Komal Patel Murali

Abstract

Background: Adult day services (ADS) provide community-based health care for older adults with complex chronic conditions but rely on outdated methods for communicating users’ health information with providers. CareMOBI, a novel mobile health (mHealth) app, was developed to address the need for a technological platform to improve bidirectional information exchange and communication between the ADS setting and providers. Objective: This study aims to examine the feasibility and acceptability of CareMOBI in the ADS setting. Methods: A concurrent-triangulation mixed methods design was used, and participants were client-facing ADS staff members, including direct care workers (paid caregivers), nurses, and social workers. Interviews were conducted to describe barriers and facilitators to the adoption of the CareMOBI app. The acceptability of the app was measured using an adapted version of the Technology Acceptance Model questionnaire. Data were integrated into 4 themes as anchors of an informational matrix: ease of use, clinical value, fit within workflow, and likelihood of adoption. Results: A mix of ADS staff (N=22) participated in the study. Participants reported high levels of acceptability across the 4 domains. Qualitative findings corroborated the questionnaire results; participants viewed the app as useful and were likely to implement CareMOBI in their practice. However, participants expressed a need for proper training and technical support throughout the implementation process. Conclusions: The CareMOBI app has the potential to improve care management in the ADS setting by promoting effective communication through an easy-to-use and portable method. While the integration of CareMOBI is acceptable and feasible, developing role-specific training modules and technical assistance programs is imperative for successful implementation within the ADS setting.

Abstract

The growing number of people living with dementia (PLWD) requires a coordinated clinical response to deliver pragmatic, evidence-based interventions in frontline care settings. However, infrastructure to support such a response is lacking. Moreover, there are too few researchers conducting rigorous embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) to make the vision of high quality, widely accessible dementia care a reality. National Institute on Aging (NIA) Imbedded Pragmatic Alzheimer's disease and Related Dementias Clinical Trials (IMPACT) Collaboratory seeks to improve the pipeline of early career researchers qualified to lead ePCTs by funding career development awards. Even with support from the Collaboratory, awardees face practical and methodological challenges to success, recently exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. We first describe the training opportunities and support network for the IMPACT CDA recipients. This report then describes the unique career development challenges faced by early-career researchers involved in ePCTs for dementia care. Topics addressed include challenges in establishing a laboratory, academic promotion, mentoring and professional development, and work-life balance. Concrete suggestions to address these challenges are offered for early-career investigators, their mentors, and their supporting institutions. While some of these challenges are faced by researchers in other fields, this report seeks to provide a roadmap for expanding the work of the IMPACT Collaboratory and initiating future efforts to recruit, train, and retain talented early-career researchers involved in ePCTs for dementia care.

Abstract

Understanding the complex care needs of seriously ill adults with multiple chronic conditions with and without cancer is critical for the delivery of high-quality serious illness and palliative care at the end of life. The objective of this secondary data analysis of a multisite randomized clinical trial in palliative care was to elucidate the clinical profile and complex care needs of seriously ill adults with multiple chronic conditions and to highlight key differences among those with and without cancer at the end of life. Of the 213 (74.2%) older adults who met criteria for multiple chronic conditions (eg, 2 or more chronic conditions requiring regular care with limitations of daily living), 49% had a diagnosis of cancer. Hospice enrollment was operationalized as an indicator for severity of illness and allowed for the capture of complex care needs of those deemed to be nearing the end of life. Individuals with cancer had complex symptomatology with a higher prevalence of nausea, drowsiness, and poor appetite and end of life and lower hospice enrollment. Individuals with multiple chronic conditions without cancer had lower functional status, greater number of medications, and higher hospice enrollment. The care of seriously ill older adults with multiple chronic conditions requires tailored approaches to improve outcomes and quality of care across health care settings, particularly at the end of life.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to characterize multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) among seriously ill adults receiving palliative care at the end of life. A latent class analysis was conducted to identify latent subgroups of seriously ill older adults based on a baseline Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) measurement, a measure of comorbidity burden, and mortality risk. The three latent subgroups were: (1) low to moderate CCI with MCC, (2) high CCI with MCC, and (3) high CCI and metastatic cancer. The “low to moderate CCI and MCC” subgroup included older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cardiovascular disease, congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, dementia, diabetes, and lymphoma. A “high CCI and MCC” subgroup included individuals with severe illness including liver or renal disease among other MCCs. A “high CCI and metastatic cancer” included all participants with metastatic cancer. This study sheds light on the MCC profile of seriously ill adults receiving palliative care.

Abstract

Purpose: To understand clinicians' views regarding use of clinical criteria, or triggers, for specialist palliative care consultation in the ICU. Materials and methods: Secondary analysis of a qualitative study that explored factors associated with adoption of specialist palliative care in the ICU. Semi-structured interviews with 36 ICU and palliative care clinicians included questions related to triggers for specialist palliative care. We performed a thematic analysis to identify participants' views on use of triggers, including appropriateness of cases for specialists and issues surrounding trigger implementation. Results: We identified five major themes: 1) Appropriate triggers for specialist palliative care, 2) Issues leading to clinician ambivalence for triggers, 3) Prospective buy-in of stakeholders, 4) Workflow considerations in deploying a trigger system, and 5) Role of ICU clinicians in approving specialist palliative care consults. Appropriate triggers included end-of-life care, chronic critical illness, frequent ICU admissions, and patient/family support. Most clinicians had concerns about “trigger overload” and ICU clinicians wanted to be broadly involved in implementation efforts. Conclusions: ICU and palliative care clinicians identified important issues to consider when implementing triggers for specialist palliative care consultation. Future research is needed to longitudinally examine the most appropriate triggers and best practices for trigger implementation.

Abstract

Background: Conflict between clinicians is prevalent within intensive care units (ICUs) and may hinder optimal delivery of care. However, little is known about the sources of interpersonal conflict and how it manifests within the context of palliative and end-of-life care delivery in ICUs. Objective: To characterize interpersonal conflict in the delivery of palliative care within ICUs. Design: Secondary thematic analysis using a deductive-inductive approach. We analyzed existing qualitative data that conducted semistructured interviews to examine factors associated with variable adoption of specialty palliative care in ICUs. Settings/Subjects: In the parent study, 36 participants were recruited from two urban academic medical centers in the United States, including ICU attendings (n = 17), ICU nurses (n = 11), ICU social workers (n = 1), and palliative care providers (n = 7). Measurements: Coders applied an existing framework of interpersonal conflict to guide initial coding and analysis, combined with a flexible inductive approach allowing new codes to emerge. Results: We characterized three properties of interpersonal conflict: disagreement, interference, and negative emotion. In the context of delivering palliative and end-of-life care for critically ill patients, "disagreement" centered around whether patients were appropriate for palliative care, which care plans should be prioritized, and how care should be delivered. "Interference" involved preventing palliative care consultation or goals-of-care discussions and hindering patient care. "Negative emotion" included occurrences of silencing or scolding, rudeness, anger, regret, ethical conflict, and grief. Conclusions: Our findings provide an in-depth understanding of interpersonal conflict within palliative and end-of-life care for critically ill patients. Further study is needed to understand how to prevent and resolve such conflicts.