We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Comparison of Two Methods for Implementing Comfort Care Order Sets in the Inpatient Setting: a Cluster Randomized Trial.
- Authors
Bailey, F. Amos; Williams, Beverly R.; Goode, Patricia S.; Kennedy, Richard E.; Redden, David T.; Kvale, Elizabeth; Bakitas, Marie; Dionne-Odom, J. Nicholas; Burgio, Kathryn L.
- Abstract
Background: There is an ongoing need for interventions to improve quality of end-of-life care for patients in inpatient settings. Objective: To compare two methods for implementing a Comfort Care Education Intervention for Palliative Care Consultation Teams (PCCT) in Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs). Design: Cluster randomized implementation trial conducted March 2015–April 2019. PCCTs were assigned to a traditional implementation approach using a teleconference or to an in-person, train-the-champion workshop to prepare PCCTs to be clinical champions at their home sites. Participants: One hundred thirty-two providers from PCCTs at 47 VAMCs. Interventions: Both training modalities involved review of educational materials, instruction on using an electronic Comfort Care Order Set, and coaching to deliver the intervention to other providers. Main Measurements: Several processes of care were identified a priori as quality endpoints for end-of-life care (last 7 days) and abstracted from medical records of veterans who died within 9 months before or after implementation (n = 6,491). The primary endpoint was the presence of an active order for opioid medication at time of death. Secondary endpoints were orders/administration of antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, and scopolamine, do-not-resuscitate orders, advance directives, locations of death, palliative care consultations, nasogastric tubes, intravenous lines, physical restraints, pastoral care visits, and family presence at/near time of death. Generalized estimating equations were conducted adjusting for potential covariates. Key Results: Eighty-eight providers from 23 VAMCs received teleconference training; 44 providers from 23 VAMCs received in-person workshop training. Analyses found no significant differences between intervention groups in any process-of-care endpoints (primary endpoint AOR (CI) = 1.18 (0.74, 1.89). Furthermore, pre-post changes were not significant for any endpoints (primary endpoint AOR (CI) = 1.16 (0.92, 1.46). Analyses may have been limited by high baseline values on key endpoints with little room for improvement. Conclusion: Findings suggest the clinical effectiveness of palliative care educational intervention was not dependent on which of the two implementation methods was used. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02383173
- Subjects
CLUSTER randomized controlled trials; TIME of death; ADVANCE directives (Medical care); GENERALIZED estimating equations; TERMINAL care; DO-not-resuscitate orders
- Publication
JGIM: Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2021, Vol 36, Issue 7, p1928
- ISSN
0884-8734
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1007/s11606-020-06482-x