Journal of palliative medicine
-
Background: A reality of the current political and legal environment is that while marijuana and cannabis-based products remain not approved for human consumption at the federal level in the United States, several states have authorized use for constituents. While state lines represent meaningful cultural and geographical identity markers, the reality is that patients and families readily cross state lines to access medical interventions and care. Methods: We present the case of a six-year-old child with intractable seizures and severe neuropathic pain managed on medical marijuana (MM) in her home state of Colorado; where medicinal use of marijuana is authorized at the state level; traveling across state lines to access surgical care in Nebraska where MM is prohibited. Conclusion: The case report shares the communication and creativity invested in adequate symptom management for this child weaned off of MM perioperatively. The case recognizes the unique complexities of shared symptom management goals within state-specific care models.
-
Observational Study
Pilot Test of an Adapted Intervention to Improve Timeliness of Referrals to Hospice and Palliative Care for Eligible Home Health Patients.
Background: Casarett et al. tested an intervention to improve timeliness of referrals to hospice. Although efficacious in the nursing home setting, it was not tested in other settings of care for seriously ill patients. We, therefore, adapted Casarett's intervention for use in home health (HH). Objective: To assess feasibility, acceptability, and patient outcomes of the adapted intervention. Design: We conducted a nine-week observational pilot test. Setting/Subjects: We conducted our pilot study with two HH agencies. ⋯ Clinical managers identified eligible patients and registered nurses then delivered the intervention, screening patients for hospice appropriateness by asking about care goals, needs, and preferences and initiating appropriate follow-up for patients who screened positive. Measurements: We collected quantitative data on patient enrollment rates and outcomes (election of hospice and/or palliative care). We collected qualitative data on pilot staff experience with the intervention and suggestions for improvement. Results: Pilot HH agencies were able to implement the intervention with high fidelity with minimal restructuring of workflows; 14% of patients who screened positive for hospice appropriateness elected hospice or palliative care. Conclusions: Our findings suggest the adapted intervention was feasible and acceptable to enhance timeliness of hospice and palliative care referral in the HH setting. Additional adaptations suggested by pilot participants could improve impact of the intervention.
-
Background: Palliative care for seriously ill adults is spreading rapidly, giving rise to a fast-growing business sector: the home-based palliative care (HBPC) industry. These programs offer services common to most palliative care programs; what distinguishes them is that services are delivered to patients in their homes. ⋯ Given this, growth in the HBPC business is likely fueled partly by the sector's money-making potential. As in many emerging industries, there are concerns that HBPC benefit may not be enjoyed equitably by patients and other stakeholders. Objective: To safeguard HBPC quality, we take stock of where quality problems may manifest and discuss strategies to forestall these problems. Methods: We examine HBPC trends with significant implications for care quality and cost, including HBPC payment, patient enrollment, staff management, and patient visits. Results/Conclusions: Recommendations pertain to quality metrics, patient disclosures, and further research.
-
Introduction: With medical cannabis (MC) remaining illegal at the federal level, hospice programs are unsure how to handle requests for MC, particularly since hospice is largely funded with federal dollars. The purpose of this survey was to determine respondents' comfort level with MC use in hospice, what processes and logistics hospice programs are employing when dealing with MC, and to determine what, if any, education hospice programs are providing to their staff. Methods: An anonymous online survey assessed a variety of factors surrounding hospice staff practice, experience, and opinions regarding MC. The survey was disseminated to employees of clients of a large hospice benefit manager as well as through a national hospice and palliative medicine professional organization. Results: Three hundred ten hospice professionals responded to the survey. ⋯ Several barriers to use were identified including discordant legal status between state and federal governments, concerns about clinical efficacy and safety, and a myriad of other societal factors. Wide variations in MC documentation and education practices between hospices were noted. Discussion: The data suggest overwhelming support for MC use in the hospice setting. Our findings highlight important opportunities to support hospice providers and their patients through education and the development of policies around MC.
-
Background: There is a growing preference for the use of marijuana for medical purposes, despite limited evidence regarding its benefits and potential safety risks. Legalization status may play a role in the attitudes and preferences toward medical marijuana (MM). Objectives: The attitudes and beliefs of cancer patients in a legalized (Arizona) versus nonlegalized state (Texas) regarding medical and recreational legalization and medical usefulness of marijuana were compared. Settings/Subjects: Two hundred adult cancer patients were enrolled from outpatient Palliative Care centers at Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center in Gilbert, AZ (n = 100) and The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX (n = 100). Design and Measurements: Adult cancer patients seen by the Palliative Care teams in the outpatient centers were evaluated. Various physical and psychosocial assessments were conducted, including a survey of attitudes and beliefs toward marijuana. Results: The majority of individuals support legalization of marijuana for medical use (Arizona 92% [85-97%] vs. ⋯ Patients preferred marijuana over current standard treatments for anxiety (60% [51-68%]; p = 0.003). Patients found to favor legalizing MM were younger (p = 0.027), had worse fatigue (p = 0.015), appetite (p = 0.004), anxiety (p = 0.017), and were Cut Down, Annoyed, Guilty, and Eye Opener-Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID) positive for alcohol/drugs (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Cancer patients from both legalized and nonlegalized states supported legalization of marijuana for medical purposes and believed in its medical use. The support for legalization for medical use was significantly higher than for recreational use in both states.