Sunday, April 1, 2012
(We hope you enjoyed our April Fool's jokes this year. Look for more of our past April Fool's posts here. - Ed.)
April 1, 2012
by Abe R Feaulx, Pallimed Special Reporter
On a cross-country plane flight, Dr. Arya Kidenmee finally admitted to her seatmate, an unabashedly handsome young shower curtain salesman, what the public has known all this time. "I finally had to tell him that hospice work is very sad. I'm not sure why people in hospice and palliative care always say it is rewarding. We have meetings every week where we just sit and cry the entire time, it is absolutely emotionally paralyzing to try and help people with advanced illness."
When reached for comment, seatmate Brock Montgomery noted, "I knew it. I run into people in health care all the time and people who work for hospice always appear so friendly and outgoing, but I knew there could not be anything rewarding in helping people who were in great pain feel better. I'm glad she finally told the truth."
Dr. Kidenmee noted that she has struggled for years in talking at dinner parties and other social gatherings when asked about what she does for a living. "If only I could take people with me and show them how utterly sad my everyday job is, then maybe they would understand that research that shows resilience and a strong purpose to work in palliative care was all a bunch of baloney. Yes I said it, baloney."
Update: It was later discovered after this story was published that Dr. Arya Kidenmee is not really a physician and clearly from her comments has no experience in hospice. She was just trying to get Brock to feel bad for her and ask for her number.
Happy April Fools Day 2012 from Pallimed
Sunday, April 1, 2012 by Abe R Feaulx ·
Monday, March 26, 2012
Walking into a room at your hospice inpatient unit you see a tired appearing female patient lying in bed with soft moaning, holding her abdomen. She has end stage CHF and no history of cancer. Review of your notes show decreasing oral intake and increased time in bed. Her nurse reports she disimpacted her yesterday after suppositories and enemas were ineffective for worsening constipation.
Medications include: Fentanyl 50mcg patch (on for several weeks), Senna 2 tabs BID, Colace daily, Recent enema, and docusate suppository
Exam: Cachectic female, Scaphoid abdomen, hypoactive bowel sounds, formed (but not hard) stool on rectal exam.
What is the next best step?
a) Write an order for methylnaltrexone 8mg subcutaneously x1 now.
b) Switch her from a fentanyl patch to a morphine pump so you can better manage her abdominal pain.
c) Write an order for octreotide 200mcg subcutaneously twice daily for three days.
d) Place an NG and give her polyethylene glycol daily until she has a bowel movement or regains ability to swallow and you can remove the NG tube
Discussion:
Answer and Discussion:
The correct answer is A
a) The patient likely has opioid induced constipation (OIC). Methylnaltrexone is a mu-opioid receptor antagonist and is related to naloxone. After ruling out bowel obstruction, fecal impaction and any other abdominal process, you give methylnaltrexone at 0.15mg/kg subcutaneously, usually 8 (patients < 136lbs) or 12 mg (patients over 136lbs). About 60 percent of patients will have a BM in under 4 hours. Usually within 30 minutes of the first dose. Number needed to treat was 2.2 (pretty darn good). One barrier is cost. At $48 per 8mg dose this is a costly way to manage constipation.
b) While controlling abdominal pain is important relieving the cause of the abdominal pain takes precedence. Opioids may be the cause of her pain – increasing them is not indicated. With the exception of imminently dying patients, proper treatment of OIC will lead to its resolution and function can be improved.
c) Octreotide has a role in palliative care for malignant bowel obstruction (MBO), not constipation. This patient does not have a cancer history and sudden onset nausea and vomiting that may be signs for a MBO. Octreotide also is expensive-costing between $40 and $80 per dose.
d) Placing a nasogastric tube should be avoided whenever possible when there are less invasive measures available. The patient can swallow oral laxatives, and does not have an MBO and so does not have any minimal indications for an NGT in any case. Polyethylene glycol is helpful as an osmotic laxative and is often employed as a first line option for OIC. It is often more helpful as part of a maintenance regimen or for mild to moderate constipation.
References:
- Thomas, Jay et. al. Methylnaltrexone for Opioid Induced Constipation in Advanced Illness. 2008. NEJM 358 (22): 2332-2343.
- Yuan, Chun-Su. Methylnaltrexone Mechanisms of Action and Effects on Opioid Bowel Dysfuction and Other Opioid Adverse Side Effects. The Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 2007. 41: 984- 993
(For email readers - click here for full post to see the answer and discussion)
Monday, March 26, 2012 by Christian Sinclair ·
Thursday, March 8, 2012
If you didn't get the chance to attend, don't fret. We plan to post a question a week on both GeriPal and Pallimed to get everyone ready of the 2012 palliative care boards.
Thursday, March 8, 2012 by Christian Sinclair ·
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Tarantula Billiards Bar and Grill is one block away from the convention center. The address is 1520 Stout St. Denver, CO.
The party is open to all, so drop on by.

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 by Brian McMichael, M.D. ·
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Wednesday, February 8, 2012 by Brian McMichael, M.D. ·
Friday, February 3, 2012
World Cancer Day is February 4th, and in honor of this day, I'm posting about a critical issue we have written about on Pallimed before... access to medications. There are three developments in the last few days I think are worth knowing about...
Friday, February 3, 2012 by Holly Yang, MD ·
Monday, January 16, 2012
I have a 1 in 542 chance of dying in the next year. In other words, for every 542 men who are the same age as me, one will die in 2012. For those of us who survive until 2017, the probability of death during that year will be 1 in 364. This probability will increase fairly predictably over the years. Gompertz Law of human mortality suggests that the rate doubles every eight years. Supposedly, this law stands the test of time and across populations.
![]() |
| Source: Meandering Through Mathematics |
And if you live long enough, you'll likely develop a chronic disease. People are remarkably resilient and can adjust, so don't worry about this too much. With illness, you'll likely develop a greater awareness of your own mortality. Hopefully, you've prepared. If not, it's never too late.
But you'll go to your doctor with the expectation that he'll help improve your quality of life in the face of the chronic disease and also that he'll know what to do to help you avoid death. You've seen the ads on TV for such and such a pill which will improve your vigor. You'll look ten years younger than the average person with your condition, be able to win the stuffed animal for your grandkid, and the lights will go off in your bedroom a full 30-45 minutes before you plan on going to sleep. You imagine it to be so perfect that if a life-threatening condition arises and your doctor doesn't have a pill to fix the problem, you'll think, "This is the year 20XX, why don't they have a pill for this?"
This is the generic frame for the typical clinic visit for patients in the early 21st century. You know that doctors can't fix everything. Your doctor knows she can't fix everything. Both facts frequently go unspoken between the four walls of the clinic room as both sides labor to prevent a "premature" death. It's a noble and worthy goal but Gompertz Law remains. It occasionally crosses your mind: What would it be like to get sick, what type of interventions will you have to go through, what will happen if you become ill and don't have enough support to remain at home? It's crossed your doctor's mind, too. She's seen others go through it, but it's easier to talk about A1C's, LDL's, and holiday plans so concerns go unspoken. Advance care planning in the office remains challenging for multiple reasons, but the frame of the visit does not easily permit acknowledgement of death or other difficult outcomes.
It's always appropriate to prepare for multiple scenarios. Explicit discussion of prognosis, while not an absolute prerequisite, can serve as an entree to discuss the possible scenarios. The healthy young man looks at his probability of death and buys life insurance but prepares at the same time for life as a 50, 60, and 70 year old. In old age, it's still appropriate to prepare for multiple scenarios. If you are an 80 year old with a Mazzaglia Index score is 3, then you have an 8% chance of dying in the next 15 months and a 30% risk of being hospitalized, it makes sense to do some preparation for those events. However, you also have a 92% chance of NOT dying in the next 15 months. What then? What will it take for you to age in place? What happens if frailty or other circumstances make this impossible? Prepare for the most likely and worst case scenarios. It should be your expectation that your healthcare team can help you prepare.
In the JAMA article, the authors suggest using the indices to guide discussions about preventative care (such as whether to pursue a screening colonoscopy in a woman with advanced COPD and comorbidities). This use of the indices makes sense. Colonoscopy, while generally safe, is not without risk of complications, especially in older adults with comorbidities. It's appropriate for physicians to use the indices along with their clinical judgment to guide their recommendations. This has brought about accusations of bedside rationing, which is really a separate discussion. Medicare covers screening colonoscopy once every ten years. I wouldn't anticipate physicians refusing to order a colonoscopy for a non-terminally ill elderly patient based on a prognostic score.
It remains to be seen whether ePrognosis will increase awareness of prognosis in non-terminal, older adults or whether this will impact clinical decisions. I think it will. Time will tell.
(See also this recent NEJM perspective piece and related Geripal commentary.)
Monday, January 16, 2012 by Lyle Fettig ·
Monday, January 2, 2012
The Alignment of HPM and Oncology: Palliative Care Influence on Chemotherapy Use in Metastatic NSCLC
| "Aikido" from Wikimedia Commons |
Last week, the Journal of Clinical Oncology released a secondary analysis of the data from the initial NEJM study data which further elucidates the differences in chemotherapy utilization between the palliative care and standard groups to try to help answer some of these questions. The authors also reexamined healthcare utilization at the end of life. Here are some bottom lines. The palliative care wing did not appear to receive more chemotherapy. The two groups did not differ with respect to initial anti-cancer therapy (and only one patient…in the standard care wing, incidentally.... didn’t receive anti-cancer therapy at the onset of the trial). They examined the use of multiple lines of chemotherapy (first, second, third, fourth, and beyond). Once again, there was no difference between the groups nor was there any difference in how much time it took for the groups to arrive at the next line of chemo.
How did the two groups differ, then?
- Days between last IV chemotherapy dose until death (Palliative care group median 64 days vs. Standard Care median 40 days, p=.02). For oral chemo, the results were 27 days and 17 days respectively but this was not statistically significant.
- Chemotherapy use in last 60 days of life (Palliative care group 52.5% vs. 70% in the Standard Care group, p=0.05). A trend towards less chemo use in last 30 and last 14 days of life as well but not statistically significant.
- Hospice utilization: While there was no difference between groups with respect to the percentage of patients utilizing hospice, the palliative care group received hospice services longer (median of 24 days vs. 9.5 days in the standard care group). In the palliative care group, 60% of patients received hospice >7 days before death compared to 33% in the standard care group. (More on this below.)
It should be noted that the study was not powered to look at many of these outcomes such as chemo use in the last month and 14 days of life as well as location of death. For instance, with a larger sample size, it’s possible that the increased incidence of home death in the palliative care group might have risen to statistical significance. However, the lack of statistically significant difference here is not surprising. While hospital based palliative care can prepare patients/families for the challenges which may come near the end of life, the provision of adequate care within the home to ensure a peaceful death involves many factors which may be outside the purview of the intervention described in the study (e.g. the development of unpredictable symptoms which are difficult to manage at home, capability of caregivers, capacity of the home hospice, etc).
While we are talking about the study being underpowered, I do have to point out that there was a statistically insignificant trend towards the palliative care group having a longer time from first to second line and from second to third line chemo (0.8 months longer in each case). This result came about only when participants were censored at time of analysis--when the numbers were crunched censoring participants at either date of death or date of analysis, there was no difference between groups in time to next line of chemo. I'm not sure which method is better for detecting a difference between groups, but this does suggest that with greater power, the study might have detected a statistically significant difference. In other words, we still can't rule out the possibility that palliative care helped patients receive more chemo early on in the course of their cancer therapy.
It was never my hypothesis that palliative care helped patients receive more chemo, thus resulting in the survival advantage. I've always thought that the benefits of excellent symptom/psychosocial support and avoidance of chemo near the end of life were more plausible explanations. Don’t confuse this with a bias against chemotherapy for patients with advanced lung cancer. I fully embrace the role for chemotherapy in advanced lung cancer and the palliative care practitioners in this study were obviously not chemotherapy obstructionists. I am familiar enough with oncology clinical trials (without being an oncologist) to know they lend more guidance to oncologists regarding when to start the agents and less guidance regarding when to stop. While sometimes the decision to stop is clear cut (patient has catastrophic complication or documented progression of disease on imaging with performance status slipping to ECOG 3), there are other times when the decision is more arbitrary.
One of the most frequently noted caveats to this study is the fact that it's a single institution. Other institutions vary with respect to patient population, oncology practice, and palliative care team practice. The palliative care intervention brought the median hospice length of stay just above the national median (21.1 days in 2009) and 60% of the palliative care patients received hospice >7 days which is below the national rate of 65%. (Source: NHPCO Facts and Figures). It's worth remembering that the palliative care intervention followed guidelines from the National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care. Adherence to those guidelines at other institutions should also mean that patients will see many of the same benefits even if the results of Temel et al and the present study couldn't be exactly replicated.
The QOPI measures are worth reviewing. As palliative care programs track metrics and achieve TJC certification, it's only natural that we should work with our oncology colleagues to help with the end of life QOPI metrics as well. The results of this study indicate that our work helps oncologists with those measures.“With accumulating evidence for the benefits of earlier referral to hospice for patients with terminal cancer, leaders in oncology have established guidelines for quality end-of-life care. The American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Oncology Practice Initiative has delineated several key metrics for determining high-quality treatment near death, such as no chemotherapy within the last 2 weeks of life, referral to hospice, and enrollment in hospice care more than 1 week before death. Palliative care clinicians, who are accustomed to practicing within a multidisciplinary team, are ideally suited to support oncology providers, patients, and families in discussing and planning for such treatment at the end of life. To date, to our knowledge, no studies have shown the utility of these services for altering the quality of end-of-life care.”
Lastly, a friendly editorial which accompanies the study is also worth a read.
Monday, January 2, 2012 by Lyle Fettig ·
Friday, December 16, 2011
| Image credit: Wikipedia |
As one of the most famous outspoken atheists of this era, his thoughts on being diagnosed with an incurable disease would be a powerful insight into how atheists might approach illness and death. Where others might retreat from the public spotlight, Hitchens attacked his cancer through writing.
As a doctor caring for patients facing their own mortality, understanding their spirituality becomes an important part of caring for the whole person. I have seen many caring family members and friends inquire to me if their was enough time to get the appropriate clergy to help a patient convert or be saved. A person dying as an agnostic/atheist or even not the right religion becomes a very important focus for some people. Some have asked me or chaplains if we have ever seen any 'deathbed conversions' or someone who died without being saved. I never really expected this before I became a palliative medicine fellow.
What surprises me about the inside peek that Hitchens gives us with his writings is that many of his feelings, thoughts and experiences are really about the human condition and I have seen and heard similar things from religious patients as well. In reading his articles it helps me understand that despite all our differences we are all human and as we die our experience is both unique and universal.
I wanted to share a few choice quotes from his articles here. Any one of them would be a good review for your team or learners on discussing the different approaches to dying that our patients experience.
The quotes come from the following Vanity Fair articles:
Unanswerable Prayers - Oct 2010
Miss Manners and the Big C - Dec 2010
Unspoken Truths - June 2011
Trial of the Will - January 2012 (published posthumously)
On stories about any possible deathbed conversions:
In which case, why not cancer of the brain? As a terrified, half-aware imbecile, I might even scream for a priest at the close of business, though I hereby state while I am still lucid that the entity thus humiliating itself would not in fact be “me.” (Bear this in mind, in case of any later rumors or fabrications.)
On holding hope and realism:
The absorbing fact about being mortally sick is that you spend a good deal of time preparing yourself to die with some modicum of stoicism (and provision for loved ones), while being simultaneously and highly interested in the business of survival.On losing his voice:
Now, if I want to enter a conversation, I have to attract attention in some other way, and live with the awful fact that people are then listening “sympathetically.” At least they don’t have to pay attention for long: I can’t keep it up and anyway can’t stand to.On sharing stories about other people's cancer:
...your narrative may fail to grip if you haven’t taken any care to find out how well or badly your audience member is faring (or feeling).On a false cliche (What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.):
After all, if it were otherwise, then each attack, each stroke, each vile hiccup, each slime assault, would collectively build one up and strengthen resistance. And this is plainly absurd. So we are left with something quite unusual in the annals of unsentimental approaches to extinction: not the wish to die with dignity but the desire to have died.On pain:
It’s probably a merciful thing that pain is impossible to describe from memory. It’s also impossible to warn against. If my proton doctors had tried to tell me up front, they might perhaps have spoken of “grave discomfort” or perhaps of a burning sensation. I only know that nothing at all could have readied or steadied me for this thing that seemed to scorn painkillers and to attack me in my core.
Friday, December 16, 2011 by Christian Sinclair ·
Quick quiz: How many medications do you think are on the current drug shortage list? (Answer at the end of the post)
- Bedford discontinued lorazepam in May, 2011 to concentrate on the manufacturing of other products.
- West-Ward acquired Baxter’s lorazepam injection products in May, 2011. The company cannot provide a reason for the shortage.
- Hospira states lorazepam vials are on shortage due to increased demand. The 1 mL iSecure syringes were discontinued in September 2011.
by Christian Sinclair ·




