ELECTRONIC ARTICLE |




* Vanderbilt Childrens Hospital
Vanderbilt University School of Medicine
Vanderbilt University School of Nursing
|| Center for Clinical Improvement, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Design. Patients in the neonatal intensive care unit, pediatric critical care unit, or general pediatric units of Vanderbilt Childrens Hospital who were hospitalized at the time of death, between July 1, 2000, and June 30, 2001, were identified. Children eligible for the survey had received inpatient EOL care at the hospital for at least 24 hours before death. A retrospective medical record review was completed to describe documentation of care for these children and their families during the last 72 hours of life.
Results. Records of children who had received inpatient EOL care were identified (n = 105). A majority (87%) of children were in an intensive care setting at the time of death. Most deaths occurred in the pediatric critical care unit (56%), followed by the neonatal intensive care unit (31%). Pain medication was received by 90% of the children in the last 72 hours of life, and 55% received additional comfort care measures. The presence of symptoms other than pain was infrequently documented.
Conclusions. The duration of hospitalization for most children dying in this inpatient setting was sufficient for provision of interdisciplinary pediatric palliative care. Management of pain and other symptoms was accomplished for many children. The documentation of pain and symptom assessment and management can be improved but requires new tools.
Key Words: children palliative care pain and symptom management
Abbreviations: EOL, end of life NICU, neonatal intensive care unit PCCU, pediatric critical care unit VCH, Vanderbilt Childrens Hospital LOS, length of stay DNR, do not resuscitate
Each year in the United States,
55 000 children <20 years of age die, and many experience lengthy illnesses. The diagnoses affecting the length of childrens lives include prematurity, congenital anomalies, sudden unexpected infant death syndrome, chromosomal defects, trauma, neurodegenerative disorders, cancer, and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.1,2 Technologic advances and medical expertise have led to improved outcomes, but incurable conditions continue to lead to premature death. A childs dying is often an intensely painful experience, both emotionally and physically.3 Studies focusing on the care of children in the terminal stages of their illnesses are limited, and most of the current evidence on the experience of childrens deaths is anecdotal.
A recent Institute of Medicine report emphasized the need to address challenges accompanying the care of dying children and their families.4 Children at the end of life (EOL) are often deprived of the benefits of palliative care because of a lack of coordinated interdisciplinary services. A comprehensive philosophy of palliative care embraces physical, emotional, social, and spiritual elements.5 Although some studies have described aspects of caring for certain children (eg, oncology patients) at the EOL,6 there is a paucity of literature examining a comprehensive approach to caring for these children.
In an effort to assess current documentation of EOL care, family and child interdisciplinary support, pain and symptom management, communication, and decision-making, investigators completed a retrospective medical record review for all children who died at Vanderbilt Childrens Hospital (VCH) in fiscal year 2001. The purpose of this study was to describe the documentation of care for these children and their families during their EOL experience.
| METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A medical record abstraction tool was adapted from chart review templates used in similar projects conducted by the City of Hope, the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and the Medical University of South Carolina.6 Minor modifications were made to the VCH tool, to facilitate chart abstraction and to record additional data, such as the use of complementary therapies to relieve pain. The tool was used to investigate 3 categories of palliative care, ie, clinical management, family and child interdisciplinary support, and specific pain and symptom management. Investigation of clinical management included documented patient-family-staff communications, elaboration regarding difficult decision-making, provision of comfort care, and supportive therapies and procedures (eg, art, music, or other child life or expressive therapies, pastoral care, spiritual support or rituals, or therapeutic touch). For this study, comfort care was defined as any measure of active care for patients whose disease was not responsive to curative treatment. Control of pain, of other symptoms, and of psychological, social, and spiritual problems was considered evidence of such care. Examples include the provision of warmth, human touch, swaddling or cuddling, family contact, pacification, secretion control, mouth care, and nonpharmacologic pain management.
The provision of complementary/alternative care was also evaluated. For this study, such care was defined as nonpharmacologic strategies to manage pain and/or symptoms (eg, acupuncture, aromatherapy, guided imagery, hypnotherapy, music therapy, massage, or therapeutic touch). Social work, child life, pastoral care, and behavioral health entries in the medical record were noted as indications of provision of such services for the patient or family. Pain and symptom management provision was evaluated from physician orders, progress note entries, and nursing flowsheet and narrative entries in the final 72 hours before death.
Four reviewers performed the chart review. Inter-reviewer reliability was validated through blinded reabstraction of 10 charts by a second, independent reviewer. Inter-reviewer reliability was >80%.
Statistical Analyses
Data are reported with descriptive statistics. Subset analysis was performed by separating the study population into cohorts, to evaluate the effects of unit of care (eg, NICU, PCCU, or general pediatric units) on the provision of palliative care services. Approval for this study was obtained from the institutional review board of Vanderbilt University Medical Center.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
The health care team documented the discussion of a life-threatening patient situation or disease in 23% of the medical records, but only 1 child received a hospice referral. A do-not-resuscitate (DNR) decision was documented in 42% of the medical records. Given sudden acute deterioration in many circumstances in the PCCU and NICU, a decision to withdraw life support was documented for 64% of the patients. Although >80% of the children were receiving ongoing pain medication as part of their care in the last 72 hours of life, only 26% of those for whom support was withheld or withdrawn received additional analgesia or sedative dosing at the time of such withdrawal. Three percent were receiving neuromuscular blockers at the time of support withdrawal (Table 2).
|
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Second, although pediatric deaths may follow sudden, acute, traumatic, or chronic disease states, the median LOS for children dying in this population was
1 week. Such stays afford the opportunity to provide comprehensive EOL care for children and their families, although such services, if provided, were poorly documented. This phenomenon was noted previously in studies from Sweden11 and Brazil12 but has been poorly addressed in US reports.
It is possible that neither professional caregivers nor parents foresaw the final hospitalizations studied in this investigation as likely being terminal hospitalizations. However, a considerable number of children had congenital anomalies, cardiac conditions, cancer, or other diagnoses that could well have provided opportunities for communicating the potential illness trajectory and how this might lead to declines in health and premature death13,14
Given the median LOS of children before their deaths, palliative care measures to support both the child and the family could have been provided for a majority of children. Such supportive services as pastoral care, social work, behavioral health, or child life services were used in a minimal number of cases. This may reflect limited awareness of these services and their capacity to help, limited resources (eg, too few supportive staff members), clinical priorities, or a reluctance to direct the goals of care to comfort and quality of life during a childs final days. For this population, community chaplaincy was available, in addition to the services of 1 hospital staff chaplain. Chart entries, as subsequently examined, are not a normative practice for these providers. Social work staff members are unit-based and routinely perform an intake assessment of the child and his or her family at the time of admission. However, documentation may be delayed pending pertinent data or contacts, and it was absent in a large number of the charts examined. It might be that child life specialists were underutilized in the intensive care areas (where most children died), and specific behavioral health referrals, although few, might have reflected staff members discomfort with their own ability to assess and refer patients or families for counseling or the fact that there were few psychologic support staff members available for consultative services. Case managers know of, and provide referral to, hospice facilities locally and throughout the VCH referral region. Lack of hospice use might well reflect a lack of managing clinicians consideration. Lack of hospice consultation for this inpatient population might also reflect a lack of awareness of or inclination to consult local hospice physicians.
Pain management was addressed consistently among the units during EOL care, for >80% of children. This was reflected in orders for analgesics and medication usage. The fiscal year 2001 study period preceded the current emphasis on pain management, fostered in part by the Joint Accreditation Commission for Hospitals and Health Care Organizations. Pain assessment scales were not routinely incorporated into all unit nursing flowsheets when this cohort was hospitalized. Nurses documented pain assessment for only 33% of children receiving EOL care. Physicians noted pain assessment/management in 34% of their daily progress notes. When pain was assessed, the documentation left investigators uncertain regarding whether pain was immediately treated and reassessed. In recent quality improvement surveys at VCH, there have been marked improvements in pain assessment and management. Pain scales are present now on all pediatric units.
Other symptoms among children at the EOL were variably documented (Fig 2). These symptoms have been reported in studies focusing on oncology-related deaths.6 Treatment of symptoms was inconsistently documented for the population in this study. Specific symptoms, such as fatigue, shortness of breath/dyspnea, and prolonged crying, may warrant greater attention in the provision of comfort for dying children. The lack of validated, objective, scoring systems for symptoms other than pain might have affected clinicians propensity to document many symptoms.
Nearly all children had life-sustaining support and nutritional support initiated during their terminal hospitalizations. Although decisions to withdraw life support were common (63% of children), not all of these children had DNR orders written before their death. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation was often administered before death was declared. This might reflect an unexpected death, a tendency on the part of staff members to perform resuscitation in the absence of an appropriate dialogue with the parent/guardian to secure a DNR order, or an insistence on "doing everything" for the child, which might have originated from the family or the staff. Because many of these deaths were likely foreseeable in the final 48 hours, opportunities to make the child comfortable when life support was withdrawn and to not provide what could be described as futile resuscitation efforts might have been missed.8,15
Decisions to withdraw nutritional support occurred far less often, compared with other life-sustaining measures. This might reflect the well-recognized emotional, psychological, and symbolic significance assigned to nutrition and hydration as pertaining to the most basic care for children.16,17 Many of the children in this study died at <1 year of age.
A majority of children underwent diagnostic imaging and laboratory testing in their final 48 hours. This is typical of management in intensive care settings. However, the focus of care toward comfort or palliation may reduce unnecessary, nonbeneficial, and potentially burdensome tests for these children at the EOL. In some instances, these tests helped direct comfort measures or decisions toward withdrawing care.
This study is limited because of its retrospective design and its dependence on documentation in medical records. Nevertheless, the findings of this study may have significant implications regarding how children and their families receive EOL care in childrens hospitals. Opportunities exist to enhance not only the documentation of such care but also overall communication and deliberations regarding the goals of care.18 Palliative measures may well be appropriate in intensive care units, concomitant with life-saving or -prolonging care that is initially provided as diagnoses are confirmed, initial treatments are offered and patient responses are elicited, and prognoses are considered19. Enhanced pain and symptom management and the utilization of supportive, comprehensive, interdisciplinary, palliative care services can be addressed for children whose terminal hospitalizations are generally a number of days in length.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We appreciate the contributions of Emily Kyzer, MSN, PNP, Lola Blackwell, and Alison Frank to the chart review process.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Address correspondence to Brian S. Carter, MD, Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, MCN, A-0126, 21st Ave and Garland St, Nashville, TN 37232-2370. E-mail: brian.carter{at}vanderbilt.edu
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. Hendrickson and R. McCorkle A Dimensional Analysis of the Concept: Good Death of a Child With Cancer Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, June 1, 2008; 25(3): 127 - 138. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Wolfe, J. F. Hammel, K. E. Edwards, J. Duncan, M. Comeau, J. Breyer, S. A. Aldridge, H. E. Grier, C. Berde, V. Dussel, et al. Easing of Suffering in Children With Cancer at the End of Life: Is Care Changing? J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2008; 26(10): 1717 - 1723. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Widger, D. Davies, D. J. Drouin, L. Beaune, L. Daoust, R. P. Farran, N. Humbert, F. Nalewajek, M. Rattray, M. Rugg, et al. Pediatric Patients Receiving Palliative Care in Canada: Results of a Multicenter Review Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, June 1, 2007; 161(6): 597 - 602. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Ramnarayan, F. Craig, A. Petros, and C. Pierce Characteristics of deaths occurring in hospitalised children: changing trends J. Med. Ethics, May 1, 2007; 33(5): 255 - 260. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||