Article

Physician Reimbursement for Critical Care Services Integrating Palliative Care for Patients Who Are Critically III

North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, NY 11030, USA.
Chest (Impact Factor: 7.13). 03/2012; 141(3):787-92. DOI: 10.1378/chest.11-2012
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Patients with advanced illness often spend time in an ICU, while nearly one-third of patients with advanced cancer who receive Medicare die in hospitals, often with failed ICU care. For most, death occurs following the withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining treatments. The integration of palliative care is essential for high-quality critical care. Although palliative care specialists are becoming increasingly available, intensivists and other physicians are also expected to provide basic palliative care, including symptom treatment and communication about goals of care. Patients who are critically ill are often unable to make decisions about their care. In these situations, physicians must meet with family members or other surrogates to determine appropriate medical treatments. These meetings require clinical expertise to ensure that patient values are explored for medical decision making about therapeutic options, including palliative care. Meetings with families take time. Issues related to the disease process, prognosis, and treatment plan are complex, and decisions about the use or limitation of intensive care therapies have life-or-death implications. Inadequate reimbursement for physician services may be a barrier to the optimal delivery of high-quality palliative care, including effective communication. Appropriate documentation of time spent integrating palliative and critical care for patients who are critically ill can be consistent with the Current Procedural Terminology codes (99291 and 99292) for critical care services. The purpose of this article is to help intensivists and other providers understand the circumstances in which integration of palliative and critical care meets the definition of critical care services for billing purposes.

Full-text

Available from: R. Bassett, Jan 02, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
178 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Communication is the cornerstone of good multidisciplinary medical care, and the impact of conversations about diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis is indisputable. Healthcare providers must be able to have difficult conversations that accurately describe diagnostic procedures, treatment goals, and the benefits and/or risks involved. This paper reviews the literature about the importance of communication in delivering bad news, the status of communication training, communication strategies, and psychosocial interventions. Although many published guidelines address difficult communication, communication training is lacking. Consequently, many clinicians may have difficulties with, or in the worst-case scenario, avoid delivering bad news and discussing end-of-life treatment. Clinicians also struggle with how to have the last conversation with a patient and how to support patient autonomy when they disagree with a patient's choices. There is a clinical imperative to educate physicians and other healthcare workers on how to effectively deliver information about a patient's health status, diagnostic avenues to be explored, and decisions to be made at critical health junctions. Knowing how to implement the most rudimentary techniques of motivational interviewing, solution-focused brief therapy, and cognitive behavioral therapy can help physicians facilitate conversations of the most difficult type to generate positive change in patients and families and to help them make decisions that minimize end-of-life distress.
    Ochsner Journal 01/2014; 14(4):712-7.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Palliative care is an interprofessional specialty as well as an approach to care by all clinicians caring for patients with serious and complex illness. Unlike hospice, palliative care is based not on prognosis but on need and is an essential component of comprehensive care for critically ill patients from the time of ICU admission. In this clinically focused article, we review evidence of opportunities to improve palliative care for critically ill adults, summarize strategies for ICU palliative care improvement, and identify resources to support implementation.
    Critical Care Medicine 08/2014; 42(11). DOI:10.1097/CCM.0000000000000573 · 6.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Background: Over the last 20 years, multiple interventions to better integrate palliative care and intensive care unit (ICU) care have been evaluated. This systematic review summarizes these studies and their outcomes. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science; performed a search of articles published by opinion leaders in the field; and reviewed hand-search articles as of August 13, 2012. The terms "palliative care" and "intensive care unit" were mapped to MeSH subject headings and "exploded." We included trials of adult patients that evaluated an ICU intervention and addressed Robert Wood Johnson group-identified domains of high-quality end-of-life care in the ICU. We excluded case series, editorials, and review articles. We compared two types of interventions, integrative and consultative, focusing on the outcomes of patient and family satisfaction, mortality, and ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), because these were most prevalent among studies. Results: Our search strategy yielded 3328 references, of which we included 37 publications detailing 30 unique interventions. Interventions and outcome measures were heterogeneous, and many studies were underpowered and/or subject to multiple biases. Most of the interventions resulted in a decrease in hospital and ICU LOS. Few interventions significantly affected satisfaction. With one exception, the interventions decreased or had no effect on mortality. There was no evidence of harm from any intervention. Conclusions: Heterogeneity of interventions made comparison of ICU-based palliative care interventions difficult. However, existing evidence suggests proactive palliative care in the ICU, using either consultative or integrative palliative care interventions, decrease hospital and ICU LOS, do not affect satisfaction, and either decrease or do not affect mortality.
    Journal of palliative medicine 02/2014; 17(2):219-35. DOI:10.1089/jpm.2013.0409 · 2.06 Impact Factor