Using intuition or a formal palliative care needs assessment screening process in general practice to predict death within 12 months: A randomised controlled trial

Abstract

Background:

Population ageing will lead to more deaths with an uncertain trajectory. Identifying patients at risk of dying could facilitate more effective care planning.

Aim:

To determine whether screening for likely death within 12 months is more effective using screening tools or intuition.

Design:

Randomised controlled trial of screening tools (Surprise Question plus the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool for Surprise Question positive patients) to predict those at risk of death at 12 months compared with unguided intuition (clinical trials registry: ACTRN12613000266763).

Setting/participants:

Australian general practice. A total of 30 general practitioners (screening tool = 12, intuition = 18) screened all patients (n = 4365) aged ≥70 years seen at least once in the last 2 years.

Results:

There were 142 deaths (screening tool = 3.1%, intuition = 3.3%; p = 0.79). General practitioners identified more at risk of dying using Surprise Question (11.8%) than intuition (5.4%; p = 0.01), but no difference with Surprise Question positive then Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (5.1%; p = 0.87). Surprise Question positive predicted more deaths (53.2%, intuition = 33.7%; p = 0.001), but Surprise Question positive/Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool predictions were similar (5.1%; p = 0.87 vs intuition). There was no difference in proportions correctly predicted to die (Surprise Question = 1.6%, intuition = 1.1%; p = 0.156 and Surprise Question positive/Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool = 1.1%; p = 0.86 vs intuition). Screening tool had higher sensitivity and lower specificity than intuition, but no difference in positive or negative predictive value.

Conclusion:

Screening tool was better at predicting actual death than intuition, but with a higher false positive rate. Both were similarly effective at screening the whole cohort for death. Screening for possible death is not the best option for initiating end-of-life planning: recognising increased burden of illness might be a better trigger.

Keywords

General practice patient screening end of life frailty multimorbidity care planning

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gill

Gahbauer

Han

et al . Trajectories of disability in the last year of life. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1173–1180.

Palliative Care Australia. Palliative care – service provision in Australia: a planning guide. Deakin West, ACT, Australia: Palliative Care Australia, 2003.

Rosenwax

McNamara

BA.

Who receives specialist palliative care in Western Australia – and who misses out. Palliat Med 2006; 20: 439–445.

Lynn

Perspectives on care at the close of life. Serving patients who may die soon and their families: the role of hospice and other services. JAMA 2001; 285: 925–932.

Alemayehu

Warner

The lifetime distribution of health care costs. Health Serv Res 2004; 39: 627–642.

Stabenau

Morrison

Gahbauer

et al . Functional trajectories in the year before hospice. Ann Family Med 2015; 13: 33–40.

Thomas

Caring for the dying at home: companions on the journey. Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press, 2003.

Maas

Murray

Engels

et al . What tools are available to identify patients with palliative care needs in primary care: a systematic literature review and survey of European practice. BMJ Support Palliat Care 2013; 3: 444–451.

Pattison

Romer

AL.

Improving care through the end of life: launching a primary care clinic-based program. J Palliat Med 2001; 4: 249–254.

10.

Highet

Crawford

Murray

et al . Development and evaluation of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT): a mixed-methods study. BMJ Support Palliat Care 2014; 4: 285–290.

11.

BMA, NHS Employers. Quality and outcomes framework for 2012/13: guidance for PCOs and practices. London: BMA, NHS Employers, 2012.

12.

Donner

Klar

Design and analysis of cluster randomization trials in health research. London: Arnold, 2000.

13.

Moroni

Zocchi

Bolognesi

et al . The ‘surprise’ question in advanced cancer patients: a prospective study among general practitioners. Palliat Med 2014; 28: 959–964.

14.

Mitchell

Del Mar

O’Rourke

et al . Do case conferences between general practitioners and specialist palliative care services improve quality of life? A randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN 52269003). Palliat Med 2008; 22: 904–912.

15.

Abernethy

Currow

Shelby-James

et al . Delivery strategies to optimize resource utilization and performance status for patients advanced life-limiting illness: results from the ‘palliative care trial’ [ISRCTN 81117481]. J Pain Symptom Manage 2013; 45: 488–505.

16.

Mitchell

Zhang

Burridge

et al . Case conferences between general practitioners and specialist teams to plan end of life care of people with end stage heart failure and lung disease: an exploratory pilot study. BMC Palliat Care 2014; 13: 24.

17.

Clark

Armstrong

Allan

et al . Imminence of death among hospital inpatients: prevalent cohort study. Palliat Med 2014; 28: 474–479.

18.

Mason

Boyd

Murray

et al . Developing a computerised search to help UK General Practices identify more patients for palliative care planning: a feasibility study. BMC Fam Pract 2015; 16: 99.