IntroductionPatients with progressive idiopathic fibrotic interstitial lung disease (ILD), such as those with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), can have an aggressive disease course, with a median survival of only 3–5 years from diagnosis. The palliative care needs of these patients are often unmet. There are calls for new models of care, whereby the patient’s usual respiratory clinician remains central to the integration of palliative care principles and practices into their patient’s management, but the optimal model of service delivery has yet to be determined.MethodsWe developed a novel, collaborative, multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting between our palliative care, psychology and ILD teams with the principal aim of integrating specialist care to ensure the needs of persons with ILD, and their caregivers were identified and met by referral to the appropriate service. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of this novel MDT meeting on the assessment of a patient’s palliative care needs.ResultsSignificant increases in advance care planning discussions were observed, in conjunction with increased referrals to community courses and teams, following introduction of this novel MDT.ConclusionsOur results suggest that our collaborative MDT is an effective platform to address patients’ unmet palliative care needs. Further work is required to explore the effect of our model on achieving the preferred place of death and reductions in unplanned hospital admissions.

Introduction: Palliative care (PC) is recommended in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) patients but poorly implemented. Integration of PC into routine management by pulmonologists may improve overall and end-of-life (EOL) care, but the optimal model of PC delivery is unknown. Objective: To describe three PC care delivery models and their impact on EOL; the Multidisciplinary Collaborative ILD clinic, Edmonton, Canada (EC) and the Bristol ILD Service, UK (BC) that provide primary level PC; and the Queen’s University ILD Clinic, Kingston, Canada (QC), which refers IPF patients to a specialist PC Clinic using specific referral criteria. Methods: A multicenter retrospective observational study of IPF patients receiving care in the identified clinics (2012–2018) was designed. Demographics; PC delivery, including symptom management; advance care planning (ACP); and location of death data were examined. Results: 298 IPF patients were included (EC 95, BC 84, and QC 119). Median age was 71 years with 74% males. Overall, 63% (188) patients received PC. Primary PC approach in EC and BC led to more patients receiving PC (98% EC, 94% BC and 13% QC (p < 0.001/<0.001)) with earlier initiation compared to QC. Associated higher rates of non-pharmacologic dyspnea management [98% EC, 94% BC, and 2% QC (p < 0.001/<0.001); opioids (45% EC and BC, and 23% QC (p < 0.001/<0.001)); and ACP (100% EC and BC, and 13% QC patients (p < 0.001/<0.001))] were observed. Median follow up (IQR) was 16 months (5–28) with 122 deaths (41%). Primary PC model in EC and BC decedents was associated with more PC delivery (91% EC, 92% BC and 19% QC (p < 0.001)) with more symptoms management, oxygen, and opiate use than QC (p < 0.001; p = 0.04; p = 0.01). EOL discussions occurred in 73% EC, 63% BC, and 4% QC decedents (p = 0.001). Fifty-nine% (57) died at home or hospice and 38% (36) in hospitals. Concordance rate between preferred and actual location of death was 58% in EC (0.29 (−0.02–0.51)) and 37% in BC models (−0.11 (−0.20–0.15)). Conclusions: Primary PC approach for IPF is feasible in ILD clinics with concurrent disease management and can improve access to symptom management, ACP, PC and EOL care. Reliance on PC specialist referral for PC initiation outside of the ILD clinic can result in delayed care.

No abstract

Background: Early and integrated palliative care is recommended for patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Unfortunately, palliative care delivery remains poor due to various barriers in practice. This study describes various palliative care delivery models in a real-world cohort of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, examines the predictors of survival in this cohort of patients, and explores the impact of palliative care on survival. Design: Charts were reviewed retrospectively and analyzed. The primary outcome was survival during a 4-year follow-up period. Two multivariable models were created to examine the impact of therapeutic strategies including palliative intervention on survival. Results: 298 patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis were enrolled from 3 interstitial lung disease clinics with different palliative care models in Edmonton, Canada; Bristol, UK; and Kingston, Canada. 200 (67%) patients received palliative care and 119 (40%) died during follow up. Primary palliative care models (Edmonton and Bristol) delivered palliative care to 96% and 100% respectively compared 21% in the referral model (Queens). Palliative care [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) .28 (.12-.65)] along with the use of antifibrotics [aHR .56 (.37-.84)], and body mass index >30 [aHR .47 (.37-.85)] reduced the risk of death in our idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis cohort. Opioid use was associated with worse survival [aHR 2.11 (1.30-23.43)]. Conclusions: Both palliative care and antifibrotic use were associated with survival benefit in this cohort of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis after adjusting for covariates. The benefit was seen despite differences in disease severity and different palliative care delivery models.