Prospective study of a proactive palliative care rounding intervention in a medical ICU.
Nicholas Braus, Toby C Campbell, Kristine L Kwekkeboom...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26556622/Actively Recruiting
Led by Washington University School of Medicine · Updated on 2025-07-16
2600
Participants Needed
1
Research Sites
52 weeks
Total Duration
This research aims to assess whether placing a hospice and palliative care practitioner directly inside a medical intensive care unit ICU improves patient outcomes, use of palliative and hospice care, and overall healthcare quality. The study focuses on medically complex patients admitted to two nearby medical ICUs at a large referral center. Currently, palliative care is provided only when requested by ICU clinicians, often late in the patients stay, which can delay needed support and hospice transfers. The study compares three groups patients in an ICU with the embedded practitioner who proactively offers timely palliative care consultations based on clinical criteria and mortality risk patients in a second ICU where the practitioner is not embedded but available for standard consultations and historical patients treated before the study began. Initially, the practitioner works in one ICU and later expands to both units to provide early and on-demand palliative and hospice consultations. Participants will be admitted to one of the medical ICUs during the study period. Researchers will track many outcomes including ICU and hospital length of stay, code status changes, advance care planning documentation, hospice and palliative care consultations and enrollment, mortality, readmissions, and healthcare costs up to one year after enrollment. These measures will help determine if embedding the practitioner improves care quality and patient experiences in the ICU setting.
CONDITIONS
Embedded Palliative Care in the MICU
S
Stephen Chi, MD
Explore thousands of other clinical trials that might be a better match.
Sign up to get personalized trial recommendations delivered to your inbox.
Already have an account? Log in here
Washington University School of Medicine
Lead Sponsor
This table compares participation in this trial with other options available for this condition. The information is drawn from published research and the trial’s study details and is provided for educational purposes only.
| Factors | Embedded Practitioner, Proactive Consultation | Standard Consultation by Request |
|---|---|---|
| What is it? | A proactive approach where a hospice and palliative care practitioner is embedded in the MICU to trigger consultations based on risk and clinical criteria. | The usual practice in the MICU where palliative care practitioners are available and provide consultation only when requested by treating clinicians. |
| Role in the trial | Participants admitted during practitioner embedding periods receive proactive consultations as part of the intervention arm. | Participants in the standard arm receive palliative care consultation only if ordered per usual clinical practice. |
| Primary use | Aims to provide timely palliative care, improve advance care planning, and potentially impact outcomes such as ICU length of stay and code status de-escalation. | Designed to support critically ill patients through requested palliative care, typically affecting patient comfort and quality of life as issues arise. |
| How is it given or performed? | Practitioner embedded in MICU, actively reviews clinical criteria and triggers consults proactively. Consultation occurs early, not just on request. | Practitioner is available for consultation, which is requested at clinician's discretion based on patient needs or clinical events. |
| Evidence status | Clinical trial results are not yet published, but previous studies suggest proactive palliative approaches in ICU may improve advance care planning, lead to earlier hospice discussion, and reduce ICU length of stay. | Conventional palliative consultation in ICU supports patients' symptom management and is standard supportive care. Evidence confirms its utility, but proactive models may achieve additional benefits. |
| Important limitations | Implementation is resource-intensive, requiring staff and workflow changes. Effects depend on practitioner availability and may vary between ICUs. Published studies indicate the need for adaptation to different hospital settings. | Standard consultation may lead to delayed intervention, depending on provider request. Patient needs may go unaddressed until critical events occur. Variation exists in when consultation is ordered. |
Disclaimer: This comparison is created with the help of artificial intelligence(AI) and may contain errors or missing information. It is not medical advice and does not mean one option is better or safer than another. Clinical trials are still being studied, and joining a trial is your choice. Please consult your healthcare professional before making any decisions.
You may qualify if you...
You will not qualify if you...
Duration - 2 to 4 weeks
Participants are screened for eligibility to participate in the trial.
1 visit (in-person)
Duration - Duration of ICU stay until hospital discharge
Participants receive care in a medical intensive care unit where a palliative care and hospice practitioner is embedded to provide early and proactive palliative care consultations, as well as standard hospice and palliative care consultations as needed.
Continuous care during ICU stay
Duration - Up to 1 year after hospital discharge
Participants are monitored for up to one year after hospital discharge for outcomes related to code status, advance care planning, hospice enrollment, hospital readmissions, and mortality.
Assessments at 30 days and periodic follow-up visits as needed
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Masking
NONE
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Model
SEQUENTIAL
Primary Purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Number of Arms
3
Have more questions? Get in touch with our team for quick support
Nicholas Braus, Toby C Campbell, Kristine L Kwekkeboom...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26556622/Rebecca Aslakson, Jennifer Cheng, Daniela Vollenweider...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24517300/Jessica Ma, Stephen Chi, Benjamin Buettner...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31609772/Kwadwo Kyeremanteng, Louis-Philippe Gagnon, Kednapa Thavorn...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27582396/Stephen Chi, Seunghwan Kim, Matthew Reuter...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37071421/Nita Khandelwal, Erin K Kross, Ruth A Engelberg...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25574794/Scott A Helgeson, Rebecca C Burnside, Maisha T Robinson...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35833450/Washington University School of Medicine
Lead Sponsor