GeriPal - A Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine Podcast

Health care professionals are human, and as humans we experience loss both in and out of work.  You’d imagine though that our professional expertise and experiences in helping patients and families cope with loss and grief would be helpful in managing our own personal losses.  Turns out, it’s maybe not. That was the lesson I learned from reading a new book edited by Matt Loscalzo along with Marshall Forstein called “Loss and Grief: Personal Stories of Doctors and Other Healthcare Professionals”.  It’s a collection of personal stories of a small number of health professionals, including Craig Blinderman and Susan Block, who have been struck by personal illness and loss. On today’s podcast, we’ve invited Matt Loscalzo and Craig Blinderman to talk about their book and the process they used to create these stories, which all stood out for their openness in talking about things that we as healthcare professionals often keep so very private.   We also brought in Vickie Leff to talk about the work she does with Wellness Debriefings.  These debriefings create a safe outlet for health care professionals to talk about the feelings resulting from their work.  Vickie worked with CAPC to create tools, including a facilitator guide, to encourage clinicians and their organizations to adopt debriefings.  So take a listen and check out some of these resources for healthcare provider loss, grief, and wellness: Loss and Grief: Personal Stories of Doctors and Other Healthcare Professionals Dates & registration info about debriefings offered by CAPC The CAPC Debrief Facilitator Training Manual we developed: PDF Download. Jared Rubensteins' "Token of Appreciation" video A great website for dealing with loss and grief: refugeingrief.com SPONSOR: This episode of the GeriPal Podcast is sponsored by UCSF’s Division of Palliative Medicine, an amazing group doing world class palliative care.  They are looking for physician faculty to join them in the inpatient and outpatient setting.  To learn more about job opportunities, please click here: https://palliativemedicine.ucsf.edu/job-openings

Dr. Faith Fitzgerald once quipped that prognostic modeling is the “punctilious quantification of the amorphous.”  She has a point.  Prognosis is inherently uncertain.  As Alex Lee says on our podcast today, all prognostic models will be wrong (in some circumstances and for some patients); our job is to make prognostic models that are clinically useful.  As Sei Lee notes, the argument for developing prognostic models has won the day, and we increasingly use prognostic scores in clinical decision making.  What makes prognostic models for mortality different from models used for anticoagulation or risk of renal injury?  James Deardorff replies that there is something inherently different about predicting mortality.  Death is different.  For some reason clinicians who might be perfectly comfortable using an anticoagulation risk calculator might be skeptical of a mortality risk calculator (see this recent terrific JAMA IM study from Nancy Shoenborn on this issue).  And yet, the only thing that may be worse than a prognostic calculator is a clinician relying solely on their clinical intuition. Today our guests Alex Lee, James Deardorff, and Sei Lee, talk to us about the uses, limitations, and clinical use cases for prognostic models.  As a springboard for this conversation we discuss new prognostic models developed to predict (simultaneously) mortality, disability, and mobility impairment (Alex Lee first author, JAGS) and mortality for people with dementia residing in the community (James Deardorff first author, JAMA IM).   Both new models are now available and free to use on ePrognosis.   And Sei and Eric reminisce about slow dancing to “Forever Young” by Alphaville in their teenage years. Enjoy! -AlexSmithMD

The Department of Health and Human Services helps to guide billions of dollars in investment and direction in research, policy, and health care. The Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE), within the HHS, is the principal advisor to the Secretary of HHS on health policy, ranging from legislation to strategic planning to research. How does this relate to aging policy and research? How does coordination occur between the federal, state and local level in aging health policies? And, who within ASPE guides aging policy and connects policy to every day health challenges experienced by patients and clinicians?    On today today’s podcast, we are joined by guest host and UCSF geriatrician Ashwin Kotwal as we welcome Dr. Tisamarie Sherry (Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Office of Behavioral Health, Disability, and Aging Policy (BHDAP), appointed by the Biden administration). This office is tasked with providing aging policy research and recommendations within ASPE, including long term care and the National Alzheimer’s Project Act.  Dr. Sherry shares her expertise in aging health policy and helps us make sense of the role of her Office and how she coordinates with the multitude of federal agencies aligned around the goal of advancing aging research, policy, and health. For the policy buffs and policy newbies out there, we hope this podcast is an essential primer to government in action.    We talk about:  The structure of federal agencies and how they coordinate  Priorities of the National Alzheimer’s Project Act, and the unique role of ASPE and BHDAP in guiding the agenda and long-term goals The recent focus on nursing facilities and long term supportive services during the pandemic, along with key gaps How HHS and ASPE solicit input from clinicians, community leaders, and older adults and how much it impacts policy decisions (spoiler alert: this involvement is CRUCIAL)  How to make your voice heard and get involved    We also touch briefly on topics discussed in prior podcasts such as loneliness and federal responses to the pandemic in relation to long-term care. Tune to hear Alex’s rendition of 'With a Little Help from My Friends'!   - Ashwin Kotwal, MD, MS

When I’m on service these days there is inevitably a moment when a resident says “Patient so-and-so is on X” - and I have absolutely no idea what X is.  Modern subspecialist practice advances at such a remarkably rapid pace, it can be hard to keep up. In this context, we’re excited to hear from infectious disease experts and nephrologists about updates in the care of older adults.  Sonali Advani and Lona Mody talk about their recent JAGS article highlighting three recent articles that every clinician caring for older adults should be aware of in the treatment of infectious diseases (hint: I’ve never finished a course of antibiotics, and maybe your patients don’t need that full course either).  Devika Nair and Rasheeda Hall talk about their JAGS article highlighting updates from nephrology in the care of older adults, including a link to this new eGFR calculator that does NOT include race.  We have a discussion about the decision to remove race, a social construct, from clinical risk calculators (though I’m not 100% sold that race should always be removed - if removal is likely to worsen disparities for example - at least until a superior race-blind calculator can be developed). These articles are part of a new series called Clin-Star Corner, a new series in JAGS that reviews practice changing articles in the care of older adults.  And yeah, they made me sing a Miley Cyrus song…(but not this hilarious parody about UTIs). Enjoy! -@AlexSmithMD

Earlier this year palliative care was the correct response to the following clue on the game show Jeopardy: From a Latin word for “to cloak”, it’s the type of care given to seriously ill patients to provide comfort without curing What struck me most was not that palliative care was a question, nor that it made it seem that palliative care isn’t provided alongside care directed at curing, nor was it that hospice was the first buzzed in response, but it was that palliative care was the $2000 question in the Double Jeopardy round!  The fact that palliative care was the hardest of questions told me that we have a massive messaging problem in our field. So what do we do about it?  Well, on today’s podcast we talk with Marian Grant and Tony Back, who with support form the John A Hartford Foundation and the Cambia Health Foundation, have done a deep dive into the research on layperson perceptions of palliative care, hospice, and advance care planning.  The result is a new toolkit to help us fix our messaging & engage the public: seriousillnessmessaging.org  Questions we talk about include: What do we know about the public’s perception of palliative care, hospice, and advance care planning? What’s wrong with the “pictures of hands clasping each other” as our palliative care meme? How can we bring in marketing strategies into our public messaging? Don't palliative care clinicians already know how to explain things with empathy? Why is this different from clinical communication skills? If we avoid talking about death, is it just contributing to the public death denial that is rampant in American culture? Related Links Public Perceptions of Advance Care Planning, Palliative Care, and Hospice: A Scoping Review https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/jpm.2020.0111 Public Messaging for Serious Illness Care in the Age of Coronavirus Disease: Cutting through Misconceptions, Mixed Feelings, and Distrust https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/jpm.2020.0719 Effective Messaging Strategies: A Review of the Evidence. Communicating to Advance the Public's Health: Workshop Summary https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK338333/  

Have you had difficulty managing a particular type of cancer pain?  For me it’s radiation induced mucositis/esophagitis.  Janet Abrahm is one of the world’s experts in pain and symptom management for patients with cancer joins us to talk about (among other things): Ketamine for hyperalgesia and allodynia, how to treat dissociative side effects Lidocaine: worth the hype? Strengths and weaknesses of buprenorphine for cancer pain Fentanyl patch: often missed issues Hypnosis: uses and how to get training via the American Society of Clinical Hypnosis Janet is the author of the 4th edition of the book Comprehensive Guide to Supportive and Palliative Care for Patients with Cancer, along with co-authors Molly Collins and BR Daubman. This book is terrific, truly comprehensive, and is a go to resource for when I’m “stuck” taking care of patients with cancer.   And yes, this would be a great one for CME.  Eric and I are working on it…maybe by 2023?   Finally, can you believe this is our 236th podcast and, I believe, the first request for the Grateful Dead?!?   Enjoy! -@AlexSmithMD

Have you ever had that moment when talking to a patient, when you realized that the phrase you just uttered, which you’ve uttered a hundred times before, came out rote and scripted?  Maybe some phrase you learned from a prominent podcast or VitalTalk?  And in response, the family or patient looked at you like you were from another planet?  Yeah, I’ve been there too. Josh Briscoe, our guests on today’s podcast, argues that you’ve entered the Uncanny Valley.  In robotics, the Uncanny Valley is that strange almost-human-but-not-quite territory in which humanoid appearing robots repulse us with their close yet still “off” appearance.  Coming off as rote and scripted during a serious illness conversation can have a similar off-putting impact on patients and families.  Today we talk with Josh about how to anticipate and avoid the uncanny valley.  And talk about times when we’ve fallen into it.   Key message: Listen to the music.  All the time. ;) Links: -Uncanny Valley post on Josh’s fantastic substack Notes from a Family Meeting -Anticipatory corpse book mentioned several times on the podcast -GeriPal post about teaching using YouTube (some links are old and don’t work, but you get the idea, I recently gave a spontaneous talk to the palliative care fellows and was able to find the video snippets) -Ira Byock’s 4 things that matter most -@AlexSmithMD

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has revolutionized the treatment of valvular heart disease for patients with severe aortic stenosis, a condition that affects one in ten adults older than the age of 80.  The rates of TAVR have also risen dramatically in the last decade. In 2019, the number of TAVRs exceeded surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in the US for the first time.    On today’s podcast we talk with two amazing cardiologists and researchers - Gwen Bernacki and Ashok Krishnaswami - about TAVRs in the elderly, including what it is, who gets it, and what the outcomes and complications look like after the procedure.    We also discuss Gwen and Ashok’s mixed-method study in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS) where they interviewed TAVR coordinators across California and Washington State about how code status is managed within their programs, and compared programs according to their policies to assess differences in outcomes.  What they found was fascinating: Most programs require that DNR status be temporarily rescinded for the procedure.  The time required before DNR was reinstated varied substantially among programs (38% 30 days post-discharge). Gwen and Ashok want to make it clear how thoughtful interventionists are about this topic for their patients — as this is very very challenging on a daily basis for them.  They also advocate for having more great minds at the table to help move the field forward (including geriatric and palliative care specialists!) Here are more resources if you want to take a deeper dive into the subject: Geriatric and Palliative Care Specialists as Valued Members of the Multidisciplinary Heart Team. The American Journal of Medicine 2022 The medically managed patient with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in the TAVR era: Patient characteristics, reasons for medical management, and quality of shared decision making at heart valve treatment centers. PLoS ONE 2017 Beyond the Do-not resuscitate Order: An Expanded Approach to Decision-making Regarding Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Older Surgical Patients. Anesthesiology 2021  

Holly Prigerson recalls the moments in which she started investigating prolonged grief disorder.  She recalls being “a social scientist [Holly] in room a full of psychiatrists,” who recognized a diagnostic gap in people experiencing profound and potentially harmful grief far after the death of a loved one.  This led her on a remarkable journey.  Holly has accumulated mountains of evidence for the diagnosis of prolonged grief disorder as a specific condition primarily notable for a yearning over a year after the death.  Prolonged grief is associated with increased risk of suicide and other negative health outcomes.  This accumulation of data over her career led ultimately to the inclusion of Prolonged Grief Disorder first in the ICD, then in the DSM-V.   And yet, despite mountains of evidence, Holly has taken a tremendous amount of heat for this work.  “Everyone has experienced grief, which makes everyone the expert.”  Today we offer Holly a chance to answer her critics, including assertions that: Grief is love; how can love be wrong? Pathologizing grief leads to overmedicalization of a natural condition  Prolonged grief disorder is a tool made for the pharmaceutical industry  Prolonged grief disorder does not account for cultural variation in mourning practices Along the way we talk about other related studies Holly has conducted, including a validation of DABDA - Elizabeth Kubler Ross’s famous stages of grief. And a song choice from the great lyricist Tom Waits. Enjoy! -@AlexSmithMD

In day-to-day practice, It’s hard to imagine providing excellent hospice or palliative care services without access to a team social worker.  Social workers augment a team’s ability to provide whole-person care, often aiding to identify and meaningfully address the wide variety of challenges and unmet needs faced by individuals and families facing serious illness. But are we really taking full advantage of ALL social workers have to offer our field? On today’s podcast, we are talking with Barbara Jones – a national hospice and palliative care social work leader whose many accolades include being a founding member of the Social Work in Hospice and Palliative Care Network (SWHPN), a Professor of Direct Social Work Practice and Associate Dean for Health Affairs at the Steve Hicks School of Social Work at UT Austin. Barbara highlights social workers’ inherent leadership qualities and tasks us to consider whether our own team and organizational structures are allowing for optimal social work engagement and influence. Whether in direct practice or in research and academia, we should work together to help Hospice and Palliative Care Social Work meet its full potential.  by: Anne Kelly, LCSW, APHSW-C