Nonbeneficial Treatments Research Articles

Did the Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC) program lead to improved end-of-life care quality and reduced non-beneficial treatments?

Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC) is an internationally recognized program developed in Australia. Taiwan became the first country in Asia to implement PCOC in 2020. There is little research on the impact of PCOC in Asia. We sought to examine the effects of the Taiwan PCOC on palliative outcomes. The study analyzed the impact of PCOC with a retrospective cohort design. The hypotheses were that PCOC could improve end-of-life care quality and reduce non-beneficial treatments. The study enrolled patients with terminal illnesses from the inpatient palliative care units. General characteristics of participants were collected. Exclusion criteria were people without a diagnosis of terminal illness, aged 20 and younger, or with missing data. The study collected 1,121 patients, 555 in the PCOC comparison group and 566 in the intervention group. Most patients were with terminal cancer (88.58%). The rates of hospital deaths in the PCOC and non-PCOC groups were 68.73% vs. 74.95% (P = 0.021). A multivariable logistic regression model, adjusting for age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, and terminal cancer status, was utilized. The PCOC intervention significantly decreased hospital deaths (OR = 0.26, 95%CI 0. 16-0.41, P < 0.001). PCOC in Taiwan significantly reduced hospital deaths among terminal patients, possibly due to effective symptom management and improved communication via the use of patient-reported outcomes. Further research is needed to support PCOC implementation in Asia and investigate collaboration programs' impact on end-of-life care quality and non-beneficial treatments.

Impact of a prospective feedback loop aimed at reducing non-beneficial treatments in older people admitted to hospital and potentially nearing the end of life. A cluster stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial.

To investigate if a prospective feedback loop that flags older patients at risk of death can reduce non-beneficial treatment at end of life. Prospective stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial with usual care and intervention phases. Three large tertiary public hospitals in south-east Queensland, Australia. 14 clinical teams were recruited across the three hospitals. Teams were recruited based on a consistent history of admitting patients aged 75+ years, and needed a nominated lead specialist consultant. Under the care of these teams, there were 4,268 patients (median age 84years) who were potentially near the end of life and flagged at risk of non-beneficial treatment. The intervention notified clinicians of patients under their care determined as at-risk of non-beneficial treatment. There were two notification flags: a real-time notification and an email sent to clinicians about the at-risk patients at the end of each screening day. The nudge intervention ran for 16-35weeks across the three hospitals. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with one or more intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. The secondary outcomes examined times from patients being flagged at-risk. There was no improvement in the primary outcome of reduced ICU admissions (mean probability difference [intervention minus usual care] = -0.01, 95% confidence interval -0.08 to 0.01). There were no differences for the times to death, discharge, or medical emergency call. There was a reduction in the probability of re-admission to hospital during the intervention phase (mean probability difference -0.08, 95% confidence interval -0.13 to -0.03). This nudge intervention was not sufficient to reduce the trial's non-beneficial treatment outcomes in older hospital patients. Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12619000675123 (registered 6 May 2019).

Hospital Culture and Intensity of End-of-Life Care at 3 Academic Medical Centers

There is substantial institutional variability in the intensity of end-of-life care that is not explained by patient preferences. Hospital culture and institutional structures (eg, policies, practices, protocols, resources) might contribute to potentially nonbeneficial high-intensity life-sustaining treatments near the end of life. To understand the role of hospital culture in the everyday dynamics of high-intensity end-of-life care. This comparative ethnographic study was conducted at 3 academic hospitals in California and Washington that differed in end-of-life care intensity based on measures in the Dartmouth Atlas and included hospital-based clinicians, administrators, and leaders. Data were deductively and inductively analyzed using thematic analysis through an iterative coding process. Institution-specific policies, practices, protocols, and resources and their role in the everyday dynamics of potentially nonbeneficial, high-intensity life-sustaining treatments. A total of 113 semistructured, in-depth interviews (66 women [58.4%]; 23 [20.4%] Asian, 1 [0.9%] Black, 5 [4.4%] Hispanic, 7 [6.2%] multiracial, and 70 [61.9%] White individuals) were conducted with inpatient-based clinicians and administrators between December 2018 and June 2022. Respondents at all hospitals described default tendencies to provide high-intensity treatments that they believed were universal in US hospitals. They also reported that proactive, concerted efforts among multiple care teams were required to deescalate high-intensity treatments. Efforts to deescalate were vulnerable to being undermined at multiple points during a patient's care trajectory by any individual or entity. Respondents described institution-specific policies, practices, protocols, and resources that engendered broadly held understandings of the importance of deescalating nonbeneficial life-sustaining treatments. Respondents at different hospitals reported different policies and practices that encouraged or discouraged deescalation. They described how these institutional structures contributed to the culture and everyday dynamics of end-of-life care at their institution. In this qualitative study, clinicians, administrators, and leaders at the hospitals studied reported that they work in a hospital culture in which high-intensity end-of-life care constitutes a default trajectory. Institutional structures and hospital cultures shape the everyday dynamics by which clinicians may deescalate end-of-life patients from this trajectory. Individual behaviors or interactions may fail to mitigate potentially nonbeneficial high-intensity life-sustaining treatments if extant hospital culture or a lack of supportive policies and practices undermine individual efforts. Hospital cultures need to be considered when developing policies and interventions to decrease potentially nonbeneficial, high-intensity life-sustaining treatments.

Reduction of Non-Beneficial Life-Sustaining Treatments in a Nursing Home

Reduction of Non-Beneficial Life-Sustaining Treatments in a Nursing Home

Ethical Implications of Nutrition Therapy at the End of Life.

Provide an evidence-based resource to inform ethically sound recommendations regarding end of life nutrition therapy. • Some patients with a reasonable performance status can temporarily benefit from medically administered nutrition and hydration(MANH) at the end of life. • MANH is contraindicated in advanced dementia. • MANH eventually becomes nonbeneficial or harmful in terms of survival, function, and comfort for all patients at end of life. • Shared decision-making is a practice based on relational autonomy, and the ethical gold standard in end of life decisions. A treatment should be offered if there is expectation of benefit, but clinicians are not obligated to offer non-beneficial treatments. A decision to proceed or not should be based on the patient's values and preferences, a discussion of all potential outcomes, prognosis for given outcomes taking into consideration disease trajectory and functional status, and physician guidance provided in the form of a recommendation.

Management of adult patients with haematological malignancies in critical care.

There are a diverse range of haematological malignancies with varying clinical presentations and prognoses. Patients with haematological malignancy may require admission to critical care at the time of diagnosis or due to treatment related effects and complications. Although the prognosis for such patients requiring critical care has improved, there remain uncertainties in optimal clinical management. Identification of patients who will benefit from critical care admission is challenging and selective involvement of palliative care may help to reduce unnecessary and non-beneficial treatments. While patients with haematological malignancy can present a challenge to critical care physicians, good outcomes can be achieved. In this narrative review, we provide a brief overview of relevant haematological malignancies for the critical care physician and a summary of recent treatment advances. Subsequently, we focus on critical care management for the patient with haematological malignancy including sepsis; acute respiratory failure; prevention and treatment of tumour lysis syndrome; thrombocytopaenia; and venous thromboembolism. We also discuss immunotherapeutic-specific related complications and their management, including cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell associated neurotoxicity syndrome associated with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. While the management of haematological malignancies is highly specialised and increasingly centralised, acutely unwell patients often present to their local hospital with complications requiring critical care expertise. The aim of this review is to provide a contemporary overview of disease and management principles for non-specialist critical care teams.

Factors That Influence the Prescription of Antibiotic Therapy at the End-of-Life: Construction and Validation of a Scale.

End-of-life care is frequently discussed in clinical practice. Non-beneficial treatments and the need for decision-making regarding therapeutic institutions are increasingly addressed. There are no guidelines regarding prescribing or de-prescribing antibiotic therapy at the end of life, which depends on clinical decisions. In this study, we developed a scale to assess the factors influencing clinicians' decisions when prescribing antimicrobial agents. This is a quantitative, exploratory, and descriptive study. After the literature review, the scale was constructed with an analysis of internal consistency and temporal stability. It was applied online together with a sociodemographic and clinical questionnaire. Statistical analysis of the scale, its construction, and final validation were performed. A total of 196 physicians participated in this study (76.5% female, 78.6% aged <40 years), 60.2% specialists, and 35.7% without palliative care training. Almost all of the participants (89.9%) reported having end-of-life care concerns with a high frequency. In this study, a scale was developed to assess factors associated with the prescription of antibiotic therapy in end-of-life patients. This scale revealed the presence of 3 factors: infection, patient/illness, and symptoms. Together, the three factors explain 57.4% of the clinician's decisions. The factors associated with symptoms were the most predominant in decision-making compared to those associated with infection. Among the multiple factors that may influence the institution of antibiotic therapy at the end of life, symptomatic control is the most important factor.

A systematic review defining non-beneficial and inappropriate end-of-life treatment in patients with non-cancer diagnoses: theoretical development for multi-stakeholder intervention design in acute care settings

BackgroundNon-beneficial treatment is closely tied to inappropriate treatment at the end-of-life. Understanding the interplay between how and why these situations arise in acute care settings according to the various stakeholders is pivotal to informing decision-making and best practice at end-of-life.AimTo define and understand determinants of non-beneficial and inappropriate treatments for patients with a non-cancer diagnosis, in acute care settings at the end-of-life.DesignSystematic review of peer-reviewed studies focusing on the above and conducted in upper-middle- and high-income countries. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, guided by Realist principles.Data sourcesCochrane; PubMed; Scopus; Embase; CINAHL; and Web of Science.ResultsSixty-six studies (32 qualitative, 28 quantitative, and 6 mixed-methods) were included after screening 4,754 papers. Non-beneficial treatment was largely defined as when the burden of treatment outweighs any benefit to the patient. Inappropriate treatment at the end-of-life was similar to this, but additionally accounted for patient and family preferences.Contexts in which outcomes related to non-beneficial treatment and/or inappropriate treatment occurred were described as veiled by uncertainty, driven by organizational culture, and limited by profiles and characteristics of involved stakeholders. Mechanisms relating to ‘Motivation to Address Conflict & Seek Agreement’ helped to lessen uncertainty around decision-making. Establishing agreement was reliant on ‘Valuing Clear Communication and Sharing of Information’. Reaching consensus was dependent on ‘Choices around Timing & Documenting of end-of-life Decisions’.ConclusionA framework mapping determinants of non-beneficial and inappropriate end-of-life treatment is developed and proposed to be potentially transferable to diverse contexts. Future studies should test and update the framework as an implementation tool.Trial registrationPROSPERO Protocol CRD42021214137.

The Impact of Signing Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders on the Use of Non-Beneficial Life-Sustaining Treatments for Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Retrospective Study.

Background: Intensive care medical technology increases the survival rate of critically ill patients. However, life-sustaining treatments also increase the probability of non-beneficial medical treatments given to patients at the end of life. Objective: This study aimed to analyse whether patients with a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order were more likely to be subject to the withholding of cardiac resuscitation and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the ICU. Methods: This retrospective study collected data regarding the demographics, illness conditions, and life-sustaining treatments of ICU patients who were last admitted to the ICU between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2017, as determined by the hospital’s electronic medical dataset. Results: We identified and collected data on 386 patients over the two years; 319 (82.6%) signed a DNR before the end. The study found that DNR patients were less likely to receive cardiac resuscitation before death than non-DNR patients. The cardiac resuscitation treatments included chest compressions, electric shock, and cardiotonic drug injections (p < 0.001). However, the life-sustaining treatments were withdrawn for only a few patients before death. The study highlights that an early-documented DNR order is essential. However, it needs to be considered that promoting discussions of time-limited trials might be the solution to helping ICU terminal patients withdraw from non-beneficial life-sustaining treatments.

The development and feasibility study of Multidisciplinary Timely Undertaken Advance Care Planning conversations at the outpatient clinic: the MUTUAL intervention

BackgroundPatients still receive non-beneficial treatments when nearing the end of life. Advance care planning (ACP) interventions have shown to positively influence compliance with end of life wishes. Hospital physicians seem to miss opportunities to engage in ACP, whereas patients visiting the outpatient clinic usually have one or more chronic conditions and are at risk for medical emergencies. So far, implemented ACP interventions have had limited impact. Structural implementation of ACP may be beneficial. We hypothesize that having ACP conversations more towards the end of life and involving the treating physician in the ACP conversation may help patient wishes and goals to become more concrete and more often documented, thus facilitating goal-concordant care.AimTo facilitate timely shared decision making and increase patient autonomy we aim to develop an ACP intervention at the outpatient clinic for frail patients and determine the feasibility of the intervention.MethodsThe United Kingdom’s Medical Research Council framework was used to structure the development of the ACP intervention. Key elements of the ACP intervention were determined by reviewing existing literature and an iterative process with stakeholders. The feasibility of the developed intervention was evaluated by a feasibility study of 20 ACP conversations at the geriatrics and pulmonology department of a non-academic hospital. Feasibility was assessed by analysing evaluation forms by patients, nurses and physicians and by evaluating with stakeholders. A general inductive approach was used for analysing comments. The developed intervention was described using the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR).ResultsWe developed a multidisciplinary timely undertaken ACP intervention at the outpatient clinic. Key components of the developed intervention consist of 1) timely patient selection 2) preparation of patient and healthcare professional 3) a scripted ACP conversation in a multidisciplinary setting and 4) documentation. 94.7% of the patients, 60.0% of the nurses and 68.8% of the physicians agreed that the benefits of the ACP conversation outweighed the potential burdens.ConclusionThis study showed that the developed ACP intervention is feasible and considered valuable by patients and healthcare professionals.

An Interdisciplinary Ethics Panel Approach to End-of-Life Decision Making for Unbefriended Nursing Home Residents

For those with advanced life-limiting illness, the optimization of quality of life and avoidance of nonbeneficial treatments at the end of life are key ethical concerns. This article evaluates the efficacy of an Interdisciplinary Ethics Panel (IEP) approach to decision making at the end of life for unbefriended nursing home residents who lack decisional capacity and have advanced life-limiting illness, through the use of a nine-step algorithm developed for this purpose. We reviewed the outcomes of three quality-of-care phased initiatives conducted in our facility, a large public nursing home in New York City, between June 2016 and February 2020, which indicated that this IEP approach promoted advance-care planning, as palliative measures were endorsed to optimize quality of life for this vulnerable population at the end of life. We also examined another quality-of-care initiative when this IEP approach was applied to end-of-life decision making for nursing home residents who had a surrogate during the COVID-19 pandemic. This application appeared to be beneficial in adding more residents to our Palliative Care Program while it improved rates of advance-care planning. When all of the above findings are considered, we believe this novel IEP approach and algorithm have the potential to be applied elsewhere after appropriate assessment.

Institutional end-of-life care policy for inpatients at a tertiary care centre in India: A way forward to provide a system for a dignified death.

India has a high share in the global burden of chronic terminal illnesses. However, there is a lack of a uniform system in providing better end-of-life care (EOLC) for large patients in their terminal stage of life. Institutional policies can be a good alternative as there is no national level policy for EOLC. This article describes the important aspects of the EOLC policy at one of the tertiary care institutes of India. A 15 member institutional committee including representatives from various departments was formed to develop this institutional policy. This policy document is aimed at helping to recognize the potentially non-beneficial or harmful treatments and provide transparency and accountability of the process of limitation of treatment through proper documentation that closely reflects the Indian legal viewpoint on this matter. Four steps are proposed in this direction: (i) recognition of a potentially non-beneficial or harmful treatment by the physicians, (ii) consensus among all the caregivers on a potentially non-beneficial or harmful treatment and initiation of the best supportive care pathway, (iii) initiation of EOLC pathways, and (iv) symptom management and ongoing supportive care till death. The article also focuses on the step-by-step process of formulation of this institutional policy, so that it can work as a blueprint for other institutions of our country to identify the infrastructural needs and resources and to formulate their own policies.

QI Intervention Reduces use of Nonbeneficial ICU Treatments.

According to this study: A quality improvement intervention that trained physicians to communicate with family members of critically ill patients in the ICU led to an improvement in the quality of family meetings and reduced the use of nonbeneficial treatments.

Evaluation of time-limited trials among critically ill patients with advanced medical illnesses and reduction of nonbeneficial ICU treatments

Evaluation of time-limited trials among critically ill patients with advanced medical illnesses and reduction of nonbeneficial ICU treatments

An Interprofessional Process for the Limitation of Life-Sustaining Treatments at the End of Life in France

ContextThe provision of potentially non-beneficial life-sustaining treatments (LSTs) remains a challenging problem. In 2005, legislation in France established an interprofessional process by which non-beneficial LSTs could be withheld or withdrawn, permitting exploration of the effects of such a legally-protected process and its implementation. ObjectivesTo characterize intensive care unit (ICU) interprofessional team decision-making and consensus-building practices regarding withholding and withdrawing of LSTs in two Parisian hospitals and to explore physician and nurse perceptions of and experiences with these practices. MethodsThis was an exploratory qualitative study utilizing thematic analysis of semi-structured, in-depth interviews of physicians and nurses purposively sampled based on level of training and experience from two hospitals in Paris, France. ResultsA total of 25 participants were interviewed. Participants reported that the two Parisian hospitals in this study have each created an interprofessional process for withholding or withdrawing non-beneficial LSTs, providing insight into how norms of decision-making respond to systems-level legal changes. Participants reported that these processes tended to be consistent across several domains: maintaining unified messaging with patients, empowering nurses to participate in end-of-life decision-making, reducing moral distress provoked by end-of-life decisions, and shaping the ethical milieu within which end-of-life decision-making takes place. ConclusionsThe architecture of the interprofessional process created at two Parisian hospitals and its perceived benefits may be useful to clinicians and policy-makers attempting to establish processes, policies, or legislation directed at withholding or withdrawing potentially non-beneficial LSTs in the United States and elsewhere.

Evaluation of Time-Limited Trials Among Critically Ill Patients With Advanced Medical Illnesses and Reduction of Nonbeneficial ICU Treatments

For critically ill patients with advanced medical illnesses and poor prognoses, overuse of invasive intensive care unit (ICU) treatments may prolong suffering without benefit. To examine whether use of time-limited trials (TLTs) as the default care-planning approach for critically ill patients with advanced medical illnesses was associated with decreased duration and intensity of nonbeneficial ICU care. This prospective quality improvement study was conducted from June 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019, at the medical ICUs of 3 academic public hospitals in California. Patients at risk for nonbeneficial ICU treatments due to advanced medical illnesses were identified using categories from the Society of Critical Care Medicine guidelines for admission and triage. Clinicians were trained to use TLTs as the default communication and care-planning approach in meetings with family and surrogate decision makers. Quality of family meetings (process measure) and ICU length of stay (clinical outcome measure). A total of 209 patients were included (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [16.3] years; 127 men [60.8%]; 101 Hispanic patients [48.3%]), with 113 patients (54.1%) in the preintervention period and 96 patients (45.9%) in the postintervention period. Formal family meetings increased from 68 of 113 (60.2%) to 92 of 96 (95.8%) patients between the preintervention and postintervention periods (P < .01). Key components of family meetings, such as discussions of risks and benefits of ICU treatments (preintervention, 15 [34.9%] vs postintervention, 56 [94.9%]; P < .01), eliciting values and preferences of patients (20 [46.5%] vs 58 [98.3%]; P < .01), and identifying clinical markers of improvement (9 [20.9%] vs 52 [88.1%]; P < .01), were discussed more frequently after intervention. Median ICU length of stay was significantly reduced between preintervention and postintervention periods (8.7 [interquartile range (IQR), 5.7-18.3] days vs 7.4 [IQR, 5.2-11.5] days; P = .02). Hospital mortality was similar between the preintervention and postintervention periods (66 of 113 [58.4%] vs 56 of 96 [58.3%], respectively; P = .99). Invasive ICU procedures were used less frequently in the postintervention period (eg, mechanical ventilation preintervention, 97 [85.8%] vs postintervention, 70 [72.9%]; P = .02). In this study, a quality improvement intervention that trained physicians to communicate and plan ICU care with family members of critically ill patients in the ICU using TLTs was associated with improved quality of family meetings and a reduced intensity and duration of ICU treatments. This study highlights a patient-centered approach for treating critically ill patients that may reduce nonbeneficial ICU care. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04181294.

Time Limited Trials to Reduce Non-Beneficial Intensive Care Unit Treatments

Time Limited Trials to Reduce Non-Beneficial Intensive Care Unit Treatments

Time-Limited Trials Among Critically Ill Patients With Advanced Medical Illnesses to Reduce Nonbeneficial Intensive Care Unit Treatments: Protocol for a Multicenter Quality Improvement Study.

BackgroundInvasive intensive care unit (ICU) treatments for patients with advanced medical illnesses and poor prognoses may prolong suffering with minimal benefit. Unfortunately, the quality of care planning and communication between clinicians and critically ill patients and their families in these situations are highly variable, frequently leading to overutilization of invasive ICU treatments. Time-limited trials (TLTs) are agreements between the clinicians and the patients and decision makers to use certain medical therapies over defined periods of time and to evaluate whether patients improve or worsen according to predetermined clinical parameters. For patients with advanced medical illnesses receiving aggressive ICU treatments, TLTs can promote effective dialogue, develop consensus in decision making, and set rational boundaries to treatments based on patients’ goals of care.ObjectiveThe aim of this study will be to examine whether a multicomponent quality-improvement strategy that uses protocoled TLTs as the default ICU care-planning approach for critically ill patients with advanced medical illnesses will decrease duration and intensity of nonbeneficial ICU care without changing hospital mortality.MethodsThis study will be conducted in medical ICUs of three public teaching hospitals in Los Angeles County. In Aim 1, we will conduct focus groups and semistructured interviews with key stakeholders to identify facilitators and barriers to implementing TLTs among ICU patients with advanced medical illnesses. In Aim 2, we will train clinicians to use protocol-enhanced TLTs as the default communication and care-planning approach in patients with advanced medical illnesses who receive invasive ICU treatments. Eligible patients will be those who the treating ICU physicians consider to be at high risk for nonbeneficial treatments according to guidelines from the Society of Critical Care Medicine. ICU physicians will be trained to use the TLT protocol through a curriculum of didactic lectures, case discussions, and simulations utilizing actors as family members in role-playing scenarios. Family meetings will be scheduled by trained care managers. The improvement strategy will be implemented sequentially in the three participating hospitals, and outcomes will be evaluated using a before-and-after study design. Key process outcomes will include frequency, timing, and content of family meetings. The primary clinical outcome will be ICU length of stay. Secondary outcomes will include hospital length of stay, days receiving life-sustaining treatments (eg, mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, and renal replacement therapy), number of attempts at cardiopulmonary resuscitation, frequency of invasive ICU procedures, and disposition from hospitalization.ResultsThe study began in August 2017. The implementation of interventions and data collection were completed at two of the three hospitals. As of September 2019, the study was at the postintervention stage at the third hospital. We have completed focus groups with physicians at each medical center (N=29) and interviews of family members and surrogate decision makers (N=18). The study is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2020, and results are expected to be available in mid-2020.ConclusionsThe successful completion of the aims in this proposal may identify a systematic approach to improve communication and shared decision making and to reduce nonbeneficial invasive treatments for ICU patients with advanced medical illnesses.International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/16301

Factors associated with non-beneficial treatments in end of life hospital admissions: a multicentre retrospective cohort study in Australia

ObjectiveTo quantitatively assess the factors associated with non-beneficial treatments (NBTs) in hospital admissions at the end of life.DesignRetrospective multicentre cohort study.SettingThree large, metropolitan tertiary hospitals in Australia.Participants831 adult patients who...

Healthcare Utilization is High in Adult Patients Relapsing after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.

Disease relapse is the leading cause of death for patients with acute leukemia (AL) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) who undergo allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Relapse post-HCT is associated with poor prognosis; however, inpatient healthcare utilization of this population is unknown. Here we describe survival, intensity of healthcare utilization, and characteristics associated with high resource use at the end of life (EOL). Adult patients with AL/MDS who underwent HCT at a large regional referral center with subsequent relapse between 2005 and 2015 were included in this retrospective study. We compared the distribution of demographic and clinical characteristics of patients as well as healthcare utilization over 2 years postrelapse and at EOL by postrelapse disease-directed therapeutic interventions. We created a composite score for EOL healthcare utilization intensity by summing the presence of any of the following criteria: death in the hospital, use of chemotherapy, emergency department, hospitalization, intensive care unit, intubation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, or hemodialysis in the last month of life. Higher scores indicate more intense healthcare use at EOL. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to determine variables (demographic characteristics, postrelapse treatment group, advance directives documentation, palliative care referral, time to relapse) associated with EOL healthcare utilization intensity. One hundred fifty-four patients were included; median age at relapse was 56 years (interquartile range [IQR], 39 to 63), 55% were men, 79% had AL, and median time from HCT to relapse was 6 months (IQR, 3 to 10). After relapse, 28% received supportive care only, 50% received chemotherapy only, and 22% received chemotherapy plus cell therapy (either donor lymphocyte infusion, second HCT, or donor lymphocyte infusion plus second HCT). With the exception of time until relapse and Karnofsky Performance Status, baseline characteristics (gender, age, race, graft-versus-host disease, year of treatment) did not significantly differ by postrelapse treatment group. One hundred thirty-six patients (88%) died within 2 years of relapse; survival differed significantly by postrelapse treatment group, with those receiving disease-directed treatment showing lower risk of death. Healthcare use in AL/MDS patients after post-HCT relapse was high overall, with 44% visiting the emergency department at least once (22% at least 2 times), 93% hospitalized (55% at least 2 times, 16% at least 5 times), and 38% using the intensive care unit (median length of stay 5, days; IQR, 3 to 10). Use was high even among those receiving only supportive care. For those patients who died, the mean intensity score for EOL healthcare use was 1.8 (standard deviation, 1.8). Most patients (70%) had a marker of high-intensity healthcare utilization at the EOL or died in hospital. In multivariable analysis, an increase in age (estimate -.03 (95% CI, -.06 to -.003) and having AL versus MDS were significantly associated with a decreased EOL healthcare intensity score; no other variables were associated with intensity of EOL healthcare use. Healthcare utilization after post-HCT relapse is associated with receipt of disease-directed therapy but remains high across all groups despite known poor prognosis. Interventions are needed to minimize nonbeneficial treatments and promote goal-concordant EOL care in this seriously ill patient population.