Outpatient Palliative Care Research Articles

Palliative Care for Patients With Heart Failure: Results From a Heart Failure Society of America Survey

Multiple guidelines recommend specialty palliative care (PC) for patients with heart failure (HF), including patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). However, the degree of integration and clinicians' perceptions of PC in HF care remain incompletely characterized. A 36-item survey was sent to 2109 members of the Heart Failure Society of America. Eighty respondents (53% physicians), including 51 respondents from at least 42 medical centers, completed the survey, with the majority practicing in urban (76%) academic medical centers (62%) that implanted LVADs (81%). Among the 42 unique medical centers identified, respondents reported both independent (40%) and integrated (40%) outpatient PC clinic models, whereas 12% reported not having outpatient PC at their institutions. A minority (12%) reported that their institution used triggered PC referrals based on objective clinical data. Of respondents from LVAD sites, the majority reported that a clinician from the PC team was required to see all patients prior to implantation, but there was variability in practices. Among all respondents, the most common reasons for PC referral in HF were poor prognosis, consideration of advanced cardiac therapies or other high-risk procedures and advance-care planning or goals-of-care discussions. The most frequent perceived barriers to PC consultation included lack of PC clinicians, unpredictable HF clinical trajectories and limited understanding of how PC can complement traditional HF care. PC integration and clinician perceptions of services vary in HF care. More research and guidance regarding evidence-based models of PC delivery in HF are needed.

Telehealth in outpatient delivery of palliative care: A qualitative study of patient and physician views.

The COVID-19 pandemic has widened the funded use of telehealth in Australia to support telehealth delivery to all patients in any setting. Increasing the use and experience of telehealth brings to light unique insights into the advantages and challenges of this new model of healthcare delivery This study aimed to qualitatively explore the experiences of both palliative care physicians and patients setting, including their views on its future role in healthcare. This qualitative study was conducted across three metropolitan tertiary palliative care centers in Victoria, Australia between November 2020 and March 2021. Purposive sampling identified 23 participants (12 physicians and 11 patients). Semi-structured interviews focused on the last telehealth consultation, thoughts and impressions of telehealth, and the possibility of telehealth remaining in palliative care. A thematic approach was adopted to code and analyze the data. Telehealth transformed the ways physicians and patients in this study perceived and engaged with outpatient palliative care across the entire continuum of care. Four key themes were identified: (1) access to care; (2) delivery of care; (3) engagement with care; and (4) the future. This study provides novel data bringing together the perspective of patients and physicians, which confirms the utility of telehealth in palliative care. Its convenience enables more frequent review, enables reviews to occur in response to lower levels of concern, and adds toward enhancing the continuity of care across and between settings. Moving forward, support seemed strongest for a hybrid model of telehealth and face-to-face consultations guided by key parameters relating to the level of anticipated complexity.

Effectiveness of a specialist palliative home care nurse–patient consultation followed by an interprofessional telephone case conference compared with usual care among patients with non-oncological palliative care needs: protocol for the multicentre KOPAL cluster-randomised controlled trial

IntroductionProgressive chronic, non-malignant diseases (CNMD) like congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and dementia are of growing relevance in primary care. Most of these patients suffer from...

Respiratory support for patients of the outpatient palliative care department for oncological patients of the Samara regional clinical oncological center.

The article reflects the importance of respiratory support at home for patients of the outpatient palliative care department for oncological patients of the Samara Regional Clinical Oncology Center.

Strengthening Community End-of-Life Care through Implementing Measurement-Based Palliative Care.

The increasing demand for palliative care in New Zealand presents a potential threat to the quality of service delivery. One strategy to overcome this is through the implementation of valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measures. This mixed-methods study aimed to (1) implement measurement-based palliative care (MBPC) in a community palliative care service in Auckland, New Zealand; (2) evaluate the clinical utility of MBPC perceived by clinicians; (3) describe patient characteristics as measured by the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS), the Australasian Modified Karnofsky Performance Scale (AKPS), and Phase of Illness (POI); and (4) evaluate the internal consistency of the IPOS. Participants were over 18 years of age from a community outpatient palliative care service. In a phased approach to implementation, healthcare staff were educated on each instrument used for patient assessment. Uptake and internal consistency were evaluated through descriptive statistics. An interpretive descriptive methodology was used to explore the clinical utility of MBPC through semi-structured interviews with seven clinical staff members. Individual patient assessments (n = 1507) were undertaken predominantly on admission, with decreasing frequency as patients advanced through to the terminal phase of their care. Mean total IPOS scores were 17.97 (SD = 10.39, α = 0.78). The POI showed that 65% of patients were in the stable phase, 20% were in the unstable phase, 9% were in the deteriorating phase, and 2% were in the terminal phase. Clinicians reported that MBPC facilitated holistic and comprehensive assessments, as well as the development of a common interdisciplinary language. Clinicians expressed discomfort using the psychosocial and spiritual items. Measurement-based palliative care was only partially implemented but it was valued by staff and perceived to increase the quality of service delivery. Future research should determine the optimal timing of assessments, cultural responsivity for Māori and Pacific patients, and the role of MBPC in decision support for clinicians.

Implementierung der „Besonders qualifizierten und koordinierten palliativmedizinischen Versorgung“ (BQKPMV) – Erfahrungen und Sichtweisen von SAPV-Teams

IntroductionIn the course of the implementation of the German Hospice and Palliative Care Act of 2015, an agreement was reached to establish an intermediate level of outpatient palliative care (BQKPMV) in Germany. By its degree of specialization, this form of care is located between generalist and specialist outpatient palliative care (AAPV/SAPV). It is still unclear which experiences the SAPV teams have gained with the approach of BQKPMV and how it affects their care routines. MethodsBetween May and August 2021, the project team developed and tested a questionnaire for SAPV teams about their experiences with and views on BQKPMV as a care approach at the interface to SAPV. In September 2021, all 58 teams providing SAPV in Lower Saxony were invited to participate. The information provided by the participants was analyzed using descriptive statistics and frequency analyses. ResultsWith 52 participants (78% female; mean age of 50 years), a participation rate of 89.7 % was achieved. Twenty-eight participants indicated that they were aware of BQKPMV and its content, and 10 had received a request for cooperation under the BQKPMV program. Fifty percent of these 10 requests (n = 5) led to a cooperation agreement.The following questions were answered only by participants who were familiar with the content of BQKPMV (N = 28). For a majority of 15 participants, the BQKPMV has (rather) no part in day-to-day care in SAPV. From the participants’ point of view, BQKPMV largely fails to supplement the existing regulations of SAPV in a meaningful way (n = 14 is not [likely] true), to promote smooth transition between the forms of outpatient palliative care (n = 13 is not [likely] true) and to facilitate communication among the professionals involved (n = 13 is not [likely] true). DiscussionThese results show that the participating SAPV teams know little about BQKPMV and that there has been little cooperation at the interface between SAPV and BQKPMV. In day-to-day care, there is a clear separation between SAPV and BQKPMV provided by general practitioners, which corresponds with the proposition of the legislator by excluding simultaneous provision of both forms of care. The close cooperation between general practitioners and SAPV teams, which is also required under the agreement regarding BQKPMV, leads to challenges in day-to-day care. ConclusionIt remains unclear whether and to what extent the close cooperation envisaged in the framework of BQKPMV can be put into practice at the interface between general practitioners and SAPV teams in their daily routines. Practical recommendations for advancing BQKPMV are needed, which, for example, address the exclusion of the simultaneous provision of both forms of care. Further developments of BQKPMV should aim at establishing a framework in which the tasks and duties of health care provision are distributed and remunerated in accordance with the competencies and resources of health care providers.

Telemedicine for outpatient palliative care during COVID-19 pandemics: a longitudinal study

ObjectivesDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine (TM) emerged as an important mean to reduce risks of transmission, yet delivering the necessary care to patients. Our aim was to evaluate feasibility, characteristics...

Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede in der spezialisierten ambulanten Palliativversorgung von Erwachsenen sowie Kindern und Jugendlichen: Ergebnisse aus Fokusgruppendiskussionen mit Leistungserbringer*innen

BackgroundIn Germany, people with life-limiting conditions and complex symptoms are eligible for specialized outpatient palliative care (SOPC). Requirements, delivery and goals of SOPC have been laid down by the Federal Joint Committee in a nationwide guideline. The guideline emphasizes the need to consider the special needs of children and adolescents with life-limiting conditions. A specification of these needs has so far been missing. The focus group discussion presented here aimed at investigating similarities and differences between the specialized outpatient palliative care of adults (SOPC for adults) on the one hand, and children and adolescents (SOPPC) on the other hand, from the perspective of health care professionals in order to further define specifics of SOPPC. MethodIn three focus group discussions a total of 11 nursing and 8 medical professionals from SOPC for adults and SOPPC engaged in face-to-face discussions on the similarities and differences of both care forms. Discussions were designed openly and stimulated with three guiding questions only. Focus group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed by thematic analysis supported by the software MAXQDA. ResultsWithin the following six themes, similarities as well as key differences between SOPC and SOPPC were identified: the participants discussed diseases, coverage area and locations, therapy goals, the psychosocial care situation, the role of relatives and end-of-life care. From the participants’ perspective different underlying diseases constitute a main difference that causes further differences in the expertise required. Furthermore, SOPC for adults and SOPPC differ in the dimension of areas covered by one team, the number of patients per team and the reasons for SOPC visits. Differences in terminal care and the mourning process within the team became evident. Some similarities existed regarding goal-setting, psychosocial care and the role of relatives, but concrete patterns and the importance of these aspects differed because a particularly complex and emotional communication is required when a child is dying. ConclusionFrom the perspective of health care professionals, SOPC for adults and SOPPC differ with regard to underlying diseases as well as care patterns such as collaboration with relatives and their need for psychosocial support. Therefore, the care for children, adolescents and young adults with life-limiting conditions and pediatric diseases all over Germany should be delivered within the frame of an independent care structure by teams whose members possess specific pediatric expertise.

Embedded outpatient palliative care for hematologic malignancies: Referral patterns and health care utilization.

12117 Background: Patients with hematologic malignancies are less likely to receive outpatient palliative care (OPC) compared to patients with other cancer types. Little is known about the characteristics or health care utilization of patients with hematologic malignancies who are co-managed by OPC. In this study, we evaluated referral patterns and health care utilization of patients with hematologic malignancies who were seen in an embedded OPC clinic. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who established care with an embedded OPC nurse practitioner from 3/2016 – 5/2020 at a quaternary academic medical center. We obtained information about patients’ demographics, clinical characteristics, and reasons for referral to OPC from the electronic health record. Information about costs and health care utilization were provided by our finance team. For patients who were followed by OPC for at least 6 months, we used two-tailed t-tests to compare the number of hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits, as well as total costs, for the 6 months before and the 6 months after initiating OPC. This was approved by the UCSF IRB. Results: A total of 120 patients received OPC. Median age was 59 years (range 24-89), 48% were female, and 64% were Non-Hispanic White. Myeloma was the most common cancer (n = 50/120, 41.7%), followed by aggressive lymphoma (n = 21/120, 17.5%), and acute myeloid leukemia (n = 18/120, 15%). The primary reason for referral was for symptom management, such as pain (60%, n = 72/120), mood symptoms (12.5%, n = 15/120), and fatigue (7.5%, n = 9/120). Ten percent (n = 12/120) were referred for goals of care conversations prior to stem cell transplant (SCT). An advance directive was on file for 29% (n = 35/120) of patients, of which 34% (n = 12/35) were completed after OPC enrollment. Of the 38 patients who died, the median time from PC enrollment to death was 15.3 months, and 39% died on hospice. For the 65 patients who were followed by OPC for at least 6 months, the total number of inpatient hospitalizations, excluding SCT, went from 0.82 to 0.54 (p = 0.11) per person in the 6 months before compared to the 6 months after initiating OPC. ED visits went from 0.28 to 0.18 (p = 0.33). The total direct cost of inpatient hospitalizations, excluding SCT, decreased from $43,428 to $13,226 (p = 0.01), and the cost of ED visits went from $640 to $297 (p = 0.32) per person. Conclusions: There is an important role for embedded OPC for patients with hematologic malignancies, long before the end-of-life period, to manage symptoms and support decision-making. OPC is associated with a trend towards lower health care utilization and decreased hospitalization costs. Prospective studies are warranted to further explore the impact of OPC on symptoms and patient/caregiver experience, as well as to clarify how OPC impacts health care utilization.

Using the consolidated framework for implementation research to evaluate facilitators and barriers to early outpatient specialty palliative care in patients with advanced cancer.

12105 Background: Prior studies have shown that integration of early outpatient specialty palliative care (OSPC) with oncologic care improves patient’s symptom burden and quality of life. As a result, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) recommends that OSPC be offered within 8 weeks of diagnosis of an advanced solid malignancy. Over the past decade, there has been an increase in the availability of OSPC services, particularly at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers; however, the majority of OSPC referrals still occur late in the disease course. The aim of this study was to evaluate the facilitators and barriers to implementation of early OSPC. Methods: To assess the contextual determinants of early OSPC implementation, we developed a survey based on constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), an implementation meta-framework. Using input from subject-matter experts, we tailored the survey to include a total of 18 relevant constructs from the 5 CFIR domains. The survey was distributed to the ambulatory palliative care (PC) clinical leader at NCI-designated cancer centers. The survey assessed each CFIR construct using a 5-point Likert Scale, where +2 represented the strongest facilitators, and -2 represented the strongest barriers. We inquired about respondent sociodemographics and OSPC clinic characteristics and used descriptive statistics to summarize responses to survey items. Results: Survey responses were collected between 12/15/21 and 1/18/22. Of the 63 NCI-designated cancer centers invited to participate, 40 (63%) completed the survey, while 3 (5%) did not due to not having an ambulatory program. All respondents were physicians. Half of the OSPC clinics were established for more than 10 years, and the majority (75%) provided care to more than 300 distinct outpatients annually. The most commonly agreed upon facilitators (Likert score = 1 or 2) to early OSPC included PC clinicians’ awareness of the ASCO recommendation for early OSPC (100%), informal communication between PC and oncology clinicians (100%), PC clinicians’ belief that OSPC improves the quality of oncology care (100%) and access to telemedicine (93%). The most commonly agreed upon barriers (Likert score = -1 or -2) included inadequate number of OSPC providers (73%) and lack of performance metric goals relating to early OSPC set by PC leadership (65%). Conclusions: Although OSPC clinics at NCI-designated cancer centers have grown over the last ten years, the utilization of early OSPC is impacted by the implementing institution’s resource availability, interdepartmental communication, stakeholder beliefs, and leadership engagement. Future studies should compare the barriers and facilitators of early OSPC identified by PC clinicians and oncologists to inform implementation strategies.

Palliative specialty care availability for adults in community oncology practices.

e24110 Background: The American Society of Clinical Oncology recommends integration of palliative care in patients with advanced cancer. Studies have shown the availability of palliative care services, especially in outpatient settings, varies widely across practice sites; factors associated with outpatient palliative care clinic availability remain unknown. Our study describes the presence and characteristics of palliative care resources in community oncology practices. Methods: Analyses used data from the 2015 Cancer Care Delivery Research (CCDR) Landscape Assessment of National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) practices (funding support provided by 2UG1CA189824). Oncology practices were surveyed regarding availability of specialty providers and supportive services, including palliative care, as reported by designated CCDR leads. Descriptive statistics describe availability of providers and services, and logistic regression models identify practice characteristics associated with supportive/palliative care specialist availability. Results: 216 non-pediatric exclusive NCORP practice groups were included in analyses. Characteristics are shown in Table. A majority of practices had palliative care specialists (76%), oncology certified nurses (95%), and advance practice providers (80%); 45% had nurse navigators for oncology. 76% of practices had inpatient palliative care consultation services, but only 36% had a dedicated outpatient palliative care clinic. Multivariable analyses demonstrated practices with Medicaid and/or uninsured patient volumes > 25% (Odds Ratio (OR) = 2.5, p = 0.020), more oncology providers (OR = 1.02, p = 0.025), survivorship clinic availability (OR = 2.5, p = 0.005), and who participated in the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) (OR = 2.0, p = 0.039) were significantly more likely to have an outpatient palliative care clinic. Conclusions: Most community oncology practices reported having palliative care specialists, although only a third had a dedicated outpatient palliative care clinic. Newly discovered factors associated with increased odds of having an outpatient palliative care clinic can inform future efforts to expand the availability of outpatient palliative care clinics within community oncology practices.[Table: see text]

Comparison of survival between patients receiving general outpatient palliative care and patients receiving other palliative care - analysis of data of a statutory health insurance data

BackgroundThe care of palliative patients takes place as non-specialized and specialized care, in outpatient and inpatient settings. However, palliative care is largely provided as General Outpatient Palliative Care (GOPC). This study aimed to investigate whether the survival curves of GOPC patients differed from those of the more intensive palliative care modalities and whether GOPC palliative care was appropriate in terms of timing.MethodsThe study is based on claims data from a large statutory health insurance. The analysis included 4177 patients who received palliative care starting in 2015 and who were fully insured 1 year before and 1 year after palliative care or until death. The probability of survival was observed for 12 months. Patients were classified into group A, which consisted of patients who received palliative care only with GOPC, and group B including patients who received inpatient or specialized outpatient palliative care. Group A was further divided into two subgroups. Patients who received GOPC on only 1 day were assigned to subgroup A1, and patients who received GOPC on two or more days were assigned to subgroup A2. The survival analysis was carried out using Kaplan-Meier curves. The median survival times were compared with the log-rank test.ResultsThe survival curves differed between groups A and B, except in the first quartile of the survival distribution. The median survival was significantly longer in group A (137 days, n = 2763) than in group B (47 days, n = 1424, p < 0.0001) and shorter in group A1 (35 days, n = 986) than in group A2 (217 days, n = 1767, p < 0.0001). The survival rate during the 12-month follow-up was higher in group A (42%) than in group B (11%) and lower in group A1 (38%) than in group A2 (44%).ConclusionsThe results of the analysis revealed that patients who received the first palliative care shortly before death suspected insufficient care, especially patients who received GOPC for only 1 day and no further palliative care until death or 12-month follow-up. Palliative care should start as early as necessary and be continuous until the end of life.

Mental and Physical Well-Being and Burden in Palliative Care Nursing: A Cross-Setting Mixed-Methods Study.

The working routines in palliative care nursing are associated with a variety of causes of stress with regional and setting-specific differences in Germany. This mixed-methods study aimed to investigate the mental and physical well-being among nurses in German palliative and hospice care and to gain a deeper understanding of procedural and structural aspects that may influence the mental and physical burden in palliative nursing care. The mixed-methods approach combined qualitative interviews, (n = 16) an online survey (n = 101), and subsequent data validation in a focus group (n = 6). Interview and focus group data were analysed using structured qualitative content analysis. Survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics and an explorative quantitative analysis. Moderate to very high levels of stress were reported across all settings, but were highest for nurses in specialized outpatient palliative care settings. Underlying causes of stress related to working conditions in the nursing profession across all palliative care settings were poor working hours, perceived inadequate remuneration, and high demands for documentation. To ensure sustainable high-quality palliative care, adaptations to working conditions that target causes of stress and burden in palliative care nurses are required.

Feasibility of a Pre-Visit Planning Intervention in Outpatient Palliative Care (GP738)

Feasibility of a Pre-Visit Planning Intervention in Outpatient Palliative Care (GP738)

Demographic Disparities in Use of Outpatient Palliative Care Services (RP520)

Demographic Disparities in Use of Outpatient Palliative Care Services (RP520)

Managing Opioids in Cancer Patients at High Risk for Substance Use Disorders: Experience from an Outpatient Palliative Care Clinic (RP311)

Managing Opioids in Cancer Patients at High Risk for Substance Use Disorders: Experience from an Outpatient Palliative Care Clinic (RP311)

Specialized Outpatient Palliative Care—Clinical Course and Predictors for Living at Home Until Death

Specialized outpatient palliative care (SOPC) is an important component of the palliative medicine care concept in Germany. Its purpose is to improve the out-of-hospital care of patients who cannot be adequately cared for by their primary care physicians and in the setting of general outpatient palliative care (GOPC). In this retrospective analysis of anonymized routine treatment data, we analyzed the characteristics of SOPC patients overall and with specific diseases, and depicted them both numerically and graphically. We also carried out a regression analysis of the factors affecting whether or not patients will be able to die in a home environment. The analysis included data from 14 460 patients who were treated by 14 different SOPC teams in the North Rhine area of Germany in 2017 and 2018. The majority of patients who died were able to live at home until death (85.9%); only a small percentage died as inpatients (7.7%). The symptom burden shortly before death was less than at the beginning of treatment. The factors displaying a statistically significant association with dying at home were: more advanced age (aOR 0.96; 95% CI: [0.95; 0.96]), female sex (aOR 0.85; 95% CI: [0.74; 0.98]), and house calls at night (aOR 0.60; 95% CI: [0.51; 0.71]). SOPC met its declared objectives of limiting distressing symptoms and enabling patients to live at home until death.

Experiences with Telehealth for Outpatient Palliative Care: Findings from a Mixed-Methods Study of Patients and Providers across the United States.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic introduced a rapid adoption and scale-up of telehealth for palliative care services in the United Sates. Objectives: To examine and compare in-person versus telehealth experience among outpatient palliative care programs and patients. Design: Mixed-methods study (1) comparing patient experience survey data received between September 2020 and February 2021 from patients who received only in-person care versus those who received only telehealth and (2) qualitative interviews with outpatient palliative care providers. Data for this study were collected as part of a larger effort to develop quality measures for outpatient palliative care in the United States. Setting/Subjects: Outpatient palliative care patients and programs. Measurements: We measured patients' experiences of "feeling heard and understood" by their palliative care provider and team and their overall rating of their provider and team. We also conducted in-depth semistructured interviews with 47 palliative care providers across 25 outpatient palliative care programs. Results: Of 1753 patient experience surveys, 26% reflected telehealth only versus 74% in-person only. Patients in both groups reported highly positive experiences; there were no differences in "feeling heard and understood" or the overall ratings of the provider and team between the telehealth-only and in-person-only groups. Palliative care program leaders described the benefits and challenges of telehealth, including increased efficiency, the ability to incorporate family members, and challenges conducting a physical examination. Conclusion: Data from this study provide preliminary evidence of overall positive experiences of telehealth for outpatient palliative care among patients and providers; future research is needed to examine the sustainability of telehealth for palliative care.

Cancer patients spend more time at home and more often die at home with advance care planning conversations in primary health care: a retrospective observational cohort study

BackgroundSpending time at home and dying at home is advocated to be a desirable outcome in palliative care (PC). In Norway, home deaths among cancer patients are rare compared to other European countries. Advance care planning (ACP) conversations enable patients to define goals and preferences, reflecting a person’s wishes and current medical condition.MethodThe study included 250 cancer patients in the Romsdal region with or without an ACP conversation in primary health care who died between September 2018 and August 2020. The patients were identified through their contact with the local hospital, cancer outpatient clinic or hospital-based PC team.ResultsDuring the last 90 days of life, patients who had an ACP conversation in primary health care (N=125) were mean 9.8 more days at home, 4.5 less days in nursing home and 5.3 less days in hospital. Having an ACP conversation in primary health care, being male or having a lower age significantly predicted more days at home at the end of life (p< .001). Patients with an ACP conversation in primary health care where significantly more likely to die at home (p< .001) with a four times higher probability (RR=4.5). Contact with the hospital-based PC team was not associated with more days at home or death at home. Patients with contact with the hospital-based PC team were more likely to have an ACP conversation in primary health care.ConclusionPalliative cancer patients with an ACP conversation in primary health care spent more days at home and more frequently died at home. Data suggest it is important that ACP conversations are conducted in primary health care setting.

Integrating patient- and caregiver-reported outcome measures into the daily care routines of specialised outpatient palliative care: a qualitative study (ELSAH) on feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness

BackgroundThe use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and caregiver-reported outcome measures can raise the patient centeredness of treatment and improve the quality of palliative care. Nevertheless, the everyday implementation of self-report in patients and caregivers is complex, and should be adapted for use in specific settings. We aimed to implement a set of outcome measures that included patient and caregiver self- and proxy-reported outcome measures in specialised outpatient palliative care (SOPC). In this study, we explore how the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS), IPOS Views on Care (IPOS VoC) and the Short-form Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview (ZBI-7) can be feasibly, acceptably and appropriately implemented in the daily care routines of SOPC.MethodsFive SOPC teams were trained, and used the outcome measures in daily practice. Team members were mainly nurses and physicians. To investigate their feedback, we used a multi-method qualitative design consisting of focus groups with SOPC-team members (n = 14), field notes of meetings and conversations with the SOPC teams. In an iterative process, we analysed the findings using qualitative content analysis and refined use of the outcome measures.ResultsWe found that integrating patient and caregiver outcome measures into daily care routines in SOPC is feasible. To improve feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness, the resulting burden on patients and relatives should be kept to a minimum, the usefulness of the measures must be understood, they should be used considerately, and administration must be manageable. We removed ZBI-7 from the set of measures as a result of feedback on its content and wording.ConclusionsSOPC-team members have reservations about the implementation of PROM in SOPC, but with appropriate adjustments, its application in daily care is feasible, accepted and perceived as appropriate. Previous to use, SOPC-team members should be trained in how to apply the measures, in the design of manageable processes that include integration into electronic documentation systems, and in ongoing evaluation and support. They should also be taught how useful the measures can be.Trial registrationMay 19th, 2017, German Clinical Trials Register DRKS-ID: DRKS00012421.