GeriPal - A Geriatrics and Palliative Care Podcast

We've covered psychedelics on the podcast before—first in 2019 with Ira Byock, where we explored their potential role in medicine, and then again in 2023 with Stacy Fischer, Brian Anderson, and Theora Cimino, focusing on the reasons to approach psychedelic use in patients with caution. In today's episode, we're taking a closer look at the current state of the science around one specific psychedelic: psilocybin. We'll discuss three recent clinical trials involving patients with serious illness, joined by our guests James Downar, Ali John Zarrabi, and Margaret Ross.  We begin with a refresher on psilocybin—what it is, how it might work, what conditions it may help treat (including demoralization), and how it's typically administered. What makes this episode especially compelling is our deep dive into the three studies, which highlight two different approaches to using psilocybin: daily microdosing, similar to traditional antidepressants, and a more intensive model known as psilocybin-assisted therapy. This latter approach involves three structured phases—preparation, the dosing session, and post-session integration with trained therapists.

Peter Selwyn, one of today's guests, has been caring for people living with HIV for over 40 years.  In that time, care of people with HIV has changed dramatically.  Initially, there was no treatment, then treatments with marginal efficacy, complex schedules, and a tremendous burden of side effects and drug-drug interactions.  The average age at death was in the 30s. Now, more people in the US die with HIV rather than from HIV.  Treatment regimens are simplified, and the anti-viral drugs are well tolerated.  People are living with HIV into advanced ages.  The average age at death is likely in the 60s.  Nearly half of people living with HIV are over age 55.  One in 10 people with newly diagnosed HIV is an older adult.  Our second guest, Meredith Greene, is a geriatrician and researcher who focuses on care of older adults living with HIV, in the US and Africa. On today's podcast we discuss: Implications of aging with HIV for clinical care Loneliness and social isolation among older adults living with HIV Persistence of stigma Need to consider HIV in the differential diagnosis for older adults Screening for HIV Screening for osteoporosis in people living with HIV Dementia and cognitive impairment risk in people living with HIV When to stop anti-virals near the end of life Toward the end we speak to the moment.  More older adults live with HIV in SubSaharan Africa and the global South than anywhere else in the world.  Funding for research and clinical care is at risk, as USAID and PEPFAR (which is under USAID), are shuttered.  Millions of lives are at stake.  Meredith wore a shirt that said Silence=death. Eric gave me the hook during my live cover of One, by U2, a song released in 1992 whose proceeds went entirely to AIDS research.  I couldn't help it, forgive me dear listeners, I had to do a longer than usual cut at the start! -Alex Smith   Useful links: Peter's article on the evolution of HIV: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11524-011-9552-y Peter's book Surviving the Fall: Personal Journey of an AIDS Doctor PEPFAR:  Global Health Policy | KFF   Articles: Geriatric Syndromes in Older HIV-Infected Adults - PMC Loneliness in Older Adults Living with HIV Management of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection in Advanced Age https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3684249/ About Act-up for those who might know the Silence=Death t-shirt reference: https://www.npr.org/2021/06/16/1007361916/act-up-a-history-of-aids-hiv-activism https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/06/14/how-act-up-changed-america

More and more people are, “doing their own research.”  Self-identified experts and influencers on podcasts (podcasts!) and social media endorse treatments that are potentially harmful and have little to no evidence of benefit, or have only been studied in animals.  An increasing number of federal leaders have a track record of endorsing such products. We and our guests have noticed that in our clinical practices, patients and caregivers seem to be asking for such treatments more frequently.  Ivermectin to treat cancer.  Stem cell treatments. Chelation therapy.  Daneila Lamas wrote about this issue in the New York Times this week -after we recorded - in her story, a family requested an herbal infusion for their dying mother via feeding tube. Our guests today, Adam Marks, Laura Taylor, & Jill Schneiderhan, have coined a term for such therapies, for Potentially Unsafe Low-evidence Treatments, or PULET. Rhymes with mullet (On the podcast we debate using the French pronunciation, though it sounds the same as the French word for chicken).  We discuss an article they wrote about PULET for the American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, including: What makes a PULET a PULET?  Key ingredients are both potentially unsafe and low evidence.  If it's low evidence but not unsafe, not generally an issue.  Think vitamins. If it's potentially unsafe, but has robust evidence, well that's most of the treatments we offer seriously ill patients!  Think chemo. What counts as potentially unsafe? They include what might be obvious, e.g. health risks, and less obvious, e.g. financial toxicity. What counts as low-evidence?  Animal studies? Theoretical only? Does PULET account for avoiding known effective treatments? Do elements of care that are often administered to seriously ill patients count? Yes. Think chemotherapy to imminently dying patients, or CPR. How does integrative medicine fit in with this?  Jill Schneiderhan, a family medicine and integrative medicine doc, helps us think through this. How ought clinicians respond?  Hint: If you're arguing over the scientific merits of a research study, you're probably not doing it right.  Instead, think VitalTalk, REMAP, and uncover and align with the emotion behind the request. Does the approach shift when it's a caregiver requesting PULET for an older relative who lost capacity? How about parents advocating for a child? For more, Laura suggests a book titled, How to Talk to a Science Denier.   And I am particularly happy that the idea for this podcast arose from my visit to Michigan to give Grand Rounds, and the conversations I had with Adam and Laura during the visit.  We love it when listeners engage with us to suggest topics that practicing clinicians find challenging. And I get to sing Bon Jovi's Bad Medicine, which is such a fun song! -Alex Smith  

I read Farah Stockman's article in the NYT on why attacks on DEI will cost us all, and thought, “Yes, and ‘everyone' includes harm to our healthcare workforce, our patients, and their families.” So we're delighted that Farah Stockman, pulitzer prize winning journalist, author of American Made: What Happens to People When Work Disappears, and editorial board member at the New York TImes joins us to set the bigger picture for this discussion.  Farah provides clear examples from the Biden administration, in which having the most diverse cabinet in history was critical to building bridges, empathy, and inspiring others to feel included. We are also pleased to welcome Ali Thomas, a hospitalist, member of the Baha'i Faith, leader of anti-racism efforts in the Pacific Northwest, and founder of the BIPOC Health Careers Ecosystem.  Ali talks about the history of affirmative action, which started as a program for Whites, the importance of diversity in the healthcare workforce, the history of allyship and cross cultural collaboration, and his own efforts to provide opportunity and support for historically oppressed groups in his own community to obtain healthcare careers. And Ken Covinsky, avid baseball fanatic, joins us and notes that the day we record (April 15) is Jackie Robinson day.  Many may be familiar with the story of Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier in major league baseball in 1947, but may not be aware of the tremendous adversity Jackie Robinson faced, and persistence he displayed, off the field. We address many things, including: The movement in Corporate America and institutes of higher education to implement DEI programming in the wake of George Floyd The general agreement in America of the value of diversity, and disagreement, unpopularity, and backlash about DEI as it was implemented How the pursuit of diversity and excellence are not in tension, they are aligned and necessary for each other What we can do to build bridges across differences There was so much we hoped to talk about and didn't get to, but I will link to now, including: Ali's mom's personal history with and study of school desegregation in South Carolina, Farah's mom's pioneering work as a speech language pathologist, and Ken's perspectives on the importance of studying ageism and racism in research. What a Wonderful World could be sung in irony at this moment.  I hope we all take it literally, with the hope this podcast ends with. -Alex Smith

Early in my research career, I was fascinated by the (then) frontier area of palliative care in the emergency department.  I asked emergency medicine clinicians what they thought when a patient who is seriously ill and DNR comes to the ED, and some responded, (paraphrasing), what are they doing here? This is not why I went into emergency medicine. I went into emergency medicine to act. I can't do the primary thing I've been trained to do: ABC, ABC, ABCs.  Most emergency providers wanted to do the right thing for seriously ill patients, but they didn't have the knowledge, skills, or experience to do it. Today we focus on an intervention, published in JAMA, that gave emergency clinicians basic palliative care knowledge, training, and skills.  We talk with Corita Grudzen and Fernanda Bellolio about their cluster stepped wedge randomized trial of a palliative care intervention directed at emergency clinicians.  They got training in Vital Talk and ELNEC.  They got a decision support tool that identified hospice patients or those who might benefit from a goals of care discussion.  They got feedback. So did it matter?  Hmmm….it depends.  We are fortunate to have Tammie Quest, emergency and palliative trained and long a leader in this space, to help us unpack and contextualize these findings. Today we discuss: Why the study was negative for the primary (hospitalization) and all secondary outcome (e.g. hospice use). Why to emergency clinicians, this study was a wild success because they had the skills they wanted/needed to feel like they could do the right thing (during the onset of Covid no less). Why this study was a success due to the sheer size (nearly 100,000 patients in about 30 EDs) of the study, and the fact that, as far as the investigators know, all study sites continue to employ the clinical decision support tool. What is a cluster stepped wedge randomized trial?  Were they surprised by the negative findings? How do we situate this study in the context of other negative primary palliative care interventions, outside the ED?  E.g. Yael Shenker's negative study of primary palliative care for cancer, Randy Curtis's negative study of a Vital Talk-ish intervention, Lieve Van den Block's negative study of primary PC in nursing homes. Why do so many (most, all??) primary palliative care interventions seem to fail, whereas specialized palliative care interventions have a relatively robust track record of success. Should we give up on primary palliative care?  What's next for primary palliative care interventions in the ED? And if your Basic Life Support training certification is due, you can practice the correct chest compression rate of 110 beats per minute to Another One Bites the Dust. -Alex Smith

Whelp, goodbye folks!  Eric and I have been DOGE'd. In a somewhat delayed April Fools, Nancy Lundeberg and Annie Medina-Walpole have taken over podcast host duties this week. Their purpose is to interview me, Eric, and Ken Covinsky about your final AGS literature review plenary session taking place at the Annual Meeting in Chicago this May (for those attending, our session is the plenary the morning of May 10).  We discuss our favorite articles, parody songs, and memories from AGS meetings past, with a little preview of a song for this year's meeting.   We covered: The first parody song I wrote, for AGS 2018 in Orlando, about this article by Nancy Schoenborn on how to discuss stopping cancer screening. Ken's favorite articles, including The Impact of Rudeness on Medical Team Performance: A Randomized Trial Effect of Exercise Intervention on Functional Decline in Very Elderly Patients During Acute Hospitalization Eric's favorite article on the effect of chair placement on physicians' behavior and patients' satisfaction Tim Anderson's study on the intensification of older adults' outpatient blood pressure treatment at hospital discharge Nancy's favorite topic and parody song, Aducanumab, which won Drug of the Year in 2021.  Enjoy! And maybe, just maybe, Eric and I will be reinstated and return as hosts next week… -Alex Smith  

A pragmatic trial evaluates the effectiveness of a treatment or intervention in “real-world” clinical practice.  Outcomes are typically assessed from available records.  Eligibility in pragmatic trials are often broad, and don't have the exclusions of efficacy studies, which examine treatment effects under highly controlled conditions in highly select populations. Today we are delighted to welcome Jennifer Wolff, Sydney Dy, and Danny Scerpella, who conducted a pragmatic trial of advance care planning (ACP) in primary care practices; and Jasmine Santoyo-Olsson, who wrote an accompanying commentary in JAMA Internal Medicine. We spend the last portion of the podcast discussing the surprising finding of the study.  In the primary care practices that received the advance care planning intervention, rates of advance care planning were higher (about double). Shockingly, rates of potentially burdensome intervention (intubation, CPR, etc) were also higher in the advance care planning intervention group.  What?!?  Not a typo. We spend some time unpacking and contextualizing the potential reasons for this surprising finding, including: Disconnect between relatively low rates of new advance directives (12% in intervention arm vs 7% control) and higher rates of potentially burdensome treatment among decedents (29% in intervention arm vs 21% control).  Only 5% of intervention patients received the facilitator led component of the intervention (there were other components, facilitator-led was the most engaged component). Was there really a causal connection between the intervention, new advance directives, and higher rates of potentially burdensome interventions? Potential that care received, though potentially burdensome, was in fact aligned with goals, and might represent goal concordant care. Potential that documenting advance directives without a robust conversation about prognosis might have led to these findings.  My goals will differ if I think I probably have 2 years to live vs 10 years. Comparison to a trial Yael Shenker discussed in our podcast on AAHPM/HPNA plenary abstracts (also used the Respecting Choices intervention, outcome differed). Implications for the larger discussion over the value of advance care planning, and additional research into advance care planning.  As I say on the podcast, I'm sure Sean Morrison would be delighted to point to these findings as evidence that advance care planning doesn't work, and in fact may be harmful. And I got to sing in Spanish for the second time. I hope my pronunciation is better than my Urdu, or French! -Alex Smith  

Eric and Alex have featured discussions about complex bioethical concepts around caring for people at the end of life, including voluntarily stopping eating and drinking (VSED), and multiple episodes about the ethical issues surrounding medical aid in dying (MAID). Recently, discussion has emerged about how these issues intertwine in caring for patients with advancing dementia who have stated that they would not want to continue living in that condition: for those with an advanced directive to stop eating and drinking, how do we balance caring for their rational past self and their experiential current self? Should these patients qualify for medical aid in dying medications? And is there a middle path to provide some degree of comfort while also hastening the end of life? To delve into these questions, we spoke with Hope Wechkin, medical director of EvergreenHealth home hospice, who authored an article describing a process of Minimal Comfort Feeding (MCF) for patients who have expressed an interest in not wanting to live with advanced dementia. MCF, which Hope implemented for one of her hospice patients, serves as a middle way between the discomfort to the patient and caregivers of completely withholding food and fluid, and the current practice of comfort feeding only in which food and fluid are routinely offered to patients even in the absence of a symptomatic benefit. We were also joined by Thaddeus Pope, JD and Dr. Joshua Briscoe, to discuss the topic of voluntarily stopping eating and drinking as a potential bridge to access medical aid in dying medications and their respective articles on the topic. We discussed what makes an illness “terminal”, what goes into assessing capacity for an action as simple as requesting something to drink, and whether the TV show Severance illuminates any of these answers. -Theo Slomoff, UCSF Palliative Care Fellow 2024-25 (guest host) Articles referenced in this discussion: “Mr. Smith Has No Mealtimes”: Minimal Comfort Feeding for Patients with Advanced Dementia by Hope Wechkin et al in JPSM Medical Aid in Dying to Avoid Late-Stage Dementia by Thaddeus Pope and Lisa Brodoff in JAGS Law not loopholes: Medical aid in dying for those with dementia also in JAGS by Joshua Briscoe and Eric Widera   Past GeriPal Podcast Episodes on MAID: MAID podcasts https://geripal.org/what-is-going-on-with-maid-in-canada-bill-gardner-leonie-herx-sonu-gaind/ https://geripal.org/conscientous-provision-of-maid-and-abortion-robert-brody-lori-freedman-mara-buchbinder/ https://geripal.org/assisted-dying-podcast-with-lewis-cohen/ https://geripal.org/dilemmas-in-aid-in-dying-podcast-with/   Past GeriPal Podcast Episode about VSED: https://geripal.org/tim-quill-vsed/  

As far as we've come in the 50 years since Balfour Mount and Sue Britton opened the first palliative care at the Royal Victoria Hospital in Quebec, have we lost something along the way? In today's podcast we welcome some of the early pioneers in palliative care to talk about the roots of palliative care.  Sue Britton was the first nurse hired on that palliative care unit. Michael Kearney on a transformational meeting in Cicely Saunders's office, with Balfour Mount at her side and a glass of sherry.  Justin Sanders wants to be sure the newer generations of palliative care clinicians understand the early principles and problems that animated the founders of hospice and palliative care, including: Origins of the word “palliative” - it's not what I thought! Yes, it means “to cloak,” but there's more… Whole-person-care Total pain Healing as a process distinct from the deterioration of the body Sympomatologists The patient and family as the unit of care  Our guests referenced many articles on this podcast, linked above and below.  If you read just one, read Palliative Medicine - Just Another Specialty? by Kearney. I promise it's short. 2 pages.  Here's a taste:  …While there is an abusive and useless dimension to illness, pain and suffering which needs to be removed if at all possible, there is also potential in such experience…If we in palliative medicine fail to accept this view, a view which allows that there may also be a potential in the suffering of the dying process, if we sell out completely to the literalism of the medical model with its view that such suffering is only a problem, we will be in danger of following a pattern which could significantly limit our scope for development and lead to our becoming 'symptomatologists', within just another specialty.  And love that Jim Croce choice.  What's in a name? I've got a name.  Enjoy!  -Alex Smith   Links Link to the McGill National Grand Rounds Series on Palliative Care, Michael Kearney as initial presenter, and registration for future events. No, you don't need to be Canadian. Canadians are welcoming. Palliative Medicine - Just Another Specialty? In Palliative Medicine By Kearney Joe Wood's book on Total Pain  Balfour Mount's memoir Ten Thousand Crossroads paper on Healing Connections in JPSM and Healing and Palliative Care in Palliative Medicine Cicely Saunders: A Life and Legacy, by David Clark Self-Care of Physicians Caring for Patients at the End of Life, by Michael Kearney and colleagues in JAMA Perspectives on Care at the Close of Life series Twycross on Readdressing Balance in Hospice

I was very proud to use the word “apotheosis” on today's podcast.  See if you can pick out the moment.  I say something like, “Palliative care for people experiencing homelessness is, in many ways, the apotheosis of great palliative care.”  And I believe that to be true.  When you think about the early concepts that shaped the field, you can see how palliative care for persons experiencing homelessness fits like a hand in a glove: total pain envisioned by Cicely Saunders, which even its earliest sketches included social suffering like loneliness; or Balfour Mount, who coined the term “palliative care,” lamenting the cruel irony of our care for the dying, and the desperate need to create programs to reach more people experiencing suffering. Today we talk with Naheed Dosani, a palliative care physician at St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto, and health justice activist. His story, which he shares on today's podcast, is remarkable.  Just out of fellowship, Naheed built a palliative care program for homeless persons  called the Palliative Education and Care for the Homeless (PEACH) Program.  This podcast is a complement to our prior podcast on aging and homelessness with Margot Kushel. Today we discuss: What is the best terminology? Homeless? Homelessness? Houseless? Marginally housed? What makes palliative care for people experiencing homelessness challenging? What makes it rewarding?  What is unique about the practice of palliative care for people experiencing homelessness? We discuss the principles of harm reduction, social determinants of health, and trauma informed care.  Major overlap with substance use disorder issues, which we have covered recently (and frequently) on this podcast. How are the health systems designed or not designed to meet the needs of people experiencing homelessness?  What are the equity issues at stake, and at risk of being cut, both in Canada and the US?   Many more links below.  And I had a blast playing Blinding Lights by that Toronto band The Weekend. Enjoy! -Alex   End Well Talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG4QE-hfPQU Resources on the PEACH Program Program Review Paper – A recent publication in Longwoods Healthcare Quarterly reviewing the PEACH model. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37144698/ Promising Practice Recognition – PEACH was named a Promising Practice in equity-oriented palliative care as part of a national initiative funded by Health Canada, operated by Healthcare Excellence Canada & the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. https://www.healthcareexcellence.ca/media/z3jifqqd/pp-peach-en-2024-v2.pdf Toronto Star Feature https://www.thestar.com/life/together/people/dr-naheed-dosani-started-peach-to-provide-palliative-care-for-homeless-and-vulnerably-housed-populations/article_c56d8f45-cbe9-522e-9554-46778bf50407.html CityNews Toronto Feature https://toronto.citynews.ca/2022/08/08/peach-team-palliative-health-care-homelessness/ Psychosocial Interventions at PEACH In addition to medical care, PEACH also runs two key psychosocial interventions for our clients: PEACH Grief Circles – Structured spaces for workers in the homelessness sector to process grief. CBC covered this a few years ago, including a radio segment feature on CBC White Coat, Black Art (which you can access at the below link). https://www.cbc.ca/radio/whitecoat/palliative-care-team-helps-the-homeless-die-with-dignity-a-healing-circle-helps-them-grieve-1.5048409 PEACH Good Wishes Program – A program that provides meaningful gifts for unhoused individuals who are terminally ill. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-homeless-palliative-holidays-1.5407360 Kensington Hospice & 'Radical Love' Equity-Oriented Hospice Palliative Care Naheed Dosani also serves as the Medical Director of Kensington Hospice, Toronto's largest hospice. There, he helps run an innovative program called 'Radical Love' Equity-Oriented Hospice Palliative Care, which provides low-threshold, low-barrier access to hospice care for structurally vulnerable individuals (e.g., those experiencing homelessness). The program also operates via a partnership with the PEACH Program. As a result of the 'Radical Love' program at Kensington Hospice: At any given time, Kensington Hospice has evolved from caring for structurally vulnerable individuals

Much like deprescribing, we plan to revisit certain high impact and dynamic topics frequently.  Substance use disorder is one of those complex issues in which clinical practice is changing rapidly.  You can listen to our prior podcasts on substance use disorder here, here, here, and here. Today we talk with experts Janet Ho, Sach Kale, and Julie Childers about opioid use disorder and serious illness.  We address: Why is caring for patients with this overlap so hard?  Inspired by Dani Chammas's paper in Annals of Internal Medicine titled, “Wishing for a no show” we talk about countertransference: start by asking yourself, “Why am I having difficulty? What is making this hard for me?”  Sach Kale set up an outpatient clinic focused on substance use disorder for patients with cancer. Why? How? What do they do? Do you need to be an addiction medicine trained physician to start such a clinic (no: Sach is not).  See Sach's write up about setting up this clinic in JPSM. What is harm reduction and how can we implement it in practice?  One key tenet of harm reduction we return to multiple times on this podcast: Accountability without termination (or, in more familiar language, without abandonment). When to consider bupenorphine vs methadone?  Why the field is moving away from prescribing methadone to bupenorphine; how to manage patients prescribed methadone for opioid use disorder who then develop serious and painful illness - should we/can we split up the once daily dosing to achieve better pain control? Who follows the patient once the cancer goes into remission? Who will prescribe the buprenorphine then?  Or when it progresses - will hospice pay? And so much more: maybe not the oxycodone for breakthrough; when the IV dilaudid is the only thing that works; pill counts and urine drug tests; the 3 Ps approach (pain, pattern, prognosis); stimulant use disorder; a forthcoming VitalTalk section… Thanks to the many questions that came in on social media from listeners in advance of this podcast.  We all have questions.  We addressed as many of your listener questions as we could. We could have talked for 4 hours and will definitely revisit this issue! Sometimes the drugs don't work. -Alex: @alexsmithmd.bsky.social

Trauma is a universal experience, and our approach as health care providers to trauma should be universal as well. That's my main take-home point after learning from our three guests today when talking about trauma-informed care, an approach that highlights key principles including safety, trustworthiness, peer support, collaboration, empowerment, and cultural sensitivity. With that said, there is so much more that I learned from our guests for this trauma-informed care podcast. Our guests include Mariah Robertson, Kate Duchowny, and Ashwin Kotwal. Mariah discussed her JAGS paper on applying a trauma-informed approach to home visits. Kate and Ashwin talked about their research on the prevalence of lifetime trauma and its association with physical and psychosocial health among adults at the end of life. We also explored several questions with them, including how to define trauma, its prevalence in older adults, the impact of past traumatic experiences, the potential triggers of trauma screening, and the application of trauma-informed principles in clinical practice. If you want a deeper dive, check out the following resources: Our “Nature of Suffering” podcast with BJ Miller and Naomi Saks Dani Chammas' Annals paper on countertransference and why we shouldn't say “that the patient was difficult rather than that I felt frustrated.”  A great Curbsiders podcast episode on Trauma-informed care with Megan Gerber CAPC's Trauma-informed care toolkit Mariah's article on Home-Based Care for LGBTQ or another diverse gender identity Older Adults

In today's podcast we were delighted to be joined by the presenters of the top scientific abstracts for the Annual Assembly of the American Academy of  Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM) and the Hospice and Palliative Medicine Nurses Association (HPNA).  Eric and I interviewed these presenters at the meeting on Thursday (before the pub crawl, thankfully).  On Saturday, they formally presented their abstracts during the plenary session, followed by a wonderful question and answer session with Hillary Lum doing a terrific job in the role of podcast host moderator. Our three guests were Marie Bakitas, who conducted a trial of tele/video palliative care for Black and White inpatients with serious illness hospitalized in the rural south; Yael Shenker, for a trial of patient-directed Prepare-for-your-care vs. facilitated Respecting Choices style advance care planning interventions; and, Na Ouyang, who studied the relationship between prognostic communication and prolonged grief among the parents of children who died from cancer.  From just the abstracts we had so many questions. We covered some of our questions on the podcast, others you can ponder on your own or in your journal clubs, including: Marie's tele/video palliative care intervention was tailored/refined with the help of a community advisory board. Does every institution need to get a community advisory board to tailor their rural tele-palliative care initiative (or geriatrics intervention) to the local communities served?  Who would/should be on that board? How to be sensitive to the risks of stereotyping based on recommendations from the few members of the board to the many heterogeneous patients served? Advance care planning has taken a beating. For the purposes of a thought exercise, no matter what you believe, let's assume that there are clear important benefits. Based on the results of Yael's study, should resources be allocated to resource intensive nurse facilitated sessions (Respecting Choices), which had significantly better engagement, or to low resource intensive patient-facing materials (Prepare), which had significantly less engagement but still plenty of engagement (e.g. 75% vs 61% advance directive completion)? One interpretation of Na's study is that clinicians can lean on the high levels of trust and high ratings of communication to engage with parents of children with cancer about prognosis.  Another interpretation is that clinicians avoided telling the parents prognosis in order to bolster their ratings of trust and communication quality.  Which is it? Bonus: Simon says he composed the song Sounds of Silence in a dark echoing bathroom about his concerns that people had stopped listening to each other in the 1960s (still resonates, right?).  Garfunkel says Simon was writing about Garfunklel's friend and college roomate Sandy, who was blind.  Who's got the right of it?   Enjoy! -Alex Smith   

Things are changing quickly in the Alzheimer's space. We now have biomarkers that can reasonably approximate the degree of amyloid build-up in the brain with a simple blood test.  We have two new FDA-approved medications that reduce that amyloid buildup and modestly slow down the progression of the disease.  So, the question becomes, what, if anything, should we do differently in the primary care setting to diagnose the disease? On today's podcast, we've invited Nathaniel Chin back to the GeriPal podcast to talk about what primary care needs to manage this new world of Alzheimer's disease effectively.  Nate is a geriatrician and clinician-scientist at the University of Wisconsin, as well as the host of the Wisconsin ADRC's podcast, "Dementia Matters." In each bi-weekly episode, he interviews Alzheimer's disease experts about research advances and caregiver strategies. Nate also wrote a NEJM piece last year on “Alzheimer's Disease, Biomarkers, and mAbs — What Does Primary Care Need?” We address the following questions with Nate: Has anything changed for the primary care doctor when diagnosing Alzheimer's?  How should we screen for cognitive impairment? Does a good history matter anymore? What's the role of assessing function? What do we do with those who have only subjective cognitive complaints? Can't we skip all this and just send some blood-based biomarkers? What is the role of the amyloid antibody treatments? Lastly, take a look at the following if you want to take a deeper dive into some of the other articles and podcasts we discuss: First, two competing definitions of what is Alzheimer's: Alzheimer Disease as a Clinical-Biological Construct—An International Working Group (IWG) Recommendation Revised criteria for diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer's disease: Alzheimer's Association Workgroup Alzheimer's Association clinical practice guideline for the Diagnostic Evaluation, Testing, Counseling, and Disclosure of Suspected Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders (DETeCD-ADRD): Executive summary of recommendations for primary care Podcasts we mentioned Prevention of Dementia: A Podcast with Kristine Yaffe Screening for Dementia: A Podcast with Anna Chodos, Joseph Gaugler and Soo Borson

It is a battle royale on this week's GeriPal podcast. In one corner, weighing in at decades of experience, well known for heavy hits of bedside assessments, strong patient-family relationships, and a knockout punch of interdisciplinary collaboration, we have in-person palliative care consults. But watch out! Travel time can leave this champ vulnerable to fatigue and no-shows.  In the other corner, we have the young upstart, able to reach patients across vast distances when delivering palliative care, all in the comfort of wearing pajamas, we have telehealth delivered palliative care.  However, lack of physical presence may make this contender struggle to land the emotional support punch that is at the very heart of palliative care. Who will emerge victorious? Will in-person palliative care use its experience and bedside manner to overwhelm telehealth palliative care, or will telehealth deliver the knockout blow of efficiency and accessibility? Find out on this week's podcast where we invite Joseph Greer,  Simone Rinaldi, and Vicki Jackson to talk about their recent JAMA article on “Telehealth vs In-Person Early Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer - A Multisite Randomized Clinical Trial.” Additionally, here are some of the resources we talked about during the podcast: Eduardo Bruera's editorial that accompanies the JAMA paper titled “Improving Palliative Care Access for Patients With Cancer” Our podcast on Stepped Palliative Care with Jennifer Temel, Chris Jones, and Pallavi Kumar The book “What's in the Syringe? Principles of Early Integrated Palliative Care” by Juliet Jacobsen, Vicki Jackson, Joseph Greer, and Jennifer Temel Lastly, don't forget about attending some of the sessions Vicki mentioned at the end of the podcast during the HPNA/AAHPM annual meeting in Denver, as well as the GeriPal #HPMParty Pub Crawl!  

It's another deprescribing super special on today's GeriPal Podcast, where we delve into the latest research on deprescribing medications prescribed to older adults. Today, we explore four fascinating studies highlighting innovative approaches to reducing medication use and improving patient outcomes. In our first segment, we discuss a study led by Constance Fung and her team, which investigated the use of a masked tapering method combined with augmented cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTI) to help patients discontinue benzodiazepines. The study involved 188 middle-aged and older adults who had been using medications like lorazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, temazepam, and zolpidem for insomnia. The results were impressive: 73% of participants in the masked tapering plus augmented CBTI group successfully discontinued their medication, compared to 59% in the open taper plus standard CBTI group. This significant difference highlights the potential of targeting placebo effect mechanisms to enhance deprescribing efforts. Next, we turn to Emily McDonald, the director of the Canadian Medication Appropriateness and Deprescribing Network, to discuss her study on the impact of direct-to-consumer educational brochures on gabapentin deprescribing. Patients received brochures detailing the risks of gabapentinoids, nonpharmacologic alternatives, and a proposed deprescribing regimen (see here for the brochure). Additionally, clinicians participated in monthly educational sessions. The intervention group saw a deprescribing rate of 21.1%, compared to 9.9% in the usual care group. This study underscores the power of patient education in promoting safer medication use. In our third segment, we explore Amy Linsky's study that examined the effect of patient-directed educational materials on clinician deprescribing of potentially low-benefit or high-risk medications, such as proton pump inhibitors, high-dose gabapentin, or risky diabetes medications. The intervention involved mailing medication-specific brochures to patients before their primary care appointments (click here for the brochure). The results showed a modest but significant increase in deprescribing rates among the intervention group. This approach demonstrates the potential of simple, low-cost interventions to improve medication safety. Finally, we discuss Michelle Odden's study, which used a target trial emulation approach to investigate the effects of deprescribing antihypertensive medications on cognitive function in nursing home residents. The study included 12,644 residents and found that deprescribing was associated with less cognitive decline, particularly among those with dementia4. These findings and the two studies Michelle mentions in the podcast (DANTE and OPTIMIZE) suggest that carefully reducing medication use in older adults may help preserve cognitive function. However, the DANTON study adds more questions to that conclusion. Join us as we dive deeper into these studies and discuss the implications for clinical practice and patient care. Don't miss this episode if you're interested in the latest advancements in deprescribing research!

Many older adults lose decision-making capacity during serious illnesses, and a significant percentage lack family or friends to assist with decisions. These individuals may become “unrepresented,” meaning they lack the capacity to make a specific medical decision, do not have an advance directive for that decision, and do not have a surrogate to help. In today's podcast, we talk with Joe Dixon, Timothy Farrell, and Yael Zweig, authors of the AGS position statement on making medical treatment decisions for unrepresented older adults. We define “unrepresented” and address the following questions: What is the scope of the unrepresented problem? Why not use the older term “unbefriended”? How should we care for unrepresented individuals in inpatient and outpatient settings? What can we do to prevent someone from becoming unrepresented? Find answers to these questions and more in this week's podcast. Listen in, and if you're interested, explore the topic further with the following resources: AGS Position statement on making medical treatment decisions for unrepresented older adults VA Policy on Advance Care Planning and on Informed Consent 

We've talked a lot before about integrating psychiatry into palliative care (see here and here for two examples). Still, we haven't talked about integrating palliative care into psychiatry or in the care of those with severe mental illness. On this week's podcast, we talk with two experts about palliative psychiatry. We invited Dani Chammas, a palliative care physician and psychiatrist at UCSF (and a frequent guest to the GeriPal podcast), as well as Brent Kious, a psychiatrist at the Huntsman Mental Health Institute, focusing on the management of severe persistent mental illnesses. We discuss the following: What is Palliative Psychiatry (and how is it different from Palliative Care Psychiatry)? What does it look like to take a palliative approach to severe mental illness? Is "terminal" mental illness a thing? Is hospice appropriate for people with serious mental illness (and does hospice have the skills to meet their needs?) Controversy over Medical Aid in Dying for primary psychiatric illness (and for those with serious medical illness who have a comorbid psychiatric illness) The level of provider moral distress that can be created in a system not designed to meet the needs of specific populations... and when we are asked to meet a need we don't feel equipped to meet. Here are a couple of articles if you want to do a deeper dive: Dani and colleagues article on “Psychiatry and Palliative Care: Growing the Interface Through Education.” Dani and colleagues article on “Palliative Care Psychiatry: Building Synergy Across the Spectrum.” Brent's article on “Physician Aid-in-Dying and Suicide Prevention in Psychiatry: A Moral Crisis?” A NY Times article titled “Should Patients Be Allowed to Die From Anorexia?”  

Surrogate decision making has some issues.  Surrogates often either don't know what patients would want, or think they know but are wrong, or make choices that align with their own preferences rather than the patients.  After making decisions, many surrogates experience regret, PTSD, and depressive symptoms.  Can we do better? Or, to phrase the question for 2024, “Can AI do better?” Follow that path and you arrive at a potentially terrifying scenario: using AI for surrogate decision making.  What?!?  When Teva Brender and Brian Block first approached me about writing a thought piece about this idea, my initial response was, “Hell no.”  You may be thinking the same.  But…stay with us here…might AI help to address some of the major issues present in surrogate decision making? Or does it raise more issues than it solves? Today we talk with Teva, Dave Wendler, and Jenny Blumenthal-Barby about: Current clinical and ethical issues with surrogate decision making The Patient Preferences Predictor (developed by Dave Wendler) or Personalized Patient Preferences Predictor (updated idea by Brian Earp) and commentary by Jenny Using AI to comb through prior recorded clinical conversations with patients to play back pertinent discussions; to predict functional outcomes; and to predict patient preferences based on prior spending patterns, emails, and social media posts (Teva's thought piece) A whole host of ethical issues raised by these ideas including the black box nature, the motivations of private AI algorithms run by for profit healthcare systems, turning an “is” into an “ought”, defaults and nudges, and privacy. I'll end this intro with a quote from Deb Grady in an editor's commentary to our thought piece in JAMA Internal Medicine about this topic: “Voice technology that creates a searchable database of patients' every encounter with a health care professional? Using data from wearable devices, internet searches, and purchasing history? Algorithms using millions of direct observations of a person's behavior to provide an authentic portrait of the way a person lived? Yikes! The authors discuss the practical, ethical, and accuracy issues related to this scenario. We published this Viewpoint because it is very interesting, somewhat scary, and probably inevitable.” -@alexsmithmd.bsky.social  

We've covered stories before.  With Liz Salmi, Anne Kelly, and Preeti Malani we talked about stories written up in the academic literature, such as the JAMA Piece of My Mind series.  We talked with Thor Ringler, who helped found the My Life My Story Project at the VA and beyond, and Heather Coats about the evidence base for capturing patient stories. Today's podcast is both similar and different.  Similar in that the underlying theme of the power of stories.  Different in that these storytelling initiatives, the Nocturnists and the Palliative Story Exchange, are focused on clinicians sharing stories with each other in small groups to heal. There's something magical that happens in small group storytelling. It's that mixture of intimacy and vulnerability, of shared clinical experiences, that fosters a sense of belonging.  We model that small group storytelling experience today. We discuss: The “origin stories” of the Nocturnists Live Show and Podcast and the Palliative Story Exchange The process for story creation and development, written in advance or not, feedback or not after the story, and the aims and goals of each initiative And we each tell a short story, modeling the process for The Nocturnists and the Palliative Story Exchange for our listeners These initiatives arose organically from clinicians as part of a journey away from burnout, moral distress, shame, and loneliness toward healing, wholeness, gratitude, and belonging.  A journey taken one story at a time. One final note on the song request: About 20 years ago I took an epidemiology course as part of a Masters program. The instructor, Fran Cook, gave all the students a survey without explanation.  We answered the survey and handed it in. One of the questions was, “Can you name a song by the Tragically Hip?”  It later turned out the survey was a prognostic index designed to determine if the respondent was Canadian.   -@AlexSmithMD Here's a link to an article about the Palliative Story Exchange.

Denial. Substance use. Venting. Positive reframing. Humor. Acceptance. All of these are ways we cope with stressful situations. Some we may consider healthy or unhealthy coping strategies, but are they really that easy to categorize? Isn't it more important to ask whether a particular coping behavior is adaptive or not for a particular person,in a particular time or situation? We are going to tackle this question and so many more about coping on this week's podcast with Dani Chammas, a recurring GeriPal guest, psychiatrist, and palliative care doc at UCSF, and Amanda Moment, a Palliative Care Social Worker at Brigham and Women's Cancer Center. There are so many take-home points for me on this podcast, including this one on a framework for assessing coping in serious illness: nonjudgmentally observe their coping wonder about the impacts of their coping prioritize helping patients maintain their psychological integrity mindfully think through how we can serve their coping in ways that they can tolerate, always calibrating based on the person, the moment, and the setting in front of us. Here are some more resources we've discussed in the podcast Dani's NEJM article on coping: “Should I Laugh at That? Coping in the Setting of Serious Illness” Dani's GeriPal podcast with us on “Improving Serious Illness Communication By Developing Formulations” A great journal article on “Formulation in Palliative Care: Elevating Our Potential for Therapeutic Communication” A study on how palliative care may work by enhancing patients' ability to access adaptive coping - “Role of Patient Coping Strategies in Understanding the Effects of Early Palliative Care on Quality of Life and Mood ** NOTE: To claim CME credit for this episode, click here **  

Falls are very common among older adults but often go unreported or untreated by healthcare providers. There may be lots of reasons behind this. Patients may feel like falls are just part of normal aging. Providers may feel a sense of nihilism, that there just isn't anything they can do to decrease the risk of falling. On this week's podcast, we try to blow up this nihilism with our guest Sarah Berry. Sarah is a geriatrician at Hebrew SeniorLife in Boston where she does research on falls, fractures, and osteoporosis in older adults.  We pepper Sarah with questions ranging from: Why should we care about falls? What are ways we should screen for falls? What are evidence based interventions to decrease the risk of falls? What about Vitamin D and falls??? How should we assess for fracture risk? What are some evidence-based ways to decrease fracture risk? When should we prescribe vs deprescribe bisphosphonate therapy?  How does life expectancy fit in with all of this? If you want to do a deeper dive into some of the articles we discuss, take a look at the following: An awesome JAMA review by Sarah on fall risk assessment and prevention in community-dwelling adults. The Fracture Risk Assessment in Long term care (FRAiL) website James Deardorff's JAMA IM article on “Time to Benefit of Bisphosphonate Therapy for the Prevention of Fractures Among Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis Sarah's article on “Controversies in Osteoporosis Treatment of Nursing Home Residents”, which includes this helpful flow chart on starting/stopping osteoporosis drugs in nursing homes

We recently published a podcast on palliative care for kidney failure, focusing on conservative kidney management. Today we're going to focus upstream on the decision to initiate dialysis vs conservative kidney management. As background, we discuss Manju Kurella Tamura's landmark NEJM paper that found, contrary to expectations, that function declines precipitously for nursing home residents who initiate dialysis.  If the purpose of initiating dialysis is improving function - our complex, frail, older patients are likely to be disappointed. We also briefly mention Susan Wong's terrific studies that found a disconnect between older adults with renal failure's expressed values, focused on comfort, and their advance care planning and end-of-life care received, which focused on life extension; and another study that found quality of life was sustained until late in the illness course. One final briefly mentioned piece of background: John Oliver's hilarious and disturbing takedown of the for profit dialysis industry, focused on DaVita. And the main topic of today is a paper in Annals of Internal Medicine, Maria first author, that addressed the tradeoffs between initiating dialysis vs continued medical/supportive management.   Turns out, in summary people who initiate dialysis have mildly longer lives, but spend more time in facilities, away from home.  We also discuss (without trying to get too wonky!) immortal time bias and target emulation trials. Do target trials differ from randomized trials and “ordinary” observational studies, or do they differ?!? Eric is skeptical. Bottom line: if faced with the decision to initiate dialysis, waiting is generally better.  Let it be (hint hint). -Additional link to study with heatmaps of specific locations (hospital, nursing home, home) after initiating dialysis. -@AlexSmithMD

In March 2020, we launched our first podcast on COVID-19. Over the past four years, we've seen many changes—some positive, some negative. While many of us are eager to move past COVID (myself included), it's clear that COVID is here to stay. This week, we sit down with infectious disease experts Peter Chin-Hong and Lona Mody to discuss living with COVID-19. Our conversation covers: The current state of COVID Evidence for COVID boosters, who should get them, and preferences between Novavax and mRNA vaccines COVID treatments like Molnupiravir and Paxlovid Differences in COVID impact on nursing home residents and those with serious illnesses We wrap up with a “magic wand” question. My wish was for better randomized evidence for vaccines and treatments, though I worry this might not be feasible. In the meantime, there's significant room to improve vaccine uptake among high-risk groups, particularly nursing home residents. Currently, only 1 in 5 nursing home residents in the US have received the COVID booster, compared to over 50% in the UK. By: Eric Widera  

Cannabis is complicated. It can mean many things, including a specific type of plant, the chemicals in the plant, synthetic analogs, or products that have these components. The doses of the most widely discussed pharmacologically active ingredients, THC and CBD, vary by product, and the onset and bioavailability vary by how it is delivered. If you believe the evidence for efficacy to manage symptoms like neuropathic pain, how do you even start to think about recommending these products to patients? On today's podcast, we answer that question with our guests, David Casarett and Eloise Theisen. David is a physician who wrote the book “Stoned: A Doctor's Case for Medical Marijuana” and gave a TED talk on “A Doctor's Case for Medical Marijuana” that was watched over 3 million times. Eloise is a palliative care NP at Stanford and co-founder of The Radicle Health Clinician Network. So, take a listen and check out the following resources to learn more about medical cannabis: Radicle Health's curriculum and modules for healthcare professionals on cannabis NEJM Catalyst article on integrating medical cannabis into clinical care David's TED talk on “A Doctor's Case for Medical Marijuana” A JPSM systematic review of current evidence for cannabis in palliative care Our past GeriPal episode with Bree Johnston and Ben Han on cannabis in older adults

When treating heart failure, how do we distinguish between the expanding list of medications recommended for “Guideline Directed Medical Therapy” (GDMT) and what might be considered runaway polypharmacy? In this week's podcast, we'll tackle this crucial question, thanks to a fantastic suggestion from GeriPal listener Matthew Shuster, who will join us as a guest host. We've also invited two amazing cardiologists, Parag Goyal and Nicole Superville, to join us about GDMT in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and in Heart Failure with preserved EF (HFpEF).  We talk about what is heart failure, particularly HFpEF, how we treat it (including the use of sodium–glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2's), and how we should apply guidelines to individual patients, especially those with multimorbidity who are taking a lot of other medications. I'd also like to give a shout out to a recent ACP article on HFpEF with an outstanding contribution from Ariela Orkaby, geriatrician extraordinaire (we also just did a podcast with her on frailty).  

In fellowship, one of the leaders at MGH used to quote Balfour Mount as saying, “You say you've worked on teams? Show me your scars.”  Scars, really?  Yes. I've been there. You probably have too. On the one hand, I don't think interprofessional teamwork needs to be scarring. On the other hand, though it goes against my middle-child “can't we all get along” nature, disagreement is a key aspect of high functioning teams.  The key is to foster an environment of curiosity and humility that welcomes and even encourages a diversity of perspectives, including direct disagreement. Today we talk with DorAnne Donesky, Michelle Milic, Naomi Saks, & Cara Wallace about the notion that we should revolutionize our education programs, training programs, teams, incentive structures, and practice to be intentionally interprofessional in all phases.  The many arguments, theories, & approaches across settings and conditions are explored in detail in the book they edited, “Intentionally Interprofessional Palliative Care” (discount code AMPROMD9). Of note: these lessons apply to geriatrics, primary care, hospital medicine, critical care, cancer care, etc, etc. And they begin on today's podcast with one clinical ask: everyone should be a generalist and a specialist. In other words, in addition to being a specialist (e.g. social worker, chaplain), everyone should be able to ask a question or two about spiritual concerns, social concerns, or physical concerns. Many more approaches to being interprofessional on today's podcast.  But how about you! What will you commit to in order to be more intentionally interprofessional? If we build this dream together, standing strong forever, nothing's gonna stop us now… -@AlexSmithMD    Interprofessional organizations that are not specific to palliative care are doing excellent work National Center for Interprofessional Practice and Education: https://nexusipe.org/ National Collaborative for Improving the Clinical Learning Environment https://ncicle.org/ Interprofessional Education Collaborative (home of the IPEC Competencies) https://www.ipecollaborative.org/ American Interprofessional Health Collaborative (sponsor of the biennial meeting "Collaborating Across Borders") https://aihc-us.org/index.php/ Health Professions Accreditors Collaborative https://healthprofessionsaccreditors.org/

Can death be portrayed as beautiful? In this episode, we share the joy of talking with Wendy MacNaughton (artist, author, graphic journalist) and Frank Ostaseski (Buddhist teacher, author, founder of the Metta Institute and Zen Hospice Project) about using drawings and images as tools for creating human connections and processing death and dying. You may know Wendy as the talented artist behind Meanwhile in San Francisco or Salt Fat Acid Heat. Our focus today, however, was on her most recently published book titled How to Say Goodbye. This beautiful book began as a very personal project for Wendy while she was the artist-in-residence at Zen Hospice. As BJ MIller writes in the foreword, “May this book be a portal -- a way for us to move beyond the unwise territory of trying to ‘do it right' and into the transcendent terrain of noticing what we can notice, loving who we love, and letting death -- like life --surprise us with its ineffable beauty.” Some highlights from our conversation:   The role of art in humanizing the dying process.  How the act of drawing can help us sloooow down, pay attention to the people and world around us, and ultimately let go…  The possibility of incorporating drawings in research and even clinical care.  The wisdom and experiences of hospice caregivers (who are often underpaid and undervalued). How to use the “Five Things” as a framework for a “conversation of love, respect, and closure” with someone who is dying. And finally, Wendy offers a drawing lesson and ONE-MINUTE drawing assignment to help us (and our listeners) be more present and connect with one another. You can read more about this blind contour exercise from Wendy's DrawTogether Strangers project. The rules are really quite simple:  Find another person. Sit down and draw each other for only one minute. NEVER lift up your pen/pencil (draw with a continuous line)  NEVER look down at your paper That's it! While the creative process is what truly matters, we think that the outcome is guaranteed to be awesome and definitely worth sharing. We invite you to post your drawings on twitter and tag us @GeriPalBlog! Happy listening and drawing, Lingsheng @lingshengli  Additional info:  For weekly lessons on drawing and the art of paying attention from Wendy, you can subscribe to her Substack DrawTogether with WendyMac and join the Grown-Ups Table (GUT)!  To learn more about Frank's teaching and philosophy on end-of-life care, read his book The Five Invitations   

If palliative care was a drug, one question we would want to know before prescribing it is what dose we should give.  Give too little - it may not work.  Give too much, it may cause harm (even if the higher dose had no significant side effects, it would require patients to take a lot of unnecessary additional pills as well as increase the cost.) So, what is the effective dose of palliative care? On today's podcast, we talk about finding an evidence-based answer to this dosing question with three leaders in palliative care: Jennifer Temel, Chris Jones, and Pallavi Kumar.  All three of our guests were co-authors of a randomized control trial on “Stepped Palliative Care” published in JAMA this year. We talk about what stepped palliative care is, how it is different from usual care or intensive palliative care, why these palliative care dosing questions are important, and dive deep into the results of their trial.  We also discuss some of the other important trials in palliative care, including Jennifer Temel's landmark NEJM study on outpatient palliative care and another study that gave an intervention we dubbed “fast-food palliative care” in an older GeriPal blog post.  

Well-being and resilience are so hot right now. We have an endless supply of CME courses on decreasing burnout through self-care strategies. Well-being committees are popping up at every level of an organization. And C-suites now have chief wellness officers sitting at the table. I must admit, though, sometimes it just feels off… inauthentic, as if it's not a genuine desire to improve our lives as health care providers, but rather a metric to check off or a desire to improve productivity and billing by making the plight of workers a little less miserable. On today's podcast, we talk with Jane Thomas, Naomi Saks, and Ishwaria Subbiah about the concepts of wellness, well-being, resilience, and burnout, as well as what can be done to truly improve the lives of healthcare providers and bring, I dare say it, joy into our work. For more on resources for well-being, check out the following:   Cynda Rushton, PHD, MSN, RN — Transforming Moral Distress into Moral Resilience https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1gE5G8WnTU Tricia Hersey: Rest & Collective Care as Tools for Liberation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OuXnLrKyi0 Beyond resiliency: shifting the narrative of medical student wellness https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10500407/ Fostering resilience in healthcare professionals during and in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bjpsych-advances/article/fostering-resilience-in-healthcare-professionals-during-and-in-the-aftermath-of-the-covid19-pandemic/0ADCA3737D12CAF308567A7F59EFC267 The Greater Good Science Center studies the psychology, sociology, and neuroscience of well-being and teaches skills that foster a thriving, resilient, and compassionate society. https://ggsc.berkeley.edu/?_ga=2.230263642.712840261.1724681290-1268886183.1680535323  

In today's podcast we set the stage with the story of Dax Cowart, who in 1973 was a 25 year old man horribly burned in a freak accident. Two thirds of his body was burned, most of his fingers were amputated, and he lost vision in both eyes.  During his 14 month recovery Dax repeatedly demanded that he be allowed to die. The requests were ignored. After, he said he was both glad to be alive, and that the doctors should have respected his wish to be allowed to die. But that was 1973, you might say. We don't have such issues today, do we?  Louise Aronson's recent perspective about her mother in the NEJM, titled, “Beyond Code Status” suggests no, we still struggle with this issue. And Bill Andereck is still haunted by the decision he made to have the police break down the door to rescue his patient who attempted suicide in the 1980s, as detailed in this essay in the Cambridge Quarterly of HealthCare Ethics.  The issues that are raised by these situations are really hard, as they involve complex and sometimes competing ethical values, including: The duty to rescue, to save life, to be a “lifeguard” Judgements about quality of life, made on the part of patients about their future selves, and by clinicians (and surrogate decision makers) about patients Age realism vs agism  The ethics of rationale suicide, subject of a prior GeriPal episode Changes in medical practice and training, a disconnect between longitudinal care and acute care, and frequent handoffs The limitations of advance directives, POLST, and code status orders in the electronic health record The complexities of patient preferences, which extend far beyond code status The tension between list vs goals based approaches to documentation in the EHR And a great song request, “The Cape” by Guy Clark to start and end. Enjoy! -@AlexSmithMD  

Serious illness communication is hard. We must often deliver complex medical information that carries heavy emotional weight in pressured settings to individuals with varying cultural backgrounds, values, and beliefs. That's a hard enough task, given that most of us have never had any communication skills training. It feels nearly impossible if you add another degree of difficulty, whether it be a crying interpreter or a grandchild from another state who shows up at the end of a family meeting yelling how you are killing grandma. On today's podcast, we try to stump three VitalTalk expert faculty, Gordon Wood, Holly Yang, Elise Carey, with some of the most challenging communication scenarios that we (and some of our listeners) could think up. During the podcast, we reference a newly released second-edition book that our guests published titled “Navigating Communication with Seriously Ill Patients: Balancing Honesty with Empathy and Hope.”  I'd add this to your “must read” list of books, as it takes readers through the VitalTalk method that our guests use so effectively when addressing these challenging scenarios. If you are interested in learning more about VitalTalk, check out their and some of these other podcasts we've done with three of the other authors of this book (and VitalTalk co-founders): Our podcast with Tony Back as well as Wendy Anderson on “Communication Skills in a Time of Crises” Our podcast with James Tulsky on “The Messiness of Medical Decision-Making in Advanced Illness.” Any one of our podcasts with Bob Arnold, including this one on the language of serious illness or this one on books, to become a better mentor. Lastly, I reference Alex's Take Out the Trash video, where he uses communication skills learned in his palliative care training at home with his wife.  The results are… well… let's just say less than perfect.  By: Eric Widera

We've talked about Brain Death before with Robert (Bob) Troug and guest-host Liz Dzeng, and in many ways today's podcast is a follow up to that episode (apologies Bob for mispronouncing your last name on today's podcast!). Why does this issue keep coming up?  Why is it unresolved?  Today we put these questions to Winston Chiong, a neurologist and bioethicist, and Sean Aas, a philosopher and bioethicist.  We talk about many reasons and ways forward on this podcast, including: The ways in which advancing technology continually forces us to re-evaluate what it means to be dead - from the ability of cells/organs to revive, to a future in which organs can be grown, to uploading our consciousness to an AI.  (I briefly mention the Bobiverse series by Denise Taylor - a science fiction series about an uploaded consciousness that confronts the reader with a  re-evaluation of what it means to be human, or deserving of moral standing). The moral questions at stake vs the biologic questions (and links between them) The pressures the organ donation placers on this issue, and questioning if this is the dominant consideration (as Winston notes, organ donation was not central to the Jahi McMath story) What we argue about when we argue about death - the title of a great recent paper from Sean - which argues that “we must define death in moralized terms, as the loss of a significant sort of moral standing,” - noting that those why are “dead” have something to gain - the ability to donate their organs to others. Winston's paper on the “fuzziness” around all definitions of brain death, titled, Brain Death without Definitions. As we joke about at the start - talking with philosophers and bioethicists, you almost always get a response along the lines of, “well that's a good question, but let's examine a deeper more fundamental question.”  Today is no different. And the process of identifying the right questions to ask is absolutely the best place to start.   Eventually, of course, everything must cease.   -@AlexSmithMD

Anti-Asian hate incidents rose dramatically during COVID, likely fueled by prominent statements about the “Chinese virus.”  VIewed through the wider lens of history, this was just the latest in a long experience of Anti-Asian hate, including the murder of Vincent Chin, the Chinese Exclusion Act, and the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII.  For those who think that anti-Asian hate has receded as the COVID has “ended,” just two days prior to recording this episode a Filipino woman was pushed to her death on BART in San Francisco. These incidents are broadcast widely, particularly in Asian News outlets. Today we talk about the impact of anti-Asian hate on the health and well being of older adults with Russell Jeung, sociologist, Professor of Asian Studies at San Francisco State, and co-founder of Stop AAPI-Hate, Lingsheng Li, geriatrician/palliative care doc and T32 fellow at UCSF, and Jessica Eng, medical director of On Lok, a PACE, and Associate Professor in the UCSF Division of Geriatrics.  We discuss: What is considered a hate incident, how is it tracked, what do we know about changes over time The wider impact of Anti-Asian hate on older Asians, who are afraid to go out, leading to anxiety, social isolation, loneliness, decreased exercise, missed appointments and medications. Lingsheng (and I) recently published studies on this in JAMA Internal Medicine, and JAGS. Ongoing reports from patients about anti-Asian hate experiences  Should clinicians screen for Anti-Asian hate? Why? Why not? Proposing the clinicians ask a simple follow up question to the usual “do you feel safe at home?” question used to screen for domestic violence.  Add to this, “do you feel safe outside the home?” This question, while providing an opportunity to talk about direct and indirect experiences, can be asked of all patients, and opens the door to conversations about anti-semitism, islamophobia, or anti-Black racism. See also guides for how to confront and discuss anti-Asian hate in these articles in the NEJM and JGIM. And to balance the somber subject, Lingsheng requested the BTS song Dynamite, which was the group's first English language song, and was released at the height of the COVID pandemic.  I had fun trying to make a danceable version with electronic drums for the audio-only podcast.  Maybe we'll get some BTS followers to subscribe to GeriPal?!?   -@AlexSmithMD  

(We couldn't resist when Miguel Paniagua proposed this podcast idea and title. And no, you'll be relieved to hear Eric and I did not imitate the interview style of Zach Galifiniakis). We've talked a good deal on this podcast about what happens before death, today we talk about what happens after.  Our guest today is Thomas Lynch, a poet and undertaker who practiced for years in a small town in Michigan.  I first met Thomas when he visited UC Berkeley in the late 90's after publishing his book, “The Undertaking: Stories from the Dismal Trade.” We cover a wide range on this topic, weaving in our own stories of loss with Thomas's experiences, stories, and poems from years of caring for families after their loved one's have died. We cover: The cultural shift from grieving to celebration, the “disappearance” of the body and death from funerals The power of viewing the body and participating in preparing the body, including cremation The costs of funerals  The story of why Thomas became an undertaker A strong response to Jessica Mitford's scathing critique of the American Funeral Industry published in “The American Way of Death” Our own experiences with funerals and burial arrangements for our loved ones Shifting practices, with a majority of people being cremated after death, a dramatic increase This podcast was like therapy for us.  And I got to sing Tom Waits' Time, one of my favorites.   

What is a healthy diet and how much does it really matter that we try to eat one as we age?  That's the topic of this week's podcast with three amazing guests: Anna Pleet, Elizabeth Eckstrom, and Emily Johnston. Emily Johnston is a registered dietitian, nutrition researcher, and Assistant professor at NYU.  Anna Pleet is an internal medicine resident at Allegheny Health Network who has a collection of amazing YouTube videos on aging and the Mediterranean diet. Elizabeth Eckstrom is a geriatrician, professor of medicine at OHSU, and author of a new book, the Gift of Aging. I love this podcast as while we talk about the usual topics in a medical podcast, like the role of screening, energy balance, and evidence-based for specific diets, we also talk about what a Mediterranean diet actually looks like on a plate and pepper our guests with questions about their favorite meals to convince Alex and me to eat more like a Sardinian. Eric PS.  NEJM just published a great summary of diets summing up adherence to the Mediterranean diet and the following improved health outcomes: death from any cause, cardiovascular diseases, coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, and diabetes    

We are dusting off our crystal balls today with three amazing guests who have all recently published an article on prognosis over the last couple months: Kara Bischoff, James Deardorff, and Elizabeth Lilley. To start us off we talk with Kara Bischoff about the article she just published in JAMA Network on a re-validation of the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) in a modern day palliative care setting.  Why do this?  The PPS  is one of the most widely used prognostic tools for seriously ill patients, but the prognostic estimates given by the PPS are based on data that is well over a decade old. Next, we talk with James Deardorff about whether we can accurately predict nursing home level of care in community-dwelling older adults with dementia.  Spoiler alert, he published a study in JAMA IM on a prognostic index that does exactly that (which is also on eprognosis.org). Lastly, we invite Liz Lilley to talk about her paper in Annals of Surgery about prognostic allignment, including why as palliative care and geriatrics teams we need to take time to ensure that all disciplines and specialities are prognostically aligned before a family meeting.  

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) concluded back in 2000 that there is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against routine screening for dementia in older adults. Are there, though, populations that it may be helpful in, or should that change with the advent of the new amyloid antibodies?  Should it?  If so, how do we screen and who do we screen? On this week's podcast we talk with three experts in the field about screening for dementia. Anna Chodos is a geriatrician at UCSF and the Principal Investigator of Dementia Care Aware, a California-wide program to improve the detection of dementia in older adults who have Medi-Cal benefits. Joseph Gaugler is the Director of the Center for Healthy Aging and Innovation at the University of Minnesota, director of the BOLD Public Health Center of Excellence on Dementia Caregiving, and Editor-in-Chief of the Gerontologist.  Lastly, Soo Borson is a self-described primary care leaning geriatric psychiatrist, developer of the Mini-Cog, and co-leads the CDC-funded BOLD Center on Early Detection of Dementia. In addition to the questions asked above, we also cover the following topics with our guests: What is dementia screening?  Who should get it if anyone? What should we use to screen individuals? What happens after they test positive? And if you are interested in learning more about the Guiding an Improved Dementia Experience (GUIDE) Model for dementia, check out this podcast.  

Emergency podcast! We've been asked by many people, mostly junior/mid career faculty, to quickly record a podcast on ageism and the elections.  People are feeling conflicted.  On the one hand, they have concerns about cognitive fitness of candidates for office.  On the other hand, they worry about ageism.  There's something happening here, and what it is ain't exactly clear. We need clear eyed thinking about this issue. In today's podcast, Louise Aronson, author of Elderhood, validates that this conflict between being concerned about both fitness for the job and alarmed about ageism is exactly the right place to be.  We both cannot ignore that with advancing age the prevalence of cognitive impairment, frailty, and disability increase.  At the same time, we can and should be alarmed at the rise in ageist language that equates aging with infirmity, and images of politicians racing walkers or a walker with the presidential seal.  Ken Covinsky reminds us that we should not be making a diagnosis based on what we see on TV, and that if a patient's daughter expressed a concern that their parent “wasn't right,” we would conduct an in depth evaluation that might last an hour.  Eric Widera reminds us of the history of the Goldwater Act created by the American Psychological Association in the 1960s which states that psychiatrists should refrain from diagnosing public figures, and the American Medical Association code of ethics which likewise discourages armchair diagnosis (rule established in 2017). We frame today's discussion around questions our listeners proposed in response to our Tweets, and are grateful for questions from Anand Iyer, Sandra Shi, Mike Wasserman, Ariela Orkaby, Karen Knops, Jeanette Leardi, Sarah McKiddy, Cecilia Poon, Colleen Christmas, and Kai Smith. We talk about positive aspects of aging, cognitive screening, the line between legitimate concerns and ageism, ableism, advice for a geriatrician asked to comment on TV, frailty and physical disability, images in the press, historical situations including , and an upper age limit for the Presidency, among other issues. Of note, we talk about candidates from all parties today.  We acknowledge concerns and speculation that others have raised about candidates across the political spectrum, current and former.  We do not endorse or disclose our personal attitudes toward any particular candidate.  Fitness for public office is a non-partisan issue that applies to all candidates for office, regardless of political party. There's something happening here, and what it is ain't exactly clear. Strong recommendation to also listen to this terrific podcast with another geriatrician all star, Jim Pacala, on MPR! -@AlexSmithMD  

In May we did a podcast on KidneyPal (the integration of palliative care in renal disease), which made us think, hmmm… one organ right next door is the liver. Maybe we should do a podcast on LiverPal? (or should we call it HepatoPal?) On today's podcast, we do that by inviting four palliative care leaders who are integrating palliative care into the care of those with liver disease: Kirsten Engel, Sarah Gillespie-Heyman, Brittany Waterman, and Amy Johnson. It's a jampacked 50 minutes, filled with pearls on taking care of patients with liver disease.  We cover: How each of their LiverPal teams are structured Why and how LiverPal differ from general palliative care or other palliative care specialty areas (KidneyPal, PalliPulm, etc) How to prognosticate in liver disease and how they communicate this with patients How to think about expectations of transplants and limitations of it How to manage complications and symptoms ranging from ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, pain, itching, cramps, and depression Also, if you want to take an ever deeper dive, check out our 2022 podcast on End Stage Liver Disease with Jen Lai, Ricky Shinall, Nneka Ufere, and Arpan Patel

“Anxiety is a lot like a toddler. It never stops talking, tells you you're wrong about everything, and wakes you up at 3 a.m.”  I'm not sure who wrote this quote, but it feels right to me. We've all had anxiety, and probably all recognize that anxiety can be a force of action or growth but can also spiral to quickly take over our lives and our sleep. How, though, do we navigate anxiety and help our patients who may end up in the anxiety spiral that becomes so hard to get out of? On today's podcast, we've invited Alex Gamble and Brianna Williamson to talk to us about anxiety. Alex is a triple-boarded (palliative care, internal medicine, and psychiatry) assistant professor of medicine at Stanford. Brianna is one of UCSF's palliative care fellows who just completed her psychiatry residency. We start by defining anxiety (harder said than done), move on to talking about when it becomes maladaptive or pathologic, and how DSM5 fits into all of this. We then walk through how we should screen for anxiety and how we should think about a differential.  Lastly, we talk about both non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments. It's a lot to cover in 45 minutes, so for those who like to take a deeper dive, here are some of the references we talked about: Alex Sable-Smith's great BATHE video on YouTube:  Two books that Alex Gamble often recommends to patients can help build up your capacities to sit with anxiety (per Alex, both are from an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy framework) Things Might Go Terribly, Horribly Wrong: A Guide to Life Liberated from Anxiety The Reality Slap  

I have to start with the song.  On our last podcast about urinary incontinence the song request was, “Let it go.”  This time around several suggestions were raised.  Eric suggested, “Even Flow,” by Pearl Jam.  Someone else suggested, “Under Pressure,” but we've done it already.  We settled on, “Oops…I did it again,” by Britney Spears. In some ways the song title captures part of the issue with urinary incontinence.  If only we lived in a world in which much of urinary incontinence was viewed as a natural part of aging, the normal response wasn't embarrassment and shame, but rather an ordinary, “Oops…I did it again.”  And if only we lived in a world in which this issue, which affects half of older women and a third of older men, received the research and attention it deserves. We shouldn't have therapeutic nihilism about those who seek treatment, yet urinary incontinence is woefully understudied relative to its frequency and impact, and as we talk about on the podcast, basic questions about urinary incontinence have yet to be addressed. I don't see those perspectives as incompatible. Today we talk with George Kuchel and Alison Huang about: Urinary incontinence as a geriatric syndrome and relationship to frailty, disability, and cognitive decline Assessment of incontinence: the importance of a 48 hour voiding diary, when to send a UA (only for acute changes) How the assessment leads naturally to therapeutic approaches Non-pharmacologic approaches including distraction, scheduled voiding, and pelvic floor therapy “Last ditch” pharmacologic treatments.  Landmark studies by Neil Resnick and Joe Ouslander.   Enjoy! -@AlexSmithMD   

I always find cachexia in serious illness puzzling. I feel like I recognize it when I see it, but I struggle to give a clear definition or provide effective ways to address it. In today's podcast, we had the opportunity to learn from a renowned expert in palliative care, Eduardo Bruera, about cachexia and anorexia in serious illness. Eduardo established one of the first palliative care programs in 1984, created the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), and significantly contributed to the evidence base for palliative care symptoms that many of us rely on daily. During our discussion with Eduardo, we delved into how we can define cachexia and anorexia, why they occur in conditions like cancer, how to assess for them, and explored the interventions that are helpful and those that are not in the treatment of these conditions.

As Eric notes at the end of today's podcast, we talk about many difficult issues with our patients.  How long they might have to live. Their declining cognitive abilities. What makes their lives meaningful, brings them joy, a sense of purpose.  But one issue we're not as good at discussing with our patients is sexual health. On today's podcast Areej El-Jawahri, oncologist specializing in blood cancers at MGH, says that sexual health is one of the top if not the top issue among cancer survivors.  Clearly this issue is important to patients.  Sharon Bober, clinical psychologist at DFCI, notes that clinicians can get caught in an anxiety cycle, in which they are afraid to ask, don't ask, then have increased anxiety about not asking.  Like any other conversation, you have to start, and through experience learn what language is comfortable for you.  Don Dizon, oncologist specializing in pelvic malignancies at Brown, suggests speaking in plain language, starting by normalizing sexual health issues, to paraphrase, “Many of my patients experience issues with intimacy and sexual health. Is that an issue for you? I'm happy to talk about it at any time.”  All guests agree that clinicians feel they need to have something they can do if they open Pandora's box.  To that end, we talk about practical advice, including: The importance of intimacy over and above physical sexual function for many patients Common causes and differential diagnoses of sexual concerns in patients with cancer and survivors Treatments for erectile dysfunction - first time the words “cock ring” have been uttered on the GeriPal Podcast - and discuss daily phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor therapy vs prn The importance of a pelvic exam for women experiencing pain What is “pelvic physical therapy?” Treatments for vaginal dryness and atrophy ACS links, NCCN links, Cancersexnetwork, and a great handout that Areej created And I get to sing Lady Gaga, also a first for GeriPal!  And let me tell you, there's nothing like the first time (sorry, I couldn't help it!).

The landscape of options for treating people with kidney failure is shifting.  It used to be that the “only” robust option in the US was dialysis.  You can listen to our prior podcast with Keren Ladin talking about patients who viewed dialysis as their only option, and structural issues that led to this point (including this takedown of for profit dialysis companies by John Oliver).  One of the problems was a lack of an alternative robust option to offer patients.  As one of our guests says, you have to offer them something viable as an alternative to dialysis. Today we interviewed Sam Gelfand, dually trained in nephrology and palliative care, Kate Sciacca, a nurse practitioner (fellowship trained in palliative care), and Josh Lakin, palliative care doc, who together with a social worker and other team members started KidneyPal at DFCI/BWH, a palliative care consult service for people with advanced kidney disease.  As a team, they provide a robust alternative to dialysis for patients with kidney failure: conservative kidney management. And “conservative,” as they note, can mean not only a “conservative approach,” as in non-invasive/less aggressive, but also an effort to “conserve” what kidney function remains. We get right down to the nitty gritty of kidney supportive care techniques they incorporate in clinic, including: Communication about the choice between dialysis and conservative kidney management: what are the tradeoffs?  Function often declines after initiating dialysis, at least among nursing home residents. Dialysis may extend life, but those “additional” days are often spent in the hospital or dialysis, away from home. Symptoms are common in both options, though more anxiety and cramping in dialysis, more pruritus and nausea in conservative kidney management.. Introducing the idea of hospice early, at the time of diagnosis with kidney failure. Listen also to our prior podcast with Melissa Wachterman on hospice and dialysis. Approaches to treating fatigue Approaches to treating pain - the second most common symptom (!) - and the answer isn't tramadol (or tramadon't) - rather think buprenorphine patch or methadone, and how to dose gabapentin and pregabalin. Also, don't count out the NSAIDS! Approaches to treating itching/pruritus Approaches to treating nausea Our guests were deeply grateful to their colleagues Dr. Frank Brennan, Dr. Mark Brown, and clinical nurse consultant Elizabeth Josland of the renal supportive care team at St. George Hospital in Sydney, Australia (down under) for teaching them the ropes of palliative care in kidney failure.  And we got to learn some new vocabulary, including the meaning of “chunder.”  Enjoy! -@AlexSmithMD  

Who gets to decide on what it means to have a disease? I posed this question a while back in reference to Alzheimer's disease. I'll save you from reading the article, but the main headline is that corporations are very much the “who” in who gets to define the nature of disease. They do this either through the invention of disease states or, more often, by redrawing the boundaries of what is considered a disease (think pre-diabetes). On today's podcast, we invite Adriane Fugh-Berman to discuss the influence of industry, whether it be pharma or device manufacturers, on healthcare. Adriane founded PharmedOut, a Georgetown University Medical Center project that “advances evidence-based prescribing and educates health care professionals and students about pharmaceutical and medical device marketing practices.” I've listened to a lot of Adriane's talks. It is clear to me that she is not anti-medicine or even anti-pharma but is very much against both the visible and hidden influences that pharma and device manufacturers use to sell their products.  This could be through overt marketing like advertisements or drug rep visits, or more covert measures like unrestricted grants to advocacy organizations, funding of CME, paying “key opinion leaders,” or the development of “disease awareness campaigns.” So take a listen and dont worry, while GeriPal podcasts offer CME, we never take money from industry. By: Eric Widera      

On today's podcast, we've invited four hospice and palliative care social media influencers (yes, that's a thing!), all of whom focus their efforts on educating the general public about living and dying with a serious illness. Their work is pretty impressive in both reach (some of their posts are seen by millions of viewers) and breadth of work.  We've invited: Julie McFadden (aka Hospice Nurse Julie): Julie is a social media superstar, with 1.5 million subscribers on TikTok, another 400,000 subscribers on her YouTube channel, and another 350k followers on Instagram. She covers topics on death, dying, and hospice from a hospice nurse perspective, and she also has a book coming out called “Nothing to Fear: Demystifying Death to Live More Fully,” which is now available for pre-order.   Matt Tyler (aka Pallidad for those on Twitter): Matt is the Hospice and Palliative care doctor who created How To Train Your Doctor, which helps patients living with serious illness find tips on “owning” their healthcare plan on his Instagram and  YouTube pages.  He was also the one who we have to thank for suggesting this podcast! Hsien Seow & Samantha (“Sammy”) Winemaker: Hsein and Sammy's goal was to start a revolution with their podcast “The Waiting Room Revolution,” which is now in its 7th season! The hope was by going directly to those living with a life-changing illness, we could directly tackle the question that comes up so many times - “Why didn't anyone tell me that sooner…”  They also just published a book,” Hope for the Best, Plan for the Rest,” and Sammy is a TikTok star in her own right, with some posts having over a million views. We covered a lot of topics in the podcast from::  What motivated them to create public-facing social media channels? Why focus on the public rather than other health care providers? How do they deal with professional barriers and the barrage of comments? Advice for others who might want to dabble in social media outreach   So, take a listen and check out their social media sites to get inspired. Just don't let Alex make me do another TikTok dance…   Eric Widera  

As Betty Ferrell says on our podcast today, nurses play an essential role in care of people with serious illness.  Who spends the most time with the patient in the infusion center? Doing home care? Hospice visits? In the ICU at the bedside?  Nurses. ELNEC (End-of-Life Nursing Education Consortium) celebrates it's 25th anniversary in 2025.  We talk today with Betty Ferrell, who has been a nurse for 47 years, and is the founder and PI of ELNEC. As I argue on the podcast, ELNEC has likely done more to lift the primary palliative care skills of clinicians than any other initiative.  Full stop.  Some numbers to back it up: ELNEC has trained more than 48,000 providers in a train the trainer model Over 1.5 million clinicians have been educated in ELNEC  ELNEC curricula are integrated int 1180 undergraduate and 394 graduate Schools of Nursing ELNEC has been taught in over 100 countries Today we talk about the origin story of ELNEC, the special role of nurses in palliative care, empowering as well as educating nurses, interprofessional ELNEC training, and opportunities and challenges ELNEC faces over the next 25 years. Enjoy! -@AlexSmithMD  

Eric asks the question that is on many of our minds - is the future of AI more Skynet from Terminator, in which AI takes over the world and drives humanity to the brink of extinction, or Wall-E, in which a benevolent and empathetic AI restores our humanity? Our guest today is Bob Wachter, Chair of Medicine at UCSF and author of the Digital Doctor: Hope, Hype, and Harm at the Dawn of Medicine's Computer Age.  Bob recently wrote an essay in JAMA on AI and delivered a UCSF Grand Rounds on the same topic.  We discuss, among other things: Findings that in several studies AI was rated by patients as more empathetic than human clinicians (not less, that isn't a typo). Turns my concern about lack of empathy from AI on its head - the AI may be more empathetic than clinicians, not less. Skepticism on the ability of predictive models to transform healthcare Consolidation of EHR's into the hands of a very few companies, and potential for the drug and device industry to influence care delivery by tweaking AI in ways that are not transparent and already a sort of magical black box. AI may de-skill clinicians in the same way that autopilot deskilled pilots, who no longer new how to fly the plane without autopilot A live demonstration of AI breaking a cancer diagnosis to a young adult with kids (VITAL Talk watch out) Use cases in healthcare: Bob predicts everyone will use digital scribes to chart within two years Concerns about bias and other anticipated and unanticipated issues And a real treat- Bob plays the song for this one!  Terrific rendition of Tomorrow from the musical Annie on piano (a strong hint there about Bob's answer to Eric's first question).  Enjoy! -@AlexSmithMD  

Ambivalence is a tough concept when it comes to decision-making. On the one hand, when people have ambivalence but haven't explored why they are ambivalent, they are prone to bad, value-incongruent decisions. On the other hand, acknowledging and exploring ambivalence may lead to better, more ethical, and less biased decisions. On today's podcast, Joshua Briscoe, Bryanna Moore, Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby, and Olubukunola Dwyer discuss the challenges of ambivalence and ways to address them. This podcast was initially sparked by Josh's “Note From a Family Meeting” Substack post titled “Ambivalence in Clinical Decision-Making,” which discussed Bryanna's and Jenny's 2022 article titled “Two Minds, One Patient: Clearing up Confusion About Ambivalence." Bryanna's and Jenny's article is particularly unique as it discusses these “ambivalent-related phenomena” and that these different kinds of “ambivalence” may call for different approaches with patients, surrogates (and health care providers): In addition to defining these “ambivalent related phenomena” we ask our guests to cover some of these topics: Is ambivalence good, bad, or just a normal part of decision-making? Does being ambivalent mean you don't care about the decision? What should we be more worried about in decision-making, ambivalence or the lack thereof? The concern about resolving ambivalence too quickly, as it might rush past important work that needs to be done to make a good decision. What about ambivalence on the part of the provider?  How should we think about that? How do you resolve ambivalence? Lastly, the one takeaway point from this podcast is that the next time I see ambiguity (or have it myself), I should ask the following question: “I see you are struggling with this decision. Tell me how you are feeling about it.”  

In 1983, a 25 year old Nancy Cruzan was thrown from her car while driving home in Missouri, landing in a water filled ditch. She was resuscitated by EMS, but did not regain higher brain function, and was eventually diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state.  In 1988, Cruzan's parents requested that her feeding tube be removed, arguing that she would not want to continue in this state. The hospital refused without a court order, and the case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court. Arguing for the state of Missouri against the Cruzan's was Ken Starr, who would later be assigned the role of special prosecutor in the investigation of the Clintons (Whitewater, Lewensky, etc). In 1990 the Supreme Court ruled…for the state of Missouri.  On the one hand, this was unfortunate, as it meant Nancy Cruzan could not be disconnected from the feeding tube immediately. On the other hand, the ruling allowed states to set their own evidentiary standards to refuse or withdraw life sustaining interventions.  Missouri set a very high bar, explicit written documentation that applies to this specific circumstance, which the Cruzan's eventually cleared.  Other states set lower bars, including oral assignment of surrogate decision-makers. The Cruzan ruling led to a flood of interest in Advance Directives, and eventually to the Patient Self Determination Act, which mandates provision of information about advanced directives to all hospitalized patients. Today, we talk with Bernie Lo, prominent bioethicist and practicing primary care internist, and Laurie Dornbrand, geriatrician at the IOA On Lok PACE, about the legacy of Nancy Curzan.  We use Bernie's NEJM Perspective as a springboard for discussion.  We discuss, among other things: How and why in the 30 years since the Cruzan ruling the emphasis has shifted from advance directive forms to in-the-moment discussions And validating the importance of the advance directive forms in some circumstances, and in starting conversations The role of the clinician in engaging patients in advance care planning and in-the-moment serious illness conversation: what questions are important? What words to use? Is the POLST useful? How? Under what circumstances?  Should we abandon the term, “comfort measures?” In case you miss the introductions at the start of the podcast, Bernie and Laurie are married, and offer wonderful reminiscence of their clinical practice over the last several decades.  So when Bernie says, “I've heard you take these phone calls in the middle of the night, Laurie…” Now you know why! And great song choice: Both Sides Now by Joni Mitchell.  Joni suffered a stroke and had to completely re-learn how to play guitar.  Her comeback performances are inspirational, such as this one at the Newport Folk Festival, attended by another influential GeriPal couple, Sean Morrison and Diane Meier. You get to hear my stripped down Hawaiian slack key style version of Both Sides Now (easy to play with 2 fingers, still in rehab for broken hand, hoping to have full use again soon). Enjoy! -@AlexSmithMD