Article Text
Abstract
Background Liver cirrhosis (LC) is a progressive disease characterised by chronic liver inflammation, leading to diminished liver function and complex symptomatology. As LC advances to decompensated cirrhosis and end-stage liver disease (ESLD), patients experience severe symptoms such as pain, ascites and encephalopathy, significantly impairing their quality of life. Despite the high symptom burden and a substantial mortality rate, palliative care remains grossly underused.
Objective This review aims to explore the current state of palliative care utilization in ESLD patients, identify barriers to palliative care access, and discuss strategies for enhancing symptom management and improving patient quality of life.
Design A comprehensive literature review was performed of palliative care in liver cirrhosis, symptom prevalence, management strategies, and barriers to palliative care consultation.
Methods and data sources Our review synthesized information from 49 referenced sources, covering symptom management, healthcare utilization, and palliative care approaches with regards to liver cirrhosis.
Findings We find significant underutilization of palliative care services, with consultation rates as low as 0.97% for patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Key barriers include liver transplant eligibility, racial disparities, and lack of insurance coverage.
Conclusion Despite evidence suggesting that palliative care improves patient outcomes and quality of life, its implementation in patients with ESLD remains insufficient. Increasing awareness and integration of palliative care into routine management for these patients are crucial. The concept of primary palliative care is proposed as a means to bridge the gap until specialised services are available, allowing all clinicians contribute to alleviating patient suffering and improving overall care.
- Advance Care Planning
- End of life care
- Palliative Care
- Pain
- Quality of life
- Symptoms and symptom management
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors FA-M, SK and AM were responsible for the concept, planning and design of this review, defining the scope and developing the structure of the manuscript. FA-M, NT and SK searched the existing literature and organised studies relevant to the review, critically analysed them and drafted the manuscript. AM and SK reviewed the final manuscript and made substantial revisions to improve clarity, coherence and scientific rigor. All authors read and approved the final manuscript before submission. FA-M serves as the guarantor for the work, taking responsibility for the integrity of the data and the overall accuracy of the review.
Funding This research was supported (in whole or in part) by HCA Healthcare and/or an HCA Healthcare-affiliated entity. This material is the result of work supported with resources and the use of facilities at the Orlando VA Healthcare System (Orlando, Florida).
Disclaimer The views expressed in this publication represent those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official views of HCA Healthcare or any of its affiliated entities. The contents of this publication do not represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the US Government.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.