GeriPal - A Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine Podcast

"I just want to say one word to you. One word. Plastics… There's a great future in plastics." This iconic line from the movie The Graduate is at the top of my mind when I think about where we are heading in healthcare. I've interpreted "plastics" as symbolizing a dystopian, mass-produced future of medicine—where artificiality and inauthenticity dominate in the pursuit of efficiency and profit margins. After listening to today's podcast on the growth of community-based palliative care, I find my perspective shifting on this quote. Perhaps the advice given for a future in plastics reflects the past generation's established worldview, failing to recognize a countercultural revolution seeking transformation and meaningful change, even if it may come across as a little brash. In this thought-provoking episode of the GeriPal podcast, we are joined by Alan Chiu (Chief of Palliative Care at Monogram Health), Mindy Stewart-Coffee (National Vice President of Palliative Care at Optum Home and Community), and Ben Thompson (National Medical Director for Hospice and Palliative Care at Gentiva) to discuss this revolution happening in palliative care. The conversation centers around the rapid growth and investment in community-based palliative care, which has emerged as a key area of innovation and opportunity to meet the largely unmet needs of patients living with serious illnesses. With a focus on expanding access, improving outcomes, and addressing workforce shortages, the guests explore how value-based care models are reshaping palliative care delivery. The discussion highlights the differences between traditional fee-for-service models and newer value-based care approaches, including how they incentivize care. We take a deep dive into the risks and benefits of these models, emphasizing the importance of maintaining high standards of care while fostering innovation. We also delve into the role of for-profit organizations and private equity in driving change, acknowledging concerns about motivations while recognizing that these entities can help spur innovation and improve access when led by clinicians committed to patient-centered care. Ultimately, this podcast serves as a call to action for the palliative care community to help shape not just the "Wild West" of community-based care, but palliative care 3.0 as a whole. Do we sit back and wait for a future dominated by a plastic version of palliative care, or do we help lead this revolution to ensure it maintains the authentic heart of what brought us to this field? As Diane Meier aptly warns, "if you are not at the table, you're on the menu." Eric Widera Of Note: the views expressed in this podcast are our guests' own opinions and not representative of their organizations.

The only certainty in medicine is uncertainty. It touches every aspect of clinical practice, from diagnosis to treatment to prognosis. Despite this, many clinicians view uncertainty as something to tolerate at best or eliminate at worst. But what if we need to rethink and reframe our relationship with uncertainty in medicine? In this episode, we sit down with Jonathan Ilgen and Gurpreet Dhaliwal, co-authors of the New England Journal of Medicine article, "Educational Strategies to Prepare Trainees for Clinical Uncertainty." Together, we explore the nature of uncertainty in clinical practice, its effects on trainees and seasoned clinicians, and strategies to embrace it as a fundamental part of medical reasoning rather than a regrettable byproduct. Jonathan and Gurpreet share insights from research and clinical experience, offering practical methods to help trainees and clinicians recognize, manage, and even embrace uncertainty. Key topics we discuss include: The paradoxical nature of uncertainty: When perceived as a threat, it can provoke anxiety or fear; yet when framed as an opportunity, it can inspire hope and optimism. Why uncertainty is inevitable in medical practice and its impact on clinicians. Is uncertainty a state or a trait? The distinction between epistemic uncertainty (knowledge gaps) and aleatoric uncertainty (randomness in outcomes). How experienced clinicians utilize strategies such as forward planning and monitoring to navigate uncertainty. Communicating uncertainty with patients: how to do it effectively without eroding trust. How to integrate uncertainty into medical education. During the conversation, we explore the emotional responses to uncertainty and how these reactions can influence clinical practice and decision-making. Importantly, Jonathan and Gurpreet emphasize the importance of openly communicating uncertainty with colleagues, supervisors, and patients—a practice that, contrary to common belief, actually strengthens trust, fosters transparency, and encourages collaboration. By normalizing and embracing uncertainty, clinicians can better manage the complexities of medicine and build confidence in their ability to care for patients in the face of the unknown. 👉 We're thrilled that Meg Wallhagen, Professor of Nursing at UCSF, has recorded an intro to this week's podcast. Any listener who contributes $1000+ is invited to record an intro to a GeriPal podcast! You can donate here, any amount is appreciated. Also, Meg is looking for practicing or student clinicians (physicians and nurses) who are willing to participate in a study on how a simulation of hearing loss promotes a greater appreciation of the experience of hearing loss. Participation should take no more than one to one and one half hour and you will receive a gift card in acknowledgement of your time. If interested, please contact her directly at meg.wallhagen@ucsf.edu. For more info, click the following link to open the flyer (PDF format): Information_Flyer_Practitioneer ** NOTE: To claim CME credit for this episode, click here **

In a recent episode of the GeriPal podcast, we explored whether the field of palliative care is in need of saving—and, if so, how to save it—with guests Ira Byock, Kristi Newport, and Brynn Bowman. Today, we shift focus to one actionable way to improve palliative care: through quality improvement (QI) collaboratives, registries, and benchmarking. To guide this discussion, we've invited three leading experts in the field—Drs. Steve Pantilat, David Currow, and Arif Kamal—who bring invaluable experience as pioneers in developing QI collaboratives and registries. Together, they authored a recent paper in JPSM titled "The Case for Collaboration to Optimize Quality," which underscores the importance of these efforts. In this episode, Dr. David Currow shares lessons from Australia's Palliative Care Outcomes Collaborative (PCOC), a national model for standardized data collection and benchmarking that has driven measurable improvements in palliative care. Meanwhile, Drs. Steve Pantilat and Arif Kamal reflect on the history of the Palliative Care Quality Collaborative (PCQC), a U.S.-based initiative formed in 2019 by merging the National Palliative Care Registry (NPCR), the Palliative Care Quality Network (PCQN), and the Global Palliative Care Quality Alliance (GPCQA). Although the PCQC had ambitious goals, it ultimately closed earlier this year. Together, the panelists unpack the reasons behind its closure and discuss the lessons future registries can take away from its challenges. Throughout the conversation, we tackle some of the field's biggest questions about registries and QI collaboratives: What data should be collected to create meaningful quality indicators? How can we minimize the administrative burden of data collection on clinicians? And how do we balance the risk of becoming narrowly focused "symptomatologists" with the need to maintain holistic, person-centered care? By addressing these questions, the panel highlights the immense potential of QI initiatives to enhance palliative care while remaining true to the field's core mission: ensuring that patients and their families feel deeply cared for during life's most vulnerable moments.

Have you had one of those consults in which you're thinking, huh, sounds like the patient's goals are clear, it's really that the clinician consulting us disagrees with those goals? To what extent is it our job as consultants to navigate, manage, or attend to clinician distress? What happens when that clinician distress leads eventually to conflict between the consulting clinician and the palliative care team? Today our guests Sara Johnson, Yael Schenker, & Anne Kelly discuss these issues, including: A recent paper first authored by Yael asking if attending to clinician distress is our job, published in JPSM. See also the wonderful conversation in the response letters from multidisciplinary providers (e.g. of course that's our job! And physicians may not be trained in therapy, but many social workers and chaplains are, and certainly psychologists). A SPACE pneumonic for addressing clinician conflict developed by Sara Johnson, Anne Kelly and others. They presented this at a recent AAHPM/HPNA meeting. See below for what SPACE stands for. We referenced a prior episode on therapeutic presence and creating a holding space with Kerri Brenner and Dani Chammas, and this article by Kerri. We talked about the role of the consultant, including this classic paper on consultation etiquette by Diane Meier and Larry Beresford. Enjoy! -Alex Smith SPACE: Navigating Conflict with Colleagues "Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response." -Viktor E. Frankl SPACE: Conflict Navigation Toolkit Authors: Ethan Silverman MD University of Pittsburgh Anne Kelly LCSW San Francisco VA Health Care System Jasmine Hudnall DO Gundersen Health System Cassie Shumway MS, RN, OCN, CHPN UW Health Hospitals & Clinics Andrew O'Donnell RN University of Wisconsin Sara K. Johnson MD University of Wisconsin

In this week's podcast, we sit down with Drs. Sarguni Singh, Christian Furman, and Lynn Flint, three authors of the recent Journal of the American Geriatrics Society article, "Rehab and Death: Improving End-of-Life Care for Medicare Skilled Nursing Facility Beneficiaries." The authors dive into the challenges facing seriously ill older adults discharged to Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs), where fragmented care transitions, misaligned Medicare policies, and inadequate access to palliative care often result in burdensome hospitalizations and goal-discordant care. The discussion highlights key barriers in Medicare's SNF and hospice benefits, including the inability to access concurrent hospice and SNF care, and explores solutions to improve care. Among the recommendations is leveraging Medicare's Patient Driven Payment Model (PDPM) to reimburse SNFs for providing palliative care, commissioning a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on SNF utilization at the end of life, and piloting a model that allows time-limited concurrent hospice and rehabilitation care. Also, check out these two resources if you want a deeper dive: Our past podcast we did, now nearly 6 years ago, on the original NEJM paper, Rehabbed to Death. Joan Carpenter's article titled "Forced to Choose: When Medicare Policy Disrupts End-of-Life Care" in the Journal of Aging & Social Policy 👉 This episode of the GeriPal Podcast is sponsored by IU Health's Geriatrics Department, in partnership with Indiana University's School of Medicine, an amazing group, rich in innovative Geriatric Medicine. They are looking for physician faculty to join them in the inpatient and outpatient settings. To learn more about job opportunities, please click the following links: Physician & Advanced Provider Job Opportunity | Geriatrician opportunity at Eskenazi HospitalPhysician & Advanced Provider Job Opportunity | Geriatrician opportunity at IU Health Fishers Hospital

Six years ago we had John Newman on GeriPal to talk about Geroscience (Song choice Who Wants to Live Forever by Queen, perfect selection). John explained the basics of geroscience, what is it, what are the key theories in geroscience, what is senescence, why people who provide clinical care for older adults should care about geroscience, and potential therapeutics like metformin and rapamycin. Today we bring on three rising stars in Geroscience, Brian Andonian, Sara LaHue, Joe Hippensteel, to talk about one of the key pillars of Geroscience: inflammaging. We use this terrific paper they published in Geroscience as a springboard. We discuss: What is inflammaging? Chronic progressive low grade inflammation with aging. I try to get one of them to stake a claim that inflammaging should be the organizing principle of geroscience How does inflammaging operate in rheumatologic conditions like rheumatoid arthritis (Brian), neurologic conditions like traumatic brain injury (Sara), and critical illness (Joe). We talk about Post-ICU Syndrome (PICS) and relate inflammaging to our prior podcast with Wes Ely about his book Every Deep Drawn Breath. We also talk about how inflammaging is not just a factor in chronic conditions like diabetes or inflammatory bowel disease, which make intuitive sense, but also in acute conditions, like sepsis or traumatic brain injury in older adults. The state of the science on clinical and research tests for inflammaging - ready for prime time? What is the state of the science for therapeutics? Why should some anti-inflammatory therapeutics make us nervous in frail older adults? Inflammation developed evolutionarily for a reason. E.g. tthink of drugs that wipe out the immune system. The outsized discrepancy between non-FDA products marketed to consumers as anti-inflammaging and the state of academic Geroscience. We announce GeriPal's new lineup of skin care anti-inflammaging products! We discuss lifestyle interventions such as exercise, meditation, caloric restriction and intermittent fasting, and strength/resistance training. \We recognize the efforts of ClinStar in bringing together multidisciplinary aging researchers to advance aging research, including our guests. And what a joy to sing Billy Joel! Here's a link to the documentary I mentioned, which is on my list to see. -Alex Smith

In this week's episode, we delve into the powerful documentary The Chaplain and The Doctor with two extraordinary guests: Betty Clark, the chaplain at the heart of the film, and Dr. Jessica Zitter, the physician and filmmaker who brought this story to the screen. The film provides a deeply moving look into the ways personal stories and biases shape our interactions in healthcare. Through our conversation with Betty and Jessica, I gained a valuable insight: the narratives we carry within ourselves—whether conscious or unconscious—act as invisible forces that influence how we engage with patients and colleagues. I also learned that recognizing these stories and the biases they may produce, rather than avoiding them, can foster more genuine and empathetic care. They also may lead to deep friendships, as is clearly shown between Betty and Jessica. I love both this podcast episode and the film itself, as they shine a light on the deeply human—and oftentimes flawed—experience of working in healthcare. They remind us of the vital role of storytelling in shaping how we care for patients, and the often-overlooked yet essential contributions of chaplains in healthcare settings. Betty and Jessica's reflections underscore how chaplains bring compassion and humanity to the medical team, offering emotional and spiritual support to patients and providers alike. If you're interested in watching The Chaplain and The Doctor during its festival tour, or would like to host a screening at your own institution, I encourage you to visit the film's website at TheChaplainandTheDoctor.com. This episode of the GeriPal Podcast is sponsored by UCSF's Division of Palliative Medicine, an amazing group doing world class palliative care. They are looking for physician faculty to join them in the inpatient and outpatient setting. To learn more about job opportunities, please click here: https://aprecruit.ucsf.edu/apply/JPF05811 ** NOTE: To claim CME credit for this episode, click here **

In June of 2025, hospice and palliative care pioneer Ira Byock published a white paper outlining the urgent challenges facing the field today. In a nutshell, he expressed concerns that the quality of hospice care in the United States has become highly variable, with disturbing frequency of unethical practices and avaricious owners. He also raised concern that the rapid increase in palliative care program growth during the first two decades of this century has stalled, leaving us with understaffed programs that are often inadequately trained. Along with Ira, we've invited Kristi Newport, a palliative care doctor and Chief Medical Officer of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, and Brynn Bowman, Chief Executive Officer of the Center to Advance Palliative Care, to discuss these issues and outline a strategic path forward for the field. In particular we talk about Ira's four-part solution to transform the field and restore its integrity: (1) publishing clear clinical and programmatic standards, (2) making meaningful data publicly available to ensure transparency and accountability, (3) fostering quality-based competition among providers, and (4) embracing the authentic brand of hospice and palliative care—expert care that alleviates suffering and fosters well-being. So take a listen and dive a little deeper with these resources, and dont forget, you too can get involved in AAHPM (click here for opportunities): Ira's paper titled "A Strategic Path Forward for Hospice and Palliative Care: A White Paper on the Potential Future of the Field" Our previous podcast on "Is Hospice Losing Its Way" Our previous podcast on Private Equity Gobbling Up Hospices plus Hospice and Dementia with Melissa Aldridge, Krista Harrison, & Lauren Hunt CAPC's Serious Ilness Scorecard - a state-by-state look at palliative care capacity CAPC's second annual Palliative Pulse survey offers insight into how palliative care professionals across the country are feeling this year and what they're focused on National Hospice Locator and TCMTalks Podcast by Chris Comeaux and Cordt Kassner

Today's topic on palliative care for sickle cell disease may raise eyebrows with some of you. You might think, wait, now we're doing sickle cell? On top of liquid cancer and transplant, kidney disease, liver disease, and survivorship? Where does it end? Do we have staff for all of this? Well I implore you, dear listeners, to keep an open mind and listen to this podcast. Our guests do a fabulous job of stating the case for palliative care in sickle cell disease, to the point that we ask: why haven't we been doing this all along? Our guests today are Craig Blinderman, Stephanie Kiser, Eberechi Nwogu-Onyemkpa, three palliative care docs who have been advancing the practice in palliative care for sickle cell for a long time. Our discussion ranges from what is sickle cell; to outcomes; to social determinants and discrimination; to PCAs, ketorolac, and bupenorphine; and to the importance of the interdisciplinary team. I would also encourage you to check out Eberechi's NEJM Perspective on Involving Palliative Care to Improve Outcomes in Sickle Cell, which includes a table of the challenges and action items needed to move the field forward. I'd also encourage you to sample this AAHPM Flight on the same topic (we learned that a flight is similar to a flight of drinks - a quick sampling). As Eberechi notes at the start, we should be grateful for the community of people who are advancing palliative care in sickle cell. Thank you for being a friend (song hint!). -Alex Smith

Last month, the "Billing Boys"—Chris Jones and Phil Rodgers—joined the GeriPal podcast to demystify medical billing and coding in palliative care. This month, we're back with part two, shifting the focus to geriatrics. While billing and coding may not be the most exciting topic, they're essential for ensuring fair reimbursement for the complex care we provide and for supporting the work of our interprofessional teams, many of whom can't bill directly for their services. When we underbill or leave money on the table, we not only shortchange ourselves but also devalue the critical role of geriatrics in the healthcare system. This time, we're joined by experts Peter Hollmann, Ken Koncilja, and Audrey Chun to dive into key questions: Why does billing matter, and who does it benefit? What's the difference between CPT, E&M, and ICD-10 codes (if you need a refresher, check out our chat with the Billing Boys here)? We explore how to think about billing for complexity versus time, and unpack new and impactful codes like the Cognitive Assessment and Care Plan Services code (99483), advance care planning (ACP) billing codes, and G2211, which acknowledges the added work of managing patients with chronic conditions. We also highlight the new APCM G-codes for 2025, a set of HCPCS codes that could provide substantial financial support for interdisciplinary teams in geriatrics. Finally, we discuss the advocacy behind these codes. The American Geriatrics Society (AGS) plays a vital role on the AMA's RUC committee, helping to improve reimbursement for the complex care of older adults. Tune in to this week's GeriPal podcast for expert advice, practical strategies, and insights that will help you optimize your billing practices and sustain the future of geriatrics! Here are some of the resources we also talked about: The physician fee schedule look up tool Wwere you can find out CMS expected charge based off where you practice AGS's annual coding update Geriatrics at Your Fingertips, which has a one-pager on billing Medicare Claims Processing Manual

I’m going to begin with a wonderful quote from a recent editorial in Bioethics by our guests Parker Crutchfield & Jason Wasserman. This quote illustrates the tension between the widely held view in bioethics that slow codes are unethical, and the complexity of real world hospital practice: “Decisive moral positions are easy to come by when sitting in the cheap seats of academic journals, but a troubling ambivalence is naturally characteristic of live dilemmas.” Gina Piscitello, our third guest, recently surveyed doctors, nurses and others at 2 academic medical centers about slow codes. In a paper published in JPSM, she found that two thirds had cared for a patient where a slow code was performed. Over half believed that a slow code is ethical if they believed the code is futile. Slow codes are happening. The accepted academic bioethics stance that slow codes are unethical is not making it through to practicing clinicians. Our 3 guests were panelists at a session of the American Society of Bioethics and the Humanities annual meeting last year, and their panel discussion was apparently the talk of the meeting. Today we talk about what constitutes a slow code, short code, show code, and “Hollywood code.” We talk about walk don’t run, shallow compressions, and…injecting the epi into the mattress! We explore the arguments for and against slow codes: harm to families, harm to patients, moral distress for doctors and nurses; deceit, trust, and communication; do outcomes (e.g. family feels code was attempted) matter more than values (e.g. never lie or withhold information from family)? We talk about the classic bioethics “trolley problem” and how it might apply to slow codes (for a longer discussion see this paper by Parker Crutchfield). We talk about the role of the law, fear of litigation, and legislative overreach (for more see this paper by Jason Wasserman). We disagree if slow codes are ever ethical. I argue that Eric’s way out of this is a slow code in disguise. One thing we can all agree about: the ethics of slow codes need a rethink. Stop! In the name of love. Before you break my heart. Think it over… -Alex Smith

This is the second GeriPal podcast we’ve recorded live using this format, see this link to our prior podcast at the Center to Advance Palliative Care (CAPC) meeting in Philadelphia. Also look for our upcoming podcast recorded live from the São Paulo Geriatrics & Gerontology Congress, click here to register. Today we join you from beautiful Banff, Alberta, Canada at the National Palliative Care Research Center (NPCRC) annual Kathleen Foley retreat. This meeting was bittersweet. I’ve been fortunate to attend every meeting in one capacity or another since 2006. The NPCRC made an enormous impact on the growth and capacity for palliative care research nationally. Personally, NPCRC funding was essential support as I was a new faculty member and had not yet secured longer term career development funding. More than anything, though, I will miss the NPCRC community. I treasure those meals, hikes, sing-alongs with others dedicated to improving care of people with serious illness through research. On today’s podcast, we invited Dio Kavalieratos, Prasanna Ananth, and Alexi Wright to join us to talk about three articles that spoke to them. For each I leave you with a teaser of a hard question that was raised that we couldn’t really answer. Prasanna chose an article by Abby Rosenberg about being fired in palliative care. We talked about why palliative care clinicians get fired, with Prasanna, a pediatric oncologist, raising the issue that it’s more problematic when you’re the oncologist providing primary palliative care and you get fired than if the consultant specialty palliative care provider is fired. Dio chose an article about the economic benefits of palliative care internationally, a call to action. We talked about the needs of palliative care internationally, and Alexi raised the question: should the highest standard of palliative care (e.g. in the US) apply to palliative care in every country, a la the Partners in Health model pioneered by the late Paul Farmer? Or should we “settle” for access to affordable opioids? Alexi chose an article about cancer care in prison. Alexi used it as a springboard to talk about other populations at compounded risk for poorer care in the current political environment. We hope you enjoy this one as much as we did, dear listeners. We’re always trying to improve, and welcome your suggestions for how to improve upon this new “live” format. So far we’ve heard we need to be better at summarizing the articles for the audience/listeners, and finding ways to involve our live audience to a greater extent than the occasional question. Please let us know if you have other suggestions! Final note - check out the wonderful video NPCRC created about their impact on the field of palliative care (Eric and I were filmed recording GeriPal). -Alex Smith This episode of the GeriPal Podcast is sponsored by UCSF’s Division of Palliative Medicine, an amazing group doing world class palliative care. They are looking for physician faculty to join them in the inpatient and outpatient setting. To learn more about job opportunities, please click here: https://aprecruit.ucsf.edu/apply/JPF05811

Eric and I had the pleasure of doing a GeriPal Live! Podcast as the closing keynote for the recent Center to Advance Palliative Care (CAPC) National Assembly in Philadelphia PA. For this podcast, we invited 3 guests to each select an article of interest to them, and engage in a discussion about the article, including questions from the CAPC attendees in the audience. Our guests chose the following articles (in the order discussed) Matt Gonzalez used AI to select an article by Ravi Parikh on algorithm based nudges to default patients with advanced cancer into a palliative care consult, published in JAMA Network Open, finding 44% in the intervention arm received palliative care consults, vs 8% in the control arm. We discussed use of AI to select the article, nudges, sludge, and the impressive though still less than 50% rate of PC consults. Kim Curseen selected an article by Harry Han in JPSM that surveyed palliative care fellowships, finding that clinical fellows spent 5 weeks in outpatient care and 24 weeks in inpatient care, on average. We discussed the mismatch between outpatient training, and the needs of people with serious illness who spend most of their lives outside the hospital, and training in inpatient care, where most hospitals have robust services and needs. Training in non-onc palliative care was particularly low. Karen Bullock selected a letter she first authored in response to Ira Byock’s white paper on a path forward in hospice and palliative care. We discussed the need to view all issues in geriatrics, hospice, and palliative care through an equity lens, particularly in view of the disparate impact on historically marginalized communities of concerning practices and trends in hospice and palliative care (e.g. private equity gobbling up hospices). And at the end, we sang a tribute to the Lady Gaga of Palliative Care, with the whole Assembly singing along! Stay tuned for future GeriPal Live! Podcasts, including recordings at the NPCRC Foley Retreat in Banff, and the São Paulo Geriatrics & Gerontology Congress, click here to register. -Alex Smith

We love getting requests from listeners for podcast topics. This request came from geriatricians we met at the annual American Geriatrics Society meeting in Chicago. They wanted to know more about what a geriatrician should do in a pre-operative risk assessment. So we invited Vicky Tang and Houman Javedan, two geriatricians and leaders in the pre-operative assessment and prehab space, to talk with us. As is our style, we backed up to some bigger questions, including: -Why do patients need a geriatric assessment pre-operatively?-Why are our surgical colleagues asking us? Is it due to liability concerns? -Why do we do them? Recognizing we may have different motivations than our consultants (hint: stealth geriatrics) -How does the comprehensive geriatric assessment fit int? Do the 4Ms fit into pre-operative assessment if at all? (an entertaining disagreement ensued) -Must a geriatrician do this? -What is the Geriatric Surgery Verification Program? -What’s the most important part of Many links from our guests below. And please forgive my Spanish on the song, I tried! Thanks to sons Kai and Renn on Ukulele and Bass for making it sound better. -Alex From Vicky: Systematic review of Prehab https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39655991/ Geriatric Surgery Verification Program https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/accreditation-and-verification/geriatric-surgery-verification/ shared decision making in surgical patients https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40551447/ From Houman: Geriatric Surgical Co-management Evidence 1. Trauma survival with geriatric assessment 2022- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36102764/ 2. Hip fracture survival benefit meta-analysis 2014- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23912859/ 3. Elective abdominal surgery benefits POSH program 2018- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29299599/ 4. POSH Program for Spine 2021- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33382460/ 5. Elective orthopedic joints ED readmission decreases 2024 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39715294/ 6. The need for geriatricians, tools and education models (aka Ms) are not enough - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30916758/ Sub Topics 7. Utility of minicog and where our improved local mortality of 18% and delirium of 11% reported - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27147687/ 8. Geriatrician performed CGA-FI best at predicting mortality in rib fractures 2025 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39800638/ 9. Geriatrician performed CGA-FI predicting mortality better than age in hip fractures 2024- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39007664/ 10. Multidomain frailty assessment and surgery showing severely frail patients at risk of mortality even with low risk procedures (eg. Cystoscopy) - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31721994/ 11. Different outcomes for hip fracture surgery in the severely frail - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38892908/ 12. Complexity of aging physiology- example of prostaglandin based free water excretion in collecting duct of aging kidney first paragraph on page 360- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36948780/

What is a “good death”? How should we define it, and who gets to decide? Is the concept of a “good death” even useful? Twenty-five years ago, Karen Steinhauser published a groundbreaking study in JAMA that transformed my understanding of what it means to have a good death and questioned the usefulness of the term itself. This study examined the factors that are important at the end of life for patients, families, physicians, and other healthcare providers. In today’s podcast, we are honored to have Karen join us to discuss this pivotal study and the nature of a “good death”. We are also joined by Rasa Mikelyte and Edison Vidal, co-authors of a recent study comparing the perspectives of people with dementia in the UK and Brazil on what constitutes a good death. In addition to exploring the nature of a good death and their individual studies, we will discuss: Whether an external criterion for a good death exists, or if it is entirely dependent on the perspective of the dying individual. The role of culture and spirituality in defining a good death. The role of healthcare providers in the discussion about the nature of a good death. Key references we discuss include: Our previous GeriPal podcast, “Should the Concept of ‘The Good Death’ Be Buried?” with VJ Periyakoil. Karen’s 2000 JAMA article, “Factors Considered Important at the End of Life by Patients, Family, Physicians, and Other Care Providers.” Rasa and Edison’s article, “Comparing the Views of People with Dementia in the UK and Brazil about a Good Death.” A short video from the EPEC project that Edison mentioned during the recording of an interview with Cicely Saunders, where she shares her advice for anyone going into medicine or palliative care and her views about the principles of palliative care. Lastly, if you would like to join Eric, Edison, and I in Brazil on April 6, 2026, for the São Paulo Geriatrics & Gerontology Congress, click here to register. -Alex Smith

A podcast on medical billing and coding??? Ok, hear us out as we were skeptical too. We’ve invited the Billing Boys, Chris Jones and Phil Rodgers, who convinced us of the following: Billing is complicated, but it isn’t hard. Effectively billing helps pay for the interprofessional team members who often can't bill We should know our worth and bill for it. Just because a visit didn’t feel HARD to a well-trained provider doesn’t mean it wasn’t complex or valuable. Many of us have long suffered from low professional self-esteem when it comes to money, and it’s high time we stop that. While exclusively billing on time may have been right 20 years ago, we must now understand complexity and advance care planning (ACP). We can't cover everything in the 45 minutes we are together, so here are some of the resources we reference in the podcast: Chris’s and Phil’s consulting contact info via Lightning Bolt Partners CAPC resources: CAPC’s Billing and Coding Toolkit CAPC’s Monthly office hours in Inpatient and Community-Based PC Billing and Coding run by Andy Esch, Phil Santa Emma, and Chris Jones CAPC’s 2025 Annual Billing and Coding Update done by Phil and Chris each year Advance Care Planning resource from the Medicare Learning Network Top Ten Tips for Using Advance Care Planning Codes CPT 2025 Professional Edition. This is the book that has the Complexity Grid in it. The answers are all here! And your coders will likely share.

On today’s podcast, we talk about an innovative specialized primary care model for older veterans called the Geriatric Patient Aligned Care Team (GeriPACT) program. It’s designed with smaller patient panels and enhanced social worker and pharmacist involvement, and its approach is aimed at improving care and outcomes for our aging population. We unpack the intriguing findings of a recent JAMA Network Open study authored by one of our guests, Susan “Nicki” Hastings, looking at GeriPACT that compares it to a traditional Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT). While GeriPACT successfully delivered more attention to geriatric conditions, it surprisingly didn't translate into expected improvements like more time at home or better self-rated health. We discuss the potential reasons behind this with our other two guests, one a geriatrics fellow, Kristie Hsu, and the other a recurring guest and host of the podcast, Ken Covinsky. Was it just that it didn’t work, or were there other things going on, from the intensity of "usual care" to the challenges of measuring complex health outcomes and the possibility that 18 months simply wasn't long enough to see the full benefits? Despite what was ostensibly a negative trial, we highlight some reassuring aspects and future hopes for GeriPACT and how we can all incorporate some of these components into the care of our patients. We'll also pose critical questions for future research, emphasizing why continued development and evaluation of new care models are essential for the health of our older population.

With all the attention focused on Alzheimer's biomarkers and amyloid antibodies, it’s easy to forget that comprehensive dementia care is more than blood draws and infusions. On today’s podcast, we buck this trend and dive into the complexities and challenges of comprehensive dementia care with the authors of two pivotal articles recently published in JAMA. We’ve invited David Reuben and Greg Sachs to talk about their two respective trials, published in JAMA — D-CARE and IN-PEACE — aimed at improving the evidence for care models supporting individuals diagnosed with dementia. D-CARE tested the comparative effectiveness of health system-based dementia care, a community-based program, and usual care, while IN-PEACE assessed the addition of palliative care to dementia care programs for individuals with moderate to severe dementia. Despite their pragmatic trial designs and high expectations, both studies' primary outcomes were negative, although there were some intriguing positive secondary outcomes. We discuss how some critical questions about the integration of these findings into practice, and how they fit in with previous research that did show benefits (see this past podcast on using health navigators to improve dementia care). If you want to learn more about comprehensive dementia care, check out these past podcasts: Our previous podcast on comprehensive dementia care with Lee Jennings and Chris Callahan Our podcast on the GUIDE Model with Malaz Boustani and Diane Ty Our podcast on Transforming the Culture of Dementia Care with Anne Basting, Ab Desai, Susan McFadden, and Judy Long Lastly, here is the link to Greg Sachs' NEJM article that describes his maternal grandmother decline from Alzheimer's disease.

In today’s podcast we talk with Eric Wong, geriatrician-researcher from Toronto, and Thiago Silva, geriatrician-researcher from Brazil, about the comprehensive geriatrics assessment. We spend the first 30 minutes (at least) discussing what, exactly is the comprehensive geriatric assessment, including: What domains of assessment are essential/mandatory components of the comprehensive geriatrics assessment? Who performs it? Is a multidisciplinary team required? Can a geriatrician perform it alone? Can non-geriatricians perform it? Who is the comprehensive geriatrics assessment for? Who is most likely to benefit? Eric Widera suggests not as much benefit for very sick and very healthy older adults, more benefit in the vast middle. Why do the comprehensive geriatrics assessment? What are the interventions that it leads to (we cover this more conceptually, rather than naming all possible interventions) How does the comprehensive geriatrics assessment relate to the 4Ms (or 5 Ms)? How long does it take to conduct a comprehensive geriatrics assessment? What’s the evidence (BMJ meta analysis) for the comprehensive geriatrics assessment? What are the outcomes we hope for from the comprehensive geriatrics assessment? That final point, about outcomes, bring’s us to Eric Wong’s study, published in JAGS, which evaluates the cost effectiveness of the comprehensive geriatrics assessment performed by a geriatrician across settings (e.g. acute care, rehab, community clinics). As an aside, as the editor at JAGS who managed this manuscript, I will say that we don’t ordinarily publish cost effectiveness studies at JAGS, as the methods are opaque to our clinical audience (e.g. raise your hand if you understand what ‘CGA provided in the combination of acute care and rehab was non-dominated’ means). We published this article because its bottom line is of great interest to geriatricians. In Eric’s study, geriatricians performing CGA were more cost effective than usual care in Every. Single. Setting. And of course cost effectiveness is only one small piece of the argument for why we do the comprehensive geriatrics assessment in the first place (no patient in the history of the world has ever asked for a test or treatment because it’s cost effective for the health care system). I’ll close with a couple of “mic drop” excerpts from Thiago’s accompanying editorial: Finally, it is instructive to compare the cost-effectiveness of geriatric services and CGAs with other interventions. A recent analysis of lecanemab for early-stage Alzheimer's disease found that gaining one QALY would cost approximately $287,000 (USD). In contrast, Wong et al. estimated that adding community-based CGA would cost about $1203 (CAD) per quality-adjusted life month (QALM) (equating to roughly $10,105 (USD) per QALY, using $1 USD = $0.7 CAD), making geriatrician-led CGA nearly 30 times more cost-effective. Put simply, for each dollar spent to improve quality of life for a year through CGA, one would need to spend almost $30 to achieve the same benefit with lecanemab. Ultimately, the question is not whether geriatricians represent a worthwhile investment (they are) but how healthcare systems can ensure that every older adult requiring specialized, comprehensive care can access it. Wong et al.'s modeling study provides a valuable contribution by showing that geriatricians placed in acute and rehabilitation settings offer the most cost-effective deployment given current workforce limitations. Despite some caveats, the overarching message remains clear: geriatric expertise not only enhances care quality but can also align with health-economic objectives, especially in high-acuity environments. However, we cannot allow an inadequate geriatric workforce to become a permanent constraint, forcing painful decisions about which older adults and which settings will miss out on optimal geriatric care. Instead, we should continue to strive to increase the number of geriatricians...

On a prior podcast we talked with Todd Semla and Mike Steinman about the update to the AGS Beers Criteria of potentially inappropriate medications in older adults (Todd and Mike co-chair the AGS Beers Criteria Panel). One of the questions that came up was - well if we should probably think twice or avoid that medication, what should we do instead? Today we talk with Todd and Mike about their new recommendations of alternative treatments to the AGS Beers Criteria, published recently in JAGS, and also presented at the 2025 AGS conference in Chicago (and available on demand online). We had a lot of fun at the start of the podcast talking about the appropriate analogy for how clinicians should use the AGS Beers Criteria. In our last podcast, the analogy was a stop sign. You should come to a stop before you prescribe or refill a medication on the Beers list, look around at alternatives, and consider how to proceed. You might in the end decide to proceed, as there are certainly situations in which it does make sense to start or continue a medication on the Beers list. Today’s analogy had somewhat higher stakes, involving a driver, a pothole in the road, and a cyclist on the side who you’d hit if you swerved. Really upping the anti!!! The podcast is framed around a case Eric crafted of a patient with most of the medications and conditions on the Beers list. We used this as a springboard to discuss the following issues (with links to prior GeriPal podcasts): Insomnia (Doxepin is an alternative, trazodone and melatonin are not?!?) Diabetes management PPI for GERD Treatments for pain, including NSAIDS, COX2, and gabapentinoids Cannabis Deprescribing,org - terrific Canadian website (no tariff to use) And I hope that the prescribing landscape is indeed getting better (thanks to Kai on guitar)! -Alex Smith