Journal of palliative medicine
-
Multicenter Study Observational Study
Validation of Modified Models of Objective Prognostic Score in Patients With Advanced Cancer.
Background: The objective prognostic score (OPS) needs to be modified to reflect practical palliative care circumstances. Objectives: We aimed to validate modified models of OPS with few or no laboratory tests for patients with advanced cancer. Design: An observational study was performed. ⋯ Considering NRIs, replacing the original OPS with mOPSs improved overall reclassification (absolute NRI: 0.47-4.15%). Higher score groups of mOPS-A and mOPS-B showed poorer survival than those of lower score groups (p < 0.001). Conclusions: mOPSs used reduced laboratory data and had relatively good accuracy for predicting survival in advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care.
-
Multicenter Study
Pediatric Home-Based Hospice and Palliative Medicine Provider Home Visits: A Multisite Study.
Background: Pediatric home-based palliative care and/or hospice provider (Physician, Advanced Practice Nurse, or Physician Assistant) home visits are an underexplored subject in the literature with little available descriptive data and limited evidence guiding how best to utilize them. Objectives: Describe the population receiving hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) provider home visits and characterize visit themes. Design: Retrospective chart review of electronic medical record (EMR) data Setting/Subjects: A total of 226 individuals 1 month to 21 years of age, who received an HPM provider home visit from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2018; two large quaternary medical centers in the Midwest. ⋯ Forms of anticipatory guidance addressed were nutrition (68%), side effects of treatment (63%), pain assessment (59%), decline/death (32%), and allow natural death/do not resuscitate/advance directives (26%). Conclusion: HPM provider visits are diverse in content and changes in plan of care with potential for proactive identification of GOC and provision of important anticipatory guidance around patient decline and end of life. Further research is indicated to establish which populations benefit most and how to leverage this scarce resource strategically.
-
Multicenter Study
Efficacy and Safety of Naldemedine Administration for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Cancer Patients with Poor Performance Status.
Background: Constipation is a concern among patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 3 and 4. Objectives: To assess naldemedine's efficacy and safety in cancer patients on opioids with poor PS. Design: Multicenter, retrospective study. ⋯ Defecation frequency increased significantly after naldemedine in the overall population (6 vs. 2, p < 0.0001) and among those who defecated <3 times/week before naldemedine (4.5 vs. 1, p < 0.0001). Diarrhea (38.0%) of all grades was the most common adverse event; 23 (85.2%) events were classified as Grade 1 or 2. Conclusion: Naldemedine is effective and safe among cancer patients with poor PS.
-
Background: Episodic dyspnea (ED) is a common problem in patients with advanced lung cancer (LC). However, the prevalence of ED and other related aspects in this patient population is not known. Objectives: To assess and describe the prevalence, clinical features, treatment, and risk factors for ED in outpatients with advanced LC. ⋯ Conclusions: ED is highly prevalent and severe in outpatients with advanced LC experiencing BD. The association between intrathoracic comorbidities and oxygen therapy points to alveolar oxygen exchange failure having a potential etiopathogenic role in ED in this population. Further studies are needed to better characterize ED in LC to better inform treatments and trial protocols.
-
Multicenter Study Observational Study
Analyzing Differences in Perception between Oncologists and Patients to Adapt Pharmacological Treatment for Breakthrough Cancer Pain: Observational ADAPTATE Study.
Background: Transmucosal fentanyl (TF), used for breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) treatment, has different formulations with distinctive attributes. The hypothesis is that, in shared decision making for the prevention of certain therapeutic problems, doctors and patients assign different value to the characteristics of treatment options. Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the discordance between the oncologists' opinion of attributes of TF and patients' expectations in BTcP treatment. ⋯ Conclusion: Our results confirm that some aspects that most concern patients about the treatment of BTcP differ from those to which oncologists attach most importance. Increased patient awareness and education about BTcP and its treatment could lead to greater satisfaction and better patient involvement in therapeutic decisions. Certain barriers need to be overcome, such as lack of time in consultations and poor communication skills of oncologists that hinder patient health education.