Early proactive referral identifies lung cancer patients with significant palliative care needs

Lung Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 127 ◽  
pp. S87
Author(s):  
J. Droney ◽  
Y. Kano ◽  
J. Nevin ◽  
L. Kamal ◽  
A. Kennett ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (11) ◽  
pp. S1566
Author(s):  
M. Pasquinelli ◽  
C. Weldon ◽  
Z. Deliu ◽  
D. Rosenberg ◽  
S. Obilade ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Abigail Sy Chan ◽  
Amit Rout ◽  
Christopher R. D.’Adamo ◽  
Irina Lev ◽  
Amy Yu ◽  
...  

Background: Timely identification of palliative care needs can reduce hospitalizations and improve quality of life. The Supportive & Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) identifies patients with advanced medical conditions who may need special care planning. The Rothman Index (RI) detects patients at high risk of acutely decompensating in the inpatient setting. SPICT and RI among cancer patients were utilized in this study to evaluate their potential roles in palliative care referrals. Methods: Advanced cancer patients admitted to an institution in Baltimore, Maryland in 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, length of hospital stay (LOS), palliative care referrals, RI scores, and SPICT scores were obtained. Patients were divided into SPICT positive or negative and RI > 60 or RI < 60.Unpaired t-tests and chi-square tests were utilized to determine the associations between SPICT and RI and early palliative care needs and mortality. Results: 227 patients were included, with a mean age of 68 years, 63% Black, 59% female, with the majority having lung and GI malignancies. Sixty percent were SPICT +, 21% had RI < 60. SPICT + patients were more likely to have RI < 60 (p = 0.001). SPICT + and RI < 60 patients were more likely to have longer LOS, change in code status, more palliative/hospice referrals, and increased mortality (p <0.05). Conclusions: SPICT and RI are valuable tools in predicting mortality and palliative/hospice care referrals. These can also be utilized to initiate early palliative and goals of care discussions in patients with advanced cancer.


2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 693
Author(s):  
Isabelle Marcelin ◽  
Caroline McNaughton ◽  
Nicole Tang ◽  
Jeffrey Caterino ◽  
Corita Grudzen

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (S1) ◽  
pp. 17-17
Author(s):  
Amanda Lovato ◽  
Nisha Almeida

IntroductionAn important reason for receiving non-beneficial treatment at end-of life is the lack of timely discussions on goals of care and end-of-life preferences. A recent randomized clinical trial demonstrated that patients primed with a questionnaire on their end-of-life preferences were more likely to initiate such conversations with their doctors. Our objective is to integrate the questionnaire into a smartphone application to facilitate early goals of care discussions. To achieve this goal, we first plan to undertake a feasibility study to understand stakeholder preferences.MethodsAs part of a quality improvement initiative at our Canadian quaternary-care hospital, we conducted focus groups with oncology and palliative care physicians and patients to understand barriers to early conversations on end-of-life preferences, and to assess feasibility of using smartphone technology in facilitating these conversations. The app would integrate a questionnaire to patients and send prompts to physicians on patient readiness and timing of conversations.ResultsWe conducted separate focus groups with lung cancer patients (n = 6) and clinicians in oncology (n = 6) and palliative care (n = 6). Clinical teams expressed enthusiasm about early conversations but raised several barriers including system (lack of electronic documentation and access to data; multiple physicians), clinician (lack of time) and patient (stigma associated with end-of-life) barriers. Clinicians agreed that an app could overcome some of these barriers such as access to patient and electronic data by making patients the repository of all their data and empowering them to initiate discussions. However, they raised concerns about universal accessibility of such technology, especially among the elderly. Patient focus groups will take place in March 2021 and inform us on feasibility in this population.ConclusionsThere is a consensus among physicians at our hospital that early end-of-life conversations have the potential to mitigate adverse events and that use of a smart phone app could facilitate such conversations.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21642-e21642
Author(s):  
Sejal Kothadia ◽  
Zhen Wang ◽  
Sarah Lee ◽  
Victor Tsu-Shih Chang ◽  
Yucai Wang ◽  
...  

e21642 Background: Little is known about palliative care for liver cancer. In this study, we examined palliative care for liver cancer and lung cancer patients. Methods: In an IRB approved protocol, we reviewed medical records of patients diagnosed with liver cancer who were seen by the palliative care service between 2006 and 2012 at 2 VA medical centers, and matched them to patients with lung cancer by year, KPS, and stage. Veterans were compared by symptom prevalence with the CMSAS and by palliative care interventions. Statistical analyses were performed with SAS Studio Version 3.5. Results: We analyzed a total of 138 male patients at 2 VA centers; 69 with lung cancer and 69 with liver cancer. The mean age in both groups was 65 years and 60% of patients self-identified as a minority. There was a high prevalence of symptoms in both groups. Symptom prevalence differed significantly between liver and lung cancer pts for weight loss and dyspnea at one site, and for feeling drowsy, constipation, at the other site. These differences disappeared in a pooled analysis. During palliative care evaluation, more lung cancer patients received treatment for constipation (n = 44 in lung, 29 in liver, p = 0.0107) and dyspnea treatment (n = 37 in lung, 22 in liver, p = 0.0167). More patients with lung cancer were evaluated by physical therapy (n = 41 in lung, n = 28 in liver, p = 0.0276) and psychiatry (n = 31 in lung, n = 20 in liver, p = 0.032). Conclusions: Differences between lung and liver cancer patients’ symptom prevalence and treatment by palliative care can vary by site. This reinforces the importance of local surveys of symptom prevalence . Further studies should be replicated in other sites.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document