scholarly journals Evidence-Based Integrative Health Care to Promote Quality of Life in Older Adults With Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 609-610
Author(s):  
Robin Majeski ◽  
Delia Chiaramonte
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Symptom Burden ◽  
Integrative Approach ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Cancer Symptoms ◽  
Integrative Health

Abstract Cancer disproportionately affects older adults and presents significant challenges to patients’ quality of life. Use of complementary medicine is increasing among older adults with cancer and these modalities have the potential for both benefit and harm. Thus, it is important that health care professionals are knowledgeable about the evidence-supported benefits and risks of complementary and integrative health approaches in the care of older adults with cancer. Integrative cancer care provides a comprehensive approach to reducing symptom burden in patients suffering with cancer symptoms and side effects of cancer treatment. Symptoms such as pain, fatigue, nausea, sleep disturbance, mood disorder, perceived stress, and reduced quality of life are common in this population.This session will discuss an evidence-based integrative approach to cancer care which incorporates both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic modalities to decrease symptom burden, enhance patient well-being, and improve quality of life. Non-pharmacologic modalities used in the integrative approach to care will be described and relevant evidence for risks, benefits and indications will be presented. Case studies will be discussed to demonstrate the integration of these techniques into conventional western medical treatment plans for older adults with cancer. Diversity and inclusion issues relevant to integrative medicine for underserved cancer patients will be addressed, as well as recommendations for future research to expand access of underserved populations to evidence-supported integrative cancer care. A resource list will be provided to participants.

Preparing for an Epidemic: Cancer Care in an Aging Population

2014 ◽  
pp. 133-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya-Chen Tina Shih ◽  
Arti Hurria
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Aging Population ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Care

The Institute of Medicine's (IOM) Committee on Improving the Quality of Cancer Care: Addressing the Challenges of an Aging Population was charged with evaluating and proposing recommendations on how to improve the quality of cancer care, with a specific focus on the aging population. Based on their findings, the IOM committee recently released a report highlighting their 10 recommendations for improving the quality of cancer care. Based on those recommendations, this article highlights ways to improve evidence-based care and addresses rising costs in health care for older adults with cancer. The IOM highlighted three recommendations to address the current research gaps in providing evidence-based care in older adults with cancer, which included (1) studying populations which match the age and health-risk profile of the population with the disease, (2) legislative incentives for companies to include patients that are older or with multiple morbidities in new cancer drug trials, and (3) expansion of research that contributes to the depth and breadth of data available for assessing interventions. The recommendations also highlighted the need to maintain affordable and accessible care for older adults with cancer, with an emphasis on finding creative solutions within both the care delivery system and payment models in order to balance costs while preserving quality of care. The implementation of the IOM's recommendations will be a key step in moving closer to the goal of providing accessible, affordable, evidence-based, high-quality care to all patients with cancer.

Clinical Integration of Digital Solutions in Health Care: An Overview of the Current Landscape of Digital Technologies in Cancer Care

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shivank Garg ◽  
Noelle L. Williams ◽  
Andrew Ip ◽  
Adam P. Dicker
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Health Care Value

Digital health constitutes a merger of both software and hardware technology with health care delivery and management, and encompasses a number of domains, from wearable devices to artificial intelligence, each associated with widely disparate interaction and data collection models. In this review, we focus on the landscape of the current integration of digital health technology in cancer care by subdividing digital health technologies into the following sections: connected devices, digital patient information collection, telehealth, and digital assistants. In these sections, we give an overview of the potential clinical impact of such technologies as they pertain to key domains, including patient education, patient outcomes, quality of life, and health care value. We performed a search of PubMed ( www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed ) and www.ClinicalTrials.gov for numerous terms related to digital health technologies, including digital health, connected devices, smart devices, wearables, activity trackers, connected sensors, remote monitoring, electronic surveys, electronic patient-reported outcomes, telehealth, telemedicine, artificial intelligence, chatbot, and digital assistants. The terms health care and cancer were appended to the previously mentioned terms to filter results for cancer-specific applications. From these results, studies were included that exemplified use of the various domains of digital health technologies in oncologic care. Digital health encompasses the integration of a vast array of technologies with health care, each associated with varied methods of data collection and information flow. Integration of these technologies into clinical practice has seen applications throughout the spectrum of care, including cancer screening, on-treatment patient management, acute post-treatment follow-up, and survivorship. Implementation of these systems may serve to reduce costs and workflow inefficiencies, as well as to improve overall health care value, patient outcomes, and quality of life.

We’re All in This Together

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheryl Krauter
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Work Life ◽  
Personal Meaning ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Professional Lives ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Life Balance

This chapter highlights and endorses a focus on continued progress in the area of integrative cancer care that assists the needs of the patients and also includes attention to the well-being of clinicians in cancer survivor care. Introducing a simple, relational structure that allows for both patients and clinicians to create a healing connection is one workable solution to the issues of quality survivorship care that can provide meaning and satisfaction to all concerned. The chapter provides evidence-based material on the vital importance of providing clinicians with meaningful support in their professional lives. It addresses their work–life balance and the importance of restoring their sense of personal meaning and quality of life to prevent burnout.

Interprofessional Team-Based Care

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beverly Lunsford ◽  
Terry A. Mikovich
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Interprofessional Collaboration ◽  
Functional Decline ◽  
Care Program ◽  
Coordination Of Care ◽  
Palliative Care Teams

As older adults live longer, they experience a concomitant increase in chronic illness, which may be associated with a more frequent need for health care and intermittent or progressive functional decline. There is an increased need for regular health care monitoring as well as treatment and coordination of care among multiple providers and across settings to prevent, delay, or minimize decline in health and quality of life. Interprofessional collaboration is critical for safe coordination of care, reduction of duplication in services, and cost containment. Health care professionals who serve older adults are developing new models of collaboration to provide more integrated and person-centered approaches to maintaining the quality of life for older adults, especially those with multiple chronic illnesses. These models include health-oriented teams, home and community-based services, Acute Care for Elders (ACE), home-based primary care, Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE), comprehensive geriatric assessment, and palliative care teams.

Quality of Life Model: Predictors of Quality of Life Among Sick Older Adults

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 241-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liv Halvorsrud ◽  
Marit Kirkevold ◽  
Åge Diseth ◽  
Mary Kalfoss
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Community Health ◽  
Environmental Conditions ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Community Health Care ◽  
Health Satisfaction

The aim of this study was to explore how depressive symptoms, physical function, health satisfaction, age, and environmental conditions predict quality of life (QoL) in a conceptual model based on the Wilson and Cleary’s Model (WCM). A stratified sample by age, gender, and living area was drawn from the Norwegian population of older adults receiving community health care (mean age of 78.6 years, 94.4% living at home, 5.6% living in nursing homes). The study is part of a larger international study. Face-to-face interviews were conducted using the WHOQoL-Old, the WHOQoL-Bref Environment domain, the Geriatric Depression Scale, the Short Form SF-12, and sociodemographic and health questions. A path analysis (structural equation modeling) showed that the overall model provided empirical evidence for linkages in the WCM. QoL was manifested by significant direct effects of environmental conditions and health satisfaction. In addition, environmental conditions had indirect effects on QoL, in particular via depressive symptoms and health satisfaction. This model may help nurses in community health care to collect and assess information, to suggest suitable interventions, and to guide decision making.

scholarly journals Screening Tool Identifies Older Adults With Cancer at Risk for Poor Outcomes

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan D. Nipp ◽  
Leah L. Thompson ◽  
Brandon Temel ◽  
Charn-Xin Fuh ◽  
Christine Server ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Symptom Burden ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Vulnerable Patients ◽  
Poor Outcomes

Background: Oncologists often struggle with managing the complex issues unique to older adults with cancer, and research is needed to identify patients at risk for poor outcomes. Methods: This study enrolled patients aged ≥70 years within 8 weeks of a diagnosis of incurable gastrointestinal cancer. Patient-reported surveys were used to assess vulnerability (Vulnerable Elders Survey [scores ≥3 indicate a positive screen for vulnerability]), quality of life (QoL; EORTC Quality of Life of Cancer Patients questionnaire [higher scores indicate better QoL]), and symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS; higher scores indicate greater symptom burden] and Geriatric Depression Scale [higher scores indicate greater depression symptoms]). Unplanned hospital visits within 90 days of enrollment and overall survival were evaluated. We used regression models to examine associations among vulnerability, QoL, symptom burden, hospitalizations, and overall survival. Results: Of 132 patients approached, 102 (77.3%) were enrolled (mean [M] ± SD age, 77.25 ± 5.75 years). Nearly half (45.1%) screened positive for vulnerability, and these patients were older (M, 79.45 vs 75.44 years; P=.001) and had more comorbid conditions (M, 2.13 vs 1.34; P=.017) compared with nonvulnerable patients. Vulnerable patients reported worse QoL across all domains (global QoL: M, 53.26 vs 66.82; P=.041; physical QoL: M, 58.95 vs 88.24; P<.001; role QoL: M, 53.99 vs 82.12; P=.001; emotional QoL: M, 73.19 vs 85.76; P=.007; cognitive QoL: M, 79.35 vs 92.73; P=.011; social QoL: M, 59.42 vs 82.42; P<.001), higher symptom burden (ESAS total: M, 31.05 vs 15.00; P<.001), and worse depression score (M, 4.74 vs 2.25; P<.001). Vulnerable patients had a higher risk of unplanned hospitalizations (hazard ratio, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.08–5.27; P=.032) and worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.14–4.48; P=.020). Conclusions: Older adults with cancer who screen positive as vulnerable experience a higher symptom burden, greater healthcare use, and worse survival. Screening tools to identify vulnerable patients should be integrated into practice to guide clinical care.

scholarly journals A Web-Based eHealth Intervention to Improve the Quality of Life of Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

10.2196/25175 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e25175
Author(s):  
David H Gustafson Sr ◽  
Marie-Louise Mares ◽  
Darcie C Johnston ◽  
Jane E Mahoney ◽  
Randall T Brown ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Health Care Use ◽  
Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Ehealth Intervention

Background Multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) are common among older adults and expensive to manage. Two-thirds of Medicare beneficiaries have multiple conditions (eg, diabetes and osteoarthritis) and account for more than 90% of Medicare spending. Patients with MCCs also experience lower quality of life and worse medical and psychiatric outcomes than patients without MCCs. In primary care settings, where MCCs are generally treated, care often focuses on laboratory results and medication management, and not quality of life, due in part to time constraints. eHealth systems, which have been shown to improve multiple outcomes, may be able to fill the gap, supplementing primary care and improving these patients’ lives. Objective This study aims to assess the effects of ElderTree (ET), an eHealth intervention for older adults with MCCs, on quality of life and related measures. Methods In this unblinded study, 346 adults aged 65 years and older with at least 3 of 5 targeted high-risk chronic conditions (hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, osteoarthritis, and BMI ≥30 kg/m2) were recruited from primary care clinics and randomized in a ratio of 1:1 to one of 2 conditions: usual care (UC) plus laptop computer, internet service, and ET or a control consisting of UC plus laptop and internet but no ET. Patients with ET have access for 12 months and will be followed up for an additional 6 months, for a total of 18 months. The primary outcomes of this study are the differences between the 2 groups with regard to measures of quality of life, psychological well-being, and loneliness. The secondary outcomes are between-group differences in laboratory scores, falls, symptom distress, medication adherence, and crisis and long-term health care use. We will also examine the mediators and moderators of the effects of ET. At baseline and months 6, 12, and 18, patients complete written surveys comprising validated scales selected for good psychometric properties with similar populations; laboratory data are collected from eHealth records; health care use and chronic conditions are collected from health records and patient surveys; and ET use data are collected continuously in system logs. We will use general linear models and linear mixed models to evaluate primary and secondary outcomes over time, with treatment condition as a between-subjects factor. Separate analyses will be conducted for outcomes that are noncontinuous or not correlated with other outcomes. Results Recruitment was conducted from January 2018 to December 2019, and 346 participants were recruited. The intervention period will end in June 2021. Conclusions With self-management and motivational strategies, health tracking, educational tools, and peer community and support, ET may help improve outcomes for patients coping with ongoing, complex MCCs. In addition, it may relieve some stress on the primary care system, with potential cost implications. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03387735; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03387735. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/25175

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document