Caregivers' accuracy in reporting patients' symptom: A preliminary report.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (26_suppl) ◽  
pp. 64-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paola Langer ◽  
Pedro Emilio Perez-Cruz ◽  
Cecilia Carrasco Escarate ◽  
Pilar Bonati ◽  
Bogomila Batic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Symptom Control ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Continuous Variable ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Symptom Intensity ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Positive Correlations

64 Background: Improving symptom control during end of life (EOL) is a core goal of palliative care. When patients are not able to report their symptoms, caregivers (CG) report symptom intensity as surrogates. Data show that there is good agreement between patients and CG in reporting symptom intensity. However, little is known about factores that influence CGs’ accuracy. The aim of the study was to determine CG accuracy of advanced cancer patients’ symptoms and to identify CG factors that could modify it. Methods: In this prospective study, patients with advanced cancer enrolled in the National Program of Palliative Care at a public Hospital in Santiago, Chile and their CGs independently scored ten patients’ symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). Correlation between patient and CG scores were estimated for each symptom. Differences between patient and CG scores were calculated for each symptom and were transformed into positive values. A continuous variable was created with the sum of all the differences as an indicator of caregiver overall accuracy, with smaller scores meaning better accuracy. CG depression, anxiety (HADS) and burden (ZARIT) were also assessed. Results: 36 patients and their CG were included in this preliminary analysis. Mean patient age was 64, 20 (56%) females, 13 (36%) had GI cancer, 7 (19%) lung cancer and 16 (45%) other. Mean caregiver age was 53, 25 (69%) female. We found positive correlations between patients’ and caregivers’ assessment of pain, fatigue, nausea, anorexia, dyspnea, depression and insomnia (r > 0.3 and p < .05 for each symptom). CG accuracy ranged between 10 and 44 points (mean 25, standard deviation 9) and was not associated with CG age, gender, depression, anxiety or burden. CG accuracy was negatively associated with CG worrying thoughts as assessed by one of the HADS questions (Coef -3.99, p = .015), meaning that CG were more accurate when their worrying thoughts were higher. This association remained significant when adjusted by CG depression, anxiety and burden. Conclusions: CG are more accurate in reporting patient symptoms when their levels of worrying thoughts are higher. This information may have implications in interpreting CG report during EOL.

scholarly journals Patterns of Opioid Prescription, Use, and Costs Among Patients With Advanced Cancer and Inpatient Palliative Care Between 2008 and 2014

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. e74-e83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sriram Yennurajalingam ◽  
Zhanni Lu ◽  
Suresh K. Reddy ◽  
EdenMae C. Rodriguez ◽  
Kristy Nguyen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Opioid Prescription ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Symptom Changes

PURPOSE: An understanding of opioid prescription and cost patterns is important to optimize pain management for patients with advanced cancer. This study aimed to determine opioid prescription and cost patterns and to identify opioid prescription predictors in patients with advanced cancer who received inpatient palliative care (IPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed data from 807 consecutive patients with cancer who received IPC in each October from 2008 through 2014. Patient characteristics; opioid types; morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) in milligrams per day of scheduled opioids before, during, and after hospitalization; and in-admission opioid cost per patient were assessed. We determined symptom changes between baseline and follow-up palliative care visits and the in-admission opioid prescription predictors. RESULTS: A total of 714 (88%) of the 807 patients were evaluable. The median MEDD per patient decreased from 150 mg/d in 2008 to 83 mg/d in 2014 ( P < .001). The median opioid cost per patient decreased and then increased from $22.97 to $40.35 over the 7 years ( P = .03). The median MEDDs increased from IPC to discharge by 67% ( P < .001). The median Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale pain improvement at follow-up was 1 ( P < .001). Younger patients with advanced cancer (odds ratio [OR[, 0.95; P < . 001) were prescribed higher preadmission MEDDs (OR, 1.01; P < .001) more often in the earlier study years (2014 v 2009: OR, 0.18 [ P = .004] v 0.30 [ P = .02]) and tended to use high MEDDs (> 75 mg/d) during hospitalization. CONCLUSION: The MEDD per person decreased from 2008 to 2014. The opioid cost per patient decreased from 2008 to 2011 and then increased from 2012 to 2014. Age, prescription year, and preadmission opioid doses were significantly associated with opioid doses prescribed to patients with advanced cancer who received IPC.

The influence of a cachexia clinic on palliative care integration in oncology.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 124-124
Author(s):  
Diane Portman ◽  
Sarah Thirlwell ◽  
Kristine A. Donovan
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Weight Loss ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Symptom Burden ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
The Impact

124 Background: Appetite and weight loss are common in patients with advanced cancer and specialized cachexia clinics have been established to address these symptoms. Given the association between anorexia/cachexia and other adverse symptoms, these patients may also benefit from specialty level palliative care (PC). However, referral to outpatient specialty level PC is often delayed or does not occur. We sought to examine the prevalence of other factors associated with appetite and weight loss in patients with advanced cancer and the impact of a specialized cachexia clinic on identification and treatment of other PC needs. Methods: The records of patients referred by their Oncologist to the cachexia clinic of a cancer center from August 2016 to June 2017 were reviewed retrospectively. Subjects who had been referred to PC by their Oncologist were excluded. Patients had been assessed for symptom burden using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS-r). Patients identified with PC needs had been referred to the PC clinic for follow-up within 30 days after cachexia clinic consultation. Results: Thirty subjects were evaluated in the cachexia clinic (average age 68 years; 63% female). The predominant diagnosis was lung cancer (70%). An average of 6 symptoms per patient were in the moderate to severe range on ESAS, excluding appetite. Depression, fatigue and pain were most common. The average cachexia clinic total ESAS score was 51.61. Only 17% of patients had completed advance directives. Ninety-three % of patients were referred to PC and 68% were seen. The average number of PC visits was 2.79. Within the PC clinic, advance directive completion increased to 37%, goals of care discussion occurred with 50% and 17% received hospice referrals. At the most recent follow-up in the PC clinic, the average total ESAS score had decreased by 11.44 (22%) and all ESAS item scores were improved on average. Conclusions: The cachexia clinic proved a useful means to identify other PC needs and achieve effective PC referrals. We suggest this is proof of concept that specialty clinics can be a meaningful way to achieve an earlier entry point to comprehensive PC in patients who were not previously referred by their Oncologists.

Verbalized desire for death or euthanasia in advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernest Güell ◽  
Adelaida Ramos ◽  
Tania Zertuche ◽  
Antonio Pascual
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Terminally Ill ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Semistructured Interview ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Terminally Ill Cancer Patients ◽  
Symptom Intensity ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Desire To Die

AbstractObjective:We aimed to address the prevalence of desire-to-die statements (DDSs) among terminally ill cancer patients in an acute palliative care unit. We also intended to compare the underlying differences between those patients who make desire-to-die comments (DDCs) and those who make desire-for-euthanasia comments (EUCs).Method:We conducted a one-year cross-sectional prospective study in all patients receiving palliative care who had made a DDC or EUC. At inclusion, we evaluated symptom intensity, anxiety and depression, and conducted a semistructured interview regarding the reasons for these comments.Results:Of the 701 patients attended to during the study period, 69 (9.8%; IC95% 7.7–12.3) made a DDS: 51 (7.3%) a DDC, and 18 (2.5%) an EUC. Using Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) DDC group showed higher percentage of moderate-severe symptoms (ESAS > 4) for well-being (91 vs. 25%; p = 0.001), depression (67 vs. 25%; p = 0.055), and anxiety (52 vs. 13%; p = 0.060) than EUC group. EUC patients also considered themselves less spiritual (44 vs. 84%; p = 0.034). The single most common reason for a DDS was pain or physical suffering, though most of the reasons given were nonphysical.Significance of results:Almost 10% of the population receiving specific oncological palliative care made a DDC (7.3%) or EUC (2.5%). The worst well-being score was lower in the EUC group. The reasons for both a DDC and EUC were mainly nonphysical. We find that emotional and spiritual issues should be identified and effectively addressed when responding to a DDS in terminally ill cancer patients.

Assessing hope at the end of life: Validation of an experience of hope scale in advanced cancer patients

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHERYL L. NEKOLAICHUK ◽  
EDUARDO BRUERA
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Factor I ◽  
Factor Ii

Objective:The purpose of this study was to gather validity evidence for an innovative experience of hope scale, theHope Differential-Short (HDS), and evaluate its clinical utility for assessing hope in advanced cancer patients.Methods:A consecutive sampling approach was used to recruit 96 patients from an inpatient tertiary palliative care unit and three hospice settings. Each participant completed an in-person survey interview, consisting of the following measures: HDS (nine items), Herth Hope Index (HHI), hope visual analog scale (Hope-VAS) and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS).Results:Using factor analytic procedures, a two-factor structure for the HDS was identified, consisting ofauthentic spirit(Factor I) andcomfort(Factor II). The HDS factors had good overall internal consistency (α = 0.83), with Factor I (α = 0.83) being higher than Factor II (α = 0.69). The two factors positively correlated with the HHI, Hope-VAS, and one of the ESAS visual analog scales, well-being (range: 0.38 to 0.64) and negatively correlated with depression and anxiety, as measured by the ESAS (range: −0.25 to −0.42).Significance of results:This is the first validation study of the HDS in advanced cancer patients. Its promising psychometric properties and brief patient-oriented nature provide a solid initial foundation for its future use as a clinical assessment measure in oncology and palliative care. Additional studies are warranted to gather further validity evidence for the HDS before its routine use in clinical practice.

Development and Validation of a Modified Version of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale in a Flemish Palliative Care Population

2011 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 475-482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Claessens ◽  
Johan Menten ◽  
Paul Schotsmans ◽  
Bert Broeckaert
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Assessment Scale ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
The Face ◽  
Palliative Care Units ◽  
Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Development And Validation

Palliative cancer patients are faced with multiple symptoms that threaten their quality of life. To manage these symptoms, a reliable and valid way of registration is crucial. In this study, the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) has been translated, modified, and tested on content, face, criterion, construct validity, and internal consistency for patients admitted to Flemish palliative care units. These aspects are tested in a descriptive, comparative, longitudinal study based on 3 convenience samples. The first consisted of 8 palliative care experts. The second sample checked the face validity and consisted of 4 patients, 5 family members, and 5 nurses. The last sample involved 23 patients admitted to 3 Flemish palliative care units. Heedful of the “new-wave” vision on validity, the translated and altered ESAS seemed a suitable instrument for the symptom assessment of patients with cancer admitted to a palliative care unit.

Symptom Management in Palliative Medicine

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathy J Selvaggi ◽  
Janet L Abrahm
Keyword(s):  
Symptom Management ◽  
Symptom Control ◽  
Hot Flashes ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Symptomatic Treatment ◽  
Assessment Scale ◽  
Transdermal Fentanyl ◽  
Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Symptom Assessment Scale

Palliative care is an interdisciplinary specialty focused on providing comfort, communication, and support for patients, families, and professional caregivers throughout the course of a life-limiting illness. This chapter discusses assessment and treatment of symptoms and disorders that commonly contribute to patient distress during these illnesses: pain, disorders of the respiratory and gastrointestinal systems, skin disorders, hot flashes, fatigue, pruritis, insomnia, and delirium. This chapter reviews care of the imminently dying patient, discusses methods for assessing patients' symptoms, and provides two examples of valid and reliable symptom measurement systems: the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale. Achieving symptom control requires the physician to assess patient suffering in all dimensions: physical, psychological, social, and spiritual. The extent of the assessment may be modified, however, based on patients’ prognosis as well as their goals and the burden and benefit of the diagnostic intervention. A 10-step protocol for terminal wean is presented. Signs that patients are entering their final days and symptom management in the last hours of a patient's life are discussed. Tables list the modified Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale; the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale; the DOLOPLUS-2 scale (behavioral pain assessment in the elderly); relative potencies of commonly used opioids; conversions between the transdermal fentanyl patch and morphine; symptomatic treatment for dyspnea, cough, and hiccups; pharmacologic treatment of nausea and vomiting; a progressive bowel regimen for patients receiving opioid therapy; treatments for constipation; etiology-based treatment for oral problems; risk factors for pressure ulcers; and applicable medications for physical and psychological sources of distress near the end of life. This review contains 12 tables and 120 references

Dexamethasone (DM) for cancer-related fatigue: A double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9002-9002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sriram Yennurajalingam ◽  
Susan Frisbee-Hume ◽  
Marvin Omar Delgado-Guay ◽  
Janet Bull ◽  
Alexandria T. Phan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Cancer Related Fatigue ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale

9002 Background: Cancer-related-fatigue (CRF) is the most common and distressing symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. Currently, there is no standard treatment for CRF. Although corticosteroids have been used in the treatment of CRF, there are no well-powered placebo-controlled trials that used a validated CRF outcome measure. The primary objective of this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study is to compare the effect of DM versus placebo on CRF. Methods: Advanced cancer patients with fatigue ≥ 4/10 on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and at least 2 other CRF-related symptoms (pain, nausea, appetite, depression, anxiety or sleep disturbance ≥ 4/10), normal cognition, no infections and hemoglobin ≥ 9 g/L were eligible for enrollment. Patients were randomized to either receive dexamethasone 4 mg orally twice a day for 15 days (primary end point) or matching placebo. The primary outcome was the day 15 change in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness-Fatigue (FACIT-F) subscale scores. Differences in the group means (normal distribution) were analyzed using the two-sample t-test. Results: In 83 evaluable patients (43 DM and 40 placebo), median age was 60 years, 61% were white, and 53% were female. There was no difference in the demographics and fatigue (FACIT-F subscale) between DM and placebo groups except for sex (p=0.02). The mean (SD) FACIT-F subscores at baseline and at day 15 for DM were 18 (11) and 27 (11) (p<0.001) and for placebo were 21 (9) and 24 (12) (p=0.06), respectively. Mean improvement in FACIT-F subscale was significantly higher in the DM group compared to placebo (9.6 (11) vs. 3.1 (9.7), p=0.005). We found a significant difference in ESAS physical distress (p=0.02), but no differences in ESAS overall symptom distress (p=0.11) and ESAS psychological distress (P=0.88) between DM and placebo. There were insignificantly higher numbers of grade ≥3 toxicities in patients who received DM than in patients who received placebo (20/42 vs. 18/47, p=0.37). Conclusions: Dexamethasone was more effective than placebo in reducing CRF in patients with advanced cancer. Long-term safety studies are needed.

Differences in performance status assessments between palliative care specialists, nurses, and oncologists.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 19-19
Author(s):  
YuJung Kim ◽  
Yi Zhang ◽  
Ji Chan Park ◽  
David Hui ◽  
Gary B. Chisholm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Care Clinic ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Ecog Ps

19 Background: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) is one of the most commonly used assessment tools among oncologists and palliative care specialists caring advanced cancer patients. However, the inter-observer difference between the oncologist and palliative care specialist has never been reported. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all patients who were first referred to an outpatient palliative care clinic in 2013 and identified 278 eligible patients. The ECOG PS assessments by palliative care specialists, nurses, and oncologists, and the symptom burden measured by Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) were analyzed. Results: According to the pairwise comparisons using Sign tests, palliative care specialists rated the ECOG PS grade significantly higher than oncologists (median 0.5 grade, P<0.0001) and nurses also rated significantly higher (median 1.0 grade, P<0.0001). The assessments of palliative care specialists and nurses were not significantly different (P=0.10). Weighted kappa values for inter-observer agreement were 0.26 between palliative care specialists and oncologists, and 0.61 between palliative care specialists and nurses. Palliative care specialists’ assessments showed a moderate correlation with fatigue, dyspnea, anorexia, feeling of well-being, and symptom distress score measured by ESAS. The ECOG PS assessments by all three groups were significantly associated with survival (P<0.001), but the assessments by oncologists could not distinguish survival of patients with PS 2 from 3. Independent predictors of discordance in PS assessments between palliative care specialists and oncologists were the presence of an effective treatment option (odds ratio [OR] 2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-5.23) and poor feeling of well-being (≥4) by ESAS (OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.34-4.21). Conclusions: ECOG PS assessments by the palliative care specialists and nurses were significantly different from the oncologists. Systematic efforts to increase regular interdisciplinary meetings and communications might be crucial to bridge the gap and establish a best care plan for each advanced cancer patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document