Strategies to embed palliative care into a culture of cancer care.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21678-e21678
Author(s):  
Angela Marie Taber ◽  
Susan F. Korber ◽  
Edward Martin ◽  
Anthony E. Mega
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Health System ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Medical Oncology ◽  
National Study ◽  
Claims Analysis ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Medicare Claims ◽  
Multi Level

e21678 Background: In 2012, the 3 hospital Lifespan Health System launched a palliative care initiative. The hospitals and medical oncologists knew this was critical for patient centered and value-based cancer care, but recognized many barriers: physician practice patterns, lack of dedicated resources and systems, patient and family education gaps, and limited return on investment in the current environment. A multi-level inpatient and outpatient strategy was implemented and tracked over four years. Methods: External benchmarking data from a Medicare claims analysis of Vizient (academic health system consortium) member organizations and from ASCO QOPI data were used in the analysis. Internal data analysis included a study on symptom management for lung cancer patients, hospital reports on palliative care service utilization, ED visits and hospital admission trends for cancer patients. Multi-level interventions were employed: hospital investment in staff and systems, partnership with a community-based hospice and palliative care provider, a medical oncology physician champion with Board certification in palliative care, a palliative care inpatient consult service and daily ICU rounds, an oncology medical home, medical oncologist Saturday hours, electronic prompts for consults, and a cancer call triage center. Results: A Medicare claims analysis for 2012 to 2014 on cancer decedents with ICU stays in the last 30 days in the Vizient national study of health systems showed that Lifespan was at the 11th percentile, making them the 4th lowest (days in ICU) in performance (pre/post data requested). QOPI data on appropriate referrals to hospice or palliative care prior to death improved from 58% in 2010, which was below the QOPI benchmark of 61%, to 94% in 2016 which is above the QOPI benchmark of 74%. Other QOPI and hospital data will be included in the presentation. Conclusions: Palliative care, a crucial tool for the delivery of future cancer care, is challenging to implement effectively. This study shows that a hospital/medical oncology partnership can drive change to embed palliative care into the culture of cancer care and these strategies offer a roadmap for others to follow as they strive to offer patient centered and value-based cancer care.

Cancer care system strengthening (Pendharkar model) offers uninterrupted care continuum during COVID19 pandemic.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13540-e13540
Author(s):  
Dinesh Pendharkar ◽  
Chandramauli Tripathi
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Health System ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Health System Strengthening ◽  
Care Programme ◽  
Care Continuum ◽  
Chemotherapy Drugs ◽  
Outpatient Visits ◽  
Number Of Patients

e13540 Background: District cancer care programme is operational in more than 150 districts of India. This programme has created nodal cancer units n government run district general hospitals offering cancer related services including chemotherapy and palliative care. During pandemic (COVID19), due lockdown, cancer patients were not able to access tertiary level specialised cancer centres. Aim of this presentation is to reaffirm the necessity of health system strengthening at peripheral level. Methods: With the aim of decentralization and task shifting, district cancer care programme is being implemented in 8 states of India. One general duty medical officers and paramedical staff is trained to assist cancer patients. The physician work under 24 x7 mentorship of oncology team. The government has created a physical cancer care unit with availability of some essential chemotherapy drugs as well. Cancer patients can access these units for assistance in diagnostics, follow-up, toxicity care, chemotherapy and palliative care. Results: We analysed data from few districts in year 2020. The number of patients vesting the units showed an increase during months of total lockdown. Data from 14 districts were analysed. It shows that number of outpatient visits and chemotherapy sessions were higher during strict lockdown. From January 2020 to December 2020 there were 19,273 outpatient visits, and 9,788 inpatient visits. During months of a strict lockdown-March, April, May, June the number increased.7,729 sessions of chemotherapy were performed and more than 2,230 new cases were registered during this year. Conclusions: The pandemic has brought new challenges and has compelled us to learn ways of care continuum. The most important has been the necessity of decentralisation of specialised care, its evenly and equitable distribution. District cancer care programme, as a measure of health system strengthening, which is being evolved in India has further emphasized the importance of such a system building.

scholarly journals Operationalizing patient‐centered cancer care: A systematic review and synthesis of the qualitative literature on cancer patients' needs, values, and preferences

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (11) ◽  
pp. 1723-1733
Author(s):  
Kerri‐Anne R. Mitchell ◽  
Kelly J. Brassil ◽  
Serena A. Rodriguez ◽  
Edward Tsai ◽  
Kayo Fujimoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Qualitative Literature

Impact of palliative care clinic (PCC) referrals on pain control in genitourinary (GU) cancer patients: Retrospective analysis at Roswell Park Cancer Institute (RPCI).

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 57-57
Author(s):  
Neha Gupta ◽  
Shipra Gandhi ◽  
Sidra Anwar ◽  
Katy Wang ◽  
Yashodhara Satchidanand
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Medical Oncology ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Care Clinic

57 Background: Many cancer patients (pts) with GU cancer suffer from uncontrolled pain, and may benefit from more focused palliative care. We assessed the frequency and impact of specialist PCC referrals on pain management of our GU Medical oncology clinic (GUMOC) pts. Methods: 239 consecutive pts were collected from a retrospective review of GUMOC records from 12/1/2013 to 2/28/2014. This group of pts was used to assess the frequency of PCC referral. Pts were divided into two arms- Arm A= GUMOC pts referred to PCC; Arm B: GUMOC pts not referred to PCC. To be able to detect a 15% between the two arms at 95% significance, 37 additional pts (who were already being seen at GUMOC) were collected from retrospective review of PCC records over 9/1/2013 to 2/28/2014. Total 276 pts were divided into Arm A (n=49), Arm B (n=227 pts). Data for baseline pain score and 4-week follow up pain scores were collected. A palliative care screening tool (retrieved from Center to Advance Palliative care [CAPC] website) was used to assign palliative care screening score (PCSS) to all study pts. Chi square test and T-test were used for statistical analysis. Results: Out of the 239 initially collected GUMOC pts, 5% were referred to PCC. 10% (n=24) had PCSS score of ≥ 4, and 33% pts with PCSS ≥ 4 were referred to PCC. Arm A had worse baseline symptoms, ECOG status and more advanced cancer stage. 4-week pain score follow up revealed significant improvement in Arm A -2.74 vs. Arm B -0.13 (p<0.01). Conclusions: GU cancer pts who are referred to PCC from medical oncology clinic have significant decrease in pain symptoms. Frequency of PCC consultation is still low in comprehensive cancer institutes, and not in congruence with the available palliative care screening tools criteria suggested by CAPC. Standardized tools should be developed to guide PCC referrals, and routine use of these tools will significantly help in pain control by seeking specialist palliative care.

Coping with uncertainty: A qualitative study of 33 palliative care consultations among patients with advanced cancer.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 92-92
Author(s):  
Mohamedtaki Abdulaziz Tejani ◽  
Charles Stewart Kamen ◽  
Supriya Gupta Mohile ◽  
Robert E. Gramling
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
The Future ◽  
Research Working Group

92 Background: Despite scientific advances, uncertainty remains an inherent and significant issue in clinical practice. Among patients with advanced cancer, uncertainty about the future can lead to distress, loss of sense of control and lower quality of life. Helping patients manage uncertainty is a core domain of patient-centered care. Little is known about how palliative care providers work with cancer patients to accomplish this goal. Methods: We performed descriptive analysis of transcripts from audio recorded inpatient palliative care consultations among adult cancer patients referred for ‘goals of care’ or ‘end of life decision making.’ Each transcript was read as a whole and then again line by line to code verbal expressions of uncertainty. Excerpted segments dealing with uncertainty about the future were grouped and analyzed by an experienced qualitative research working group. Results: 33 consultations were analyzed: 53% men, median age 62 and median survival 3.6 weeks. Multiple expressions of uncertainty were identified – 106 by patients/families and 56 by providers. A majority (63%) were centered on the inevitable uncertainty in predicting clinical course at the end of life. Palliative care providers managed this type of uncertainty in three main ways: (a) pairing expressions of unpredictability with reiteration of what was certain/known at time of consultation (e.g. ‘we will not let you suffer’); (b) utilizing inherent uncertainty of future to promote hope and faith (e.g. ‘nobody knows how long you are going to live’) and (c) reassurance that multi-disciplinary providers would convene to provide consensus and clarity for next visit (e.g. ‘we will all put our heads together and come up with exactly which options are available.’). Conclusions: Uncertainty is highly prevalent during end of life consultations with advanced cancer patients. Palliative care providers use validating strategies to help patients acknowledge and cope with what is inherently uncertain about their future. These methods can be used to develop communication training and guidelines for use with advanced cancer patients at the end of life.

Choosing oncology as specialization: Medical students' perception after clinical rotation in cancer center.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10528-10528
Author(s):  
Omar Orlando Castillo Fernandez ◽  
Maria Lim ◽  
Lilian Hayde Montano ◽  
Gaspar Perez-Jimenez ◽  
Jhonattan Camaño ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Medical Students ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Medical Oncology ◽  
Surgical Oncology ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Clinical Rotation ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Field Methods

10528 Background: Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide and the demand for oncologist and palliative care specialists is increasing dramatically. Two years ago, The Universidad de Panama incorporated Oncology in the curriculum in order to face the shortage of professionals involved in cancer care. Little information is available concerning young medical students desire to pursue a career in oncology.The aim of this study is to evalute medical students perception about Oncology as a specialization field. Methods: An electronic survey was sent to medical students from Universidad de Panama after finishing Oncology rotation the last 2 years. Chi square and Mann Whitney U tests were used to compare variables. Results: 145 questionnaries were responded (40%). 60% female and 40% male. Median age was 25 years old. Clinical rotation during Oncology practices were: 37% in Medical Oncology, 24% in Surgical Oncology, 21% in Radiation Oncology and 18% in Palliative Care. 20% (29) of students are highly motivated to pursue a career in Oncology. 8 in Radiation Oncology. 8 in Surgical Oncology, 8 in Medical Oncology and 5 in Palliative Care. Variable associated with a oncology preference were: male gender (p=0.007), lack of human resources (p=0.009), contact with patients and family (p=0.005), good experience with mentor (p=0.002), nature and complexity of disease (p<0.001). Potential emotional burden was negatively asssociated (p=0.004) with oncology preference. 66% of students acknowledged that clinical rotation changed positively their perception about cancer patient care and a third of students haved not rule out the possibility to choose Oncology in the near future. Conclusions: Early exposition to medical student to cancer care might help to reduce the global shortage of oncologist and palliative specialists.

scholarly journals Adverse events in deceased hospitalised cancer patients as a measure of quality and safety in end-of-life cancer care

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellinor Christin Haukland ◽  
Christian von Plessen ◽  
Carsten Nieder ◽  
Barthold Vonen
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Quality And Safety ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Specialist Palliative Care ◽  
Early Integration ◽  
Anticancer Treatment

Abstract Background: Anticancer treatment exposes patients to negative consequences such as increased toxicity and decreased quality of life, and there are clear guidelines recommending limiting use of aggressive anticancer treatments for patients near end of life. The aim of this study is to investigate the association between anticancer treatment given during the last 30 days of life and adverse events contributing to death and elucidate how adverse events can be used as a measure of quality and safety in end-of-life cancer care Methods: Retrospective cohort study of 247 deceased hospitalised cancer patients at three hospitals in Norway. The Global Trigger Tool method were used to identify adverse events. We used Poisson regression and binary logistic regression to compare adverse events and association with use of anticancer treatment given during the last 30 days of life. Results: 30 % of deceased hospitalised cancer patients received some kind of anticancer treatment during the last 30 days of life, mainly systemic anticancer treatment. These patients had 62 % more adverse events compared to patients not being treated last 30 days, 39 vs. 24 adverse events per 1 000 patient days (p<0.001, OR 1.62 (1.23 – 2.15). They also had twice the odds of an adverse event contributing to death compared to patients without such treatment, 33 vs. 18 % (p=0.045, OR 1.85 (1.01 – 3.36)). Receiving follow up by specialist palliative care reduced the rate of AEs per 1 000 patient days in both groups by 29 % (p= 0.02, IRR 0.71, CI 95% 0.53 – 0.96). Conclusions: Anticancer treatment given during the last 30 days of life is associated with a significantly increased rate of adverse events and related mortality. Patients receiving specialist palliative care had significantly fewer adverse events, supporting recommendations of early integration of palliative care in a patient safety perspective.

scholarly journals Decision-making support for cancer patients and their families at a palliative care clinic in a designated regional cancer care hospital

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 324-328
Author(s):  
Hiroaki Watanabe ◽  
Miho Kojima ◽  
Yoshimi Okumura ◽  
Yuki Kato ◽  
Yuko Deguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Care Clinic ◽  
Decision Making Support

scholarly journals Adverse events in deceased hospitalised cancer patients as a measure of quality and safety in end-of-life cancer care

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellinor Christin Haukland ◽  
Christian von Plessen ◽  
Carsten Nieder ◽  
Barthold Vonen
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Quality And Safety ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Specialist Palliative Care ◽  
Early Integration ◽  
Anticancer Treatment

Abstract Background: Anticancer treatment exposes patients to negative consequences such as increased toxicity and decreased quality of life, and there are clear guidelines recommending limiting use of aggressive anticancer treatments for patients near end of life. The aim of this study is to investigate the association between anticancer treatment given during the last 30 days of life and adverse events contributing to death and elucidate how adverse events can be used as a measure of quality and safety in end-of-life cancer careMethods: Retrospective cohort study of 247 deceased hospitalised cancer patients at three hospitals in Norway in 2012 and 2013. The Global Trigger Tool method were used to identify adverse events. We used Poisson regression and binary logistic regression to compare adverse events and association with use of anticancer treatment given during the last 30 days of life.Results: 30 % of deceased hospitalised cancer patients received some kind of anticancer treatment during the last 30 days of life, mainly systemic anticancer treatment. These patients had 62 % more adverse events compared to patients not being treated last 30 days, 39 vs. 24 adverse events per 1 000 patient days (p<0.001, OR 1.62 (1.23 – 2.15). They also had twice the odds of an adverse event contributing to death compared to patients without such treatment, 33 vs. 18 % (p=0.045, OR 1.85 (1.01 – 3.36)). Receiving follow up by specialist palliative care reduced the rate of AEs per 1 000 patient days in both groups by 29 % (p= 0.02, IRR 0.71, CI 95% 0.53 – 0.96).Conclusions: Anticancer treatment given during the last 30 days of life is associated with a significantly increased rate of adverse events and related mortality. Patients receiving specialist palliative care had significantly fewer adverse events, supporting recommendations of early integration of palliative care in a patient safety perspective.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document