Health care coach support in reducing acute care use in patients with cancer.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4-4
Author(s):  
Manali I. Patel ◽  
Kim Smith ◽  
Etsegenet Sisay ◽  
David J. Park
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Goals Of Care ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Community Oncology ◽  
Hospice Use

4 Background: Lay health workers (LHWs) who are trained to proactively discuss goals of care and assess patient symptoms have improved value-based cancer care among Veterans and a Medicare Advantage population. Little data exists regarding the effect of integrating LHWs into community oncology care among commercially insured populations. In this study, we implemented an LHW intervention to assist with goals of care and symptom management in collaboration with a private community oncology practice among patients with advanced cancer. This randomized controlled trial evaluates the effect of the intervention on acute care use and secondarily on goals of care documentation and patient satisfaction. Methods: Newly diagnosed patients with advanced stages of solid and hematologic malignancies were randomized from 8/11/2016 through 6/5/2019 into the intervention and control groups. All patients were followed for 12 months or death, whichever was first. Patients reported satisfaction with care using the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey at time of enrollment and 9 months follow-up. We compared risk of death using Cox Models and compared rates of acute care, palliative care and hospice use using generalized models adjusted for length of follow-up. Results: A total of 104 patients were randomized with 52 in the intervention and 52 in the control. In both groups, the mean age was 67 years; 70% were non-Hispanic white, 25% Asian Pacific Islander, 1% Native Hawaiian, 1% American Indian/Alaskan Native, 3% multiple races/ethnicities. There were no differences in cancer diagnoses or stages. There were no differences in rates of survival between the two groups. Intervention patients as compared to the control had lower mean emergency department visits (0.80 +/- 0.17 versus 1.9 +/- 0.46, p = 0.02) and hospitalizations (0.67 +/- 0.19 versus 1.49 +/- 0.37, p = 0.04), greater rates of goals of care documentation (92% versus 33% p = 0.002) and no differences in palliative care (88% versus 77% p = 0.16) or hospice use (27% versus 21% p = 0.45). At 9 months follow-up as compared to baseline, patients in the intervention experienced greater improvements in satisfaction with their care (difference-in-difference: 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.60, p < 0.001). Conclusions: An LHW intervention significantly reduced acute care use and improved patient experiences with cancer care as compared to a control group. This intervention may be a solution to improve care delivery and experiences for patients after a diagnosis of cancer in community oncology settings. Clinical trial information: NCT03154190 .

Enhancing community capacity to deliver value-based cancer care at the end-of-life.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4-4
Author(s):  
Manali I. Patel ◽  
David Ramirez ◽  
Richy Agajanian ◽  
Hilda H. Agajanian ◽  
Tumaini Coker
Keyword(s):  
End Of Life ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Care Facility ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Healthcare Use ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Costs Of Care ◽  
Patient Reported

4 Background: To improve value-based cancer care, we designed an intervention using lay health workers (LHWs) who we trained to assess patient's symptoms. LHWs referred patients to palliative care and/or behavioral health in response to positive assessments. We implemented the intervention in collaboration with a community oncology group and a Medicare Advantage payer for patients with all stages of cancer. At ASCO 2019 we demonstrated the associated reductions in patient-reported symptoms, acute care use, and total costs of care. This study evaluates the effect of the intervention on end-of-life cancer care, specifically healthcare use in the last month of life and total costs of care from diagnosis until death. Methods: We enrolled all newly diagnosed health plan beneficiaries with solid and hematologic malignancies from 11/2016 through 9/2018 and compared outcomes to all patients diagnosed with cancer in the year prior to the intervention (control arm). For all patients who died within 12-months follow-up, we compared risk of death using Cox Models and generalized linear regression to compare healthcare use in the last month of life, and total costs of care from diagnosis until death. All models were adjusted for age, stage, comorbidities, diagnosis, and length of follow-up. Results: 180 patients in the intervention and 156 in the control died during the study. In both groups, the mean age was 80 years; 49% were non-Hispanic White, 40% Hispanic, 5% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 4% black. There were no differences in survival (HR 0.96, p = 0.6). Intervention patients as compared to the control had lower mean inpatient admissions (0.3 +/- 0.04 versus 0.5 +/- 0.07, p = 0.02) and emergency department visits per thousand members per year (0.11 +/- 0.02 versus 0.49 +/- 0.06, p < 0.001) in the last month of life, greater proportion of patients with hospice use (69% versus 48%, p < 0.001), lower proportion of patients with acute care facility deaths (37.5% versus 62.5%, p = 0.02) and lower median total healthcare costs from diagnosis until death ($24,902 versus $33,145, p = 0.02). Conclusions: An LHW intervention significantly improved the value of end-of-life cancer care and may be a solution to improve burdensome and costly care for patients.

scholarly journals Goals-of-Care Consult and Future Costs, Acute Care and Hospice Use in Matched Cohorts of African Americans and Whites

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 521-521
Author(s):  
Lauren Starr ◽  
Connie Ulrich ◽  
Scott Appel ◽  
Paul Junker ◽  
Nina O’Connor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
African Americans ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Care Utilization ◽  
Goals Of Care ◽  
Palliative Care Consultation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hospice Use ◽  
Care Costs

Abstract African Americans receive less hospice care and more aggressive end-of-life care than Whites. Little is known about how palliative care consultation to discuss goals-of-care (“PCC”) is associated with future acute care utilization and costs, or hospice use, by race. To compare future acute care costs and utilization and discharge to hospice between propensity-matched cohorts of African Americans with and without PCC, and Whites with and without PCC, we conducted a secondary analysis of 35,154 seriously-ill African American and White adults who had PCC at a high-acuity hospital and were discharged 2014-2016. We found no significant difference between African Americans with or without PCC in mean future acute care costs ($11,651 vs. $15,050, P=0.09), 30-day readmissions (P=0.58), future hospital days (P=0.34), future ICU admission (P=0.25), or future ICU days (P=0.30), but found greater discharge to hospice among African Americans with PCC (36.5% vs. 2.4%, P&lt;0.0001). We found significant differences between Whites with PCC vs. without PCC in mean future acute care costs ($8,095 vs. $16,799, P&lt;0.001), 30-day readmissions (10.2% vs. 16.7%, P&lt;0.0001), future days hospitalized (3.7 vs. 6.3 days, P&lt;0.0001), and discharge to hospice (42.7% vs. 3.0%, P&lt;0.0001). Results suggest PCC decreases future acute care costs and utilization in Whites and, directionally but not significantly, in African Americans; and increases discharge to hospice in both races (15-fold in African Americans, 14-fold in Whites). Research is needed to understand how PCC supports end-of-life decision-making and hospice use across races and how systems and policies can enable effective goals-of-care consultations across settings.

scholarly journals Prescreening of Patient-reported Symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) in Outpatient Palliative Cancer Care

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garden Lee ◽  
Han Sang Kim ◽  
Si Won Lee ◽  
Eun Hwa Kim ◽  
Bori Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Severe Symptom ◽  
Symptom Burden ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment System ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Background: Although early palliative care is associated with a better quality of life and improved outcomes in end-of-life cancer care, the criteria of palliative care referral are still elusive. Methods: We collected patient-reported symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) at the baseline, first, and second follow-up visit. The ESAS evaluates ten symptoms: pain, fatigue, nausea, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, dyspnea, sleep disorder, appetite, and wellbeing. A total of 71 patients were evaluable, with a median age of 65 years, male (62%), and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status distribution of 1/2/3 (28%/39%/33%), respectively. Results: Twenty (28%) patients had moderate/severe symptom burden with the mean ESAS ≥5. Interestingly, most of the patients with moderate/severe symptom burdens (ESAS ≥5) had globally elevated symptom expression. While the mean ESAS score was maintained in patients with mild symptom burden (ESAS<5; 2.7 at the baseline; 3.4 at the first follow-up; 3.0 at the second follow-up; P =0.117), there was significant symptom improvement in patients with moderate/severe symptom burden (ESAS≥5; 6.5 at the baseline; 4.5 at the first follow-up; 3.6 at the second follow-up; P <0.001). Conclusions: Advanced cancer patients with ESAS ≥5 may benefit from outpatient palliative cancer care. Prescreening of patient-reported symptoms using ESAS can be useful for identifying unmet palliative care needs in advanced cancer patients.

Identification of patients at high risk for preventable emergency department visits and inpatient admissions after starting chemotherapy: Machine learning applied to comprehensive electronic health record data.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1511-1511
Author(s):  
Dylan J. Peterson ◽  
Nicolai P. Ostberg ◽  
Douglas W. Blayney ◽  
James D. Brooks ◽  
Tina Hernandez-Boussard
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Electronic Health Record ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Model Performance ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Health Record ◽  
Patients At Risk ◽  
Ed Visits

1511 Background: Acute care use is one of the largest drivers of cancer care costs. OP-35: Admissions and Emergency Department Visits for Patients Receiving Outpatient Chemotherapy is a CMS quality measure that will affect reimbursement based on unplanned inpatient admissions (IP) and emergency department (ED) visits. Targeted measures can reduce preventable acute care use but identifying which patients might benefit remains challenging. Prior predictive models have made use of a limited subset of the data available in the Electronic Health Record (EHR). We hypothesized dense, structured EHR data could be used to train machine learning algorithms to predict risk of preventable ED and IP visits. Methods: Patients treated at Stanford Health Care and affiliated community care sites between 2013 and 2015 who met inclusion criteria for OP-35 were selected from our EHR. Preventable ED or IP visits were identified using OP-35 criteria. Demographic, diagnosis, procedure, medication, laboratory, vital sign, and healthcare utilization data generated prior to chemotherapy treatment were obtained. A random split of 80% of the cohort was used to train a logistic regression with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regularization (LASSO) model to predict risk for acute care events within the first 180 days of chemotherapy. The remaining 20% were used to measure model performance by the Area Under the Receiver Operator Curve (AUROC). Results: 8,439 patients were included, of whom 35% had one or more preventable event within 180 days of starting chemotherapy. Our LASSO model classified patients at risk for preventable ED or IP visits with an AUROC of 0.783 (95% CI: 0.761-0.806). Model performance was better for identifying risk for IP visits than ED visits. LASSO selected 125 of 760 possible features to use when classifying patients. These included prior acute care visits, cancer stage, race, laboratory values, and a diagnosis of depression. Key features for the model are shown in the table. Conclusions: Machine learning models trained on a large number of routinely collected clinical variables can identify patients at risk for acute care events with promising accuracy. These models have the potential to improve cancer care outcomes, patient experience, and costs by allowing for targeted preventative interventions. Future work will include prospective and external validation in other healthcare systems.[Table: see text]

Inpatient Palliative Care Consult: A Marker for High Risk of Readmission or Death in Discharged Oncology Inpatients

2019 ◽  
pp. 082585971986906
Author(s):  
Debbie Selby ◽  
Anita Chakraborty ◽  
Audrey Kim ◽  
Jeff Myers
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Acute Care ◽  
Disease Process ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Advanced Illness ◽  
Phone Calls ◽  
Palliative Care Teams ◽  
Advance Care

Background: Emergency department visits or readmission to hospital are common particularly among those with advanced illness. Little prospective data exist on early outcomes specifically for patients seen by a palliative care consult service during their acute care admission, who are subsequently discharged home. Methods: This study followed 62 oncology patients who had had a palliative care consult during their admission to acute care with weekly phone calls postdischarge for 4 weeks. Events recorded included death, readmission, emergency department visits, and admission to a palliative care unit. Results: By the end of the study, 32 (52%) of 62 had had at least 1 event, (readmission, emergency department visit, or death), with the majority of these occurring in the first 2 weeks postdischarge. The overall 4-week death rate was 14 (22.6%) of 62. Conclusions: These data suggest that the need for a palliative care consult identifies inpatients at very high risk for early deterioration and underlines the critical importance of advance care planning/goals-of-care discussions by the oncology and palliative care teams to ensure patients and families understand their disease process and have the opportunity to direct their care decisions.

Prognostic Impact of Transfusions Intensity on Survival and Development of Thrombocytopenia in Newly Diagnosed Lower-Risk MDS Patients Participating in the European Leukemianet EU-MDS Registry

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 1677-1677
Author(s):  
Louise De Swart ◽  
Tom Johnston ◽  
Alexandra Smith ◽  
Pierre Fenaux ◽  
Argiris Symeonidis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Risk ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Rapid Decline ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
Platelet Counts ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The outcome of lower-risk MDS patients with red blood cell transfusions (RBCT) dependency is inferior to that of RBCT independent patients, but whether the intensity of RBCT is important for prognosis is unknown. The EUMDS Registry is a non-interventional, observational longitudinal study enrolling patients with lower-risk MDS from 142 sites in 17 countries as described elsewhere (1). The EUMDS registry has accrued 1,902 patients as of July 21, 2015. We hypothesized that RBCT intensity is an independent prognostic factor for survival. Methods We first assessed the impact of RBCT intensity in the first year post-diagnosis (1yrPD) on progression-free survival among the 1034 patients who survived at least 1yrPD and had potential for a further year of follow-up. Secondly, we developed a longitudinal model of platelet counts throughout follow-up for 1660 patients in the registry with potential for at least one year follow-up. Results Among the 1034 patients, 323 patients had died: 67 after progression to higher-risk MDS/AML and 256 without progression. A further 41 surviving patients had progressed to AML. The overall 5-year survival was 52%. In a proportional hazards regression model (Table), the risk of death or progression increased in a non-linear fashion with age at diagnosis (p<0.001). The risk of death was increased in the intermediate IPSS-R risk group compared to low risk. Patients with RARS and 5q- syndrome had a better outcome compared to RCMD. Increased RBCT intensity in 1yrPD (Table, Figure) was strongly associated with an increased risk of death (p<0.001). In the 1660 patients no significant decline in platelet counts was observed (0.16x109 platelets/l average monthly decline, p=0.16) among patients who were not RBC transfused at any time during follow-up. However platelet counts of patients receiving RBCT declined more quickly (p<0.0001) at an average rate of 1.14x109 platelets/l/month. Among the 920 RBCT dependent patients, lower platelet counts were associated with receiving more RBCT units in the preceding six months. 185 Patients had at least 2 observations both before and after becoming RBCT dependent, defined as 1st RBCT. 50% of these patients had a decreasing trend of platelets prior to their 1st RBCT and 67% had a decreasing slope of platelets after their 1st RBCT. In the control group of RBC untransfused patients, decreasing slopes of platelets occurred in around 50% of the patients throughout the whole observation period of 4 visits. Logistic regression of the risk of having a post-1st RBCT decreasing trend in platelets showed that transfused patients were at a greater risk (OR=1.7, 95% CI: 1.1-2.7) of having a post-1st RBCT decreasing trend in platelets than untransfused patients. Conclusion These multivariate regression models including age, sex, country, IPSS and WHO classification showed that more intensive RBCT treatment is associated with poor prognosis and a more rapid decline of platelets. This indicates that the intensity of RBCT should be incorporated in the regular prognostic scoring systems and the choice of therapeutic interventions. (1): De Swart L et al. Br J Haematol 2015; 170: 372-83. Disclosures Fenaux: NOVARTIS: Honoraria, Research Funding; CELGENE: Honoraria, Research Funding; JANSSEN: Honoraria, Research Funding; AMGEN: Honoraria, Research Funding. Hellström-Lindberg:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Sanz:JANSSEN CILAG: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mittelman:Roche: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding. Almeida:Bristol Meyer Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Park:Hospira: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Itzykson:Oncoethix: Research Funding. de Witte:Novartis: Research Funding.

Embedding palliative care into bone marrow transplantation clinic.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 157-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle M Noreika ◽  
Brian Cassel ◽  
Felicia Noland ◽  
Egidio Del Fabbro
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Bone Marrow Transplantation ◽  
Marrow Transplantation ◽  
Intensive Therapy ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Initial Assessment ◽  
Emotional Symptoms ◽  
Goals Of Care

157 Background: Stem cell/bone marrow transplantation (SC/BMT) is intensive therapy that creates the potential for a number of physical and emotional symptoms. Despite the symptom burden and support needs of these patients there are no publications describing palliative care involvement in the course of treatment. Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed on 37 patients followed over a 6-month period by a palliative care service embedded within the SC/BMT clinic. Results: 37 patients were referred by SC/BMT clinic physicians or nurses to a palliative care team embedded within the clinic (including a physician, physical therapist, and psychologist). Almost all patients were referred for symptom management rather than goals of care; only three (9%) died during the review period and for none of them was the reason for consultation goals of care/hospice referral. Patients were seen between once and eight times during the six month period by various members of the team. Most (77%) were allogenic transplant patients and most were seen within 6 months of their transplantation. The most common reasons for referral were fatigue (57%), anorexia (27%), pain (38%) and depression and/or anxiety (35%). At initial assessment the highest-rated symptoms were lack of appetite (mean 4.78, SD 3.08), fatigue (4.51 [2.59]), and diminished feeling of well-being (4.16, [2.51]). At initial assessment, 73% of patients had 3 or more different symptoms that they rated at 4+; this dropped to 39.1% at follow-up (n = 23). Of the 9 symptoms assessed at both initial and follow-up visits, 7 decreased significantly (all but fatigue and dyspnea) and none increased. For example appetite improved from 5.52 (2.98) to 3.13 (2.96); pain improved from 3.52 (2.92) to 1.78 (1.88) (n = 23, p < .01). SC/BMT providers requested an expansion of the service after three months of experience. Conclusions: Patients who have undergone SC/BMT experience many physical and emotional symptoms. Palliative care embedded within the bone marrow transplant clinic can provide benefit by lessening the symptomatic burden of patients.

Evaluation of coordination of cancer care between designated cancer hospitals and primary care providers: Results from a nationwide survey in Japan.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 84-84
Author(s):  
Taro Tomizuka ◽  
Tomone Watanabe ◽  
Satoru Kamitani ◽  
Takahiro Higashi
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Care Coordination ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Critical Path ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Follow Up Care ◽  
Cancer Specialist

84 Background: To improve coordination of cancer care between cancer specialist hospitals and primary care providers (PCPs), the Japanese government accredited cancer specialist hospitals, so called “designated cancer care hospitals (DCCHs)” and introduced “Cancer care coordination instruction fee” which PCPs can receive if they share a cancer critical path (Japanese version of Survivorship Care Plans) of each cancer patient with DCCHs. We sought to assess the current status of coordination of cancer care in Japan and communication between DCCHs and PCPs from PCPs’ point of view. Methods: A cross-sectional mail survey was administered to randomly selected clinic-based PCPs (4,000 clinics) from a nation-wide database of medical institutions authorized by Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare Japan to treat patients with health insurance (87,869 clinics). The survey evaluated how much PCPs provided cancer follow-up care and how well DCCHs coordinated care and communicated with PCPs in cancer survivorship. Results: 1,873 PCPs returned the questionnaire (response rate: 46.8%). 1,223 (65.3%) answered to provide cancer follow-up care in outpatient setting. Most of the PCPs which provided cancer follow-up care evaluated the care coordination and support by DCCHs were satisfactory (946, 77.4%) but the degree of good evaluation varied by region (highest: 91.3%, lowest: 45.8%). In regression analysis, provision of palliative care by PCPs (OR 1.52 95%CI 1.05-2.17) and use of cancer critical path (OR 2.10 95%CI 1.63-2.71) were significantly correlated with better evaluation of communication and care coordination. Conclusions: DCCHs communicated well with PCPs and PCPs were satisfied with the communication and care coordination by DCCHs. Provision of palliative care by PCPs and use of cancer critical path are likely to lead good care coordination in cancer care.

The individualized Goals of Care Discussion Guide: A simple tool to empower patients with metastatic breast cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11622-11622
Author(s):  
Jeffrey M. Peppercorn ◽  
Yvonne Y. Lei ◽  
Nora Horick ◽  
Katharine M. Quain ◽  
Don S. Dizon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Attrition Rate ◽  
Feasibility Trial ◽  
Treatment Preferences ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Goals Of Care

11622 Background: Individualized treatment planning is a critical part of quality cancer care, but how best to achieve this for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is unclear. We evaluated the feasibility, acceptability and impact of using a simple and scalable “Individualized Goals of Care Discussion Guide” (IGCDG) to facilitate patient-provider communication at the time of treatment decisions. Methods: We developed the IGCDG based on structured interviews with MBC patients and input from experts in cancer care, decision sciences, psychology and palliative care. We then conducted a single arm feasibility trial among patients with newly diagnosed or progressive MBC. Prior to clinic, patients received the IGCDG, an 8-page MBC informational brochure and 1-page questionnaire regarding treatment preferences, personal goals and priorities for care planning. The completed questionnaire was provided to the oncology team at the patient’s visit. Pre and post assessment included the Distress Thermometer (DT), Patient Satisfaction with Cancer Care Scale and the Control Preferences Scale. Feasibility was defined as: 1) accrual of > 50%, 2) attrition rate < 32%, and 3) < 50% of patients experiencing increased distress following the intervention. Results: Among 60 eligible patients, 42 participated (70% accrual), 40 completed all surveys (2% attrition), and only 7 (18%) reported increased distress. Mean age was 57 (range 31 – 79), 85% were white, 7% black, 5% Hispanic, 66% were college graduates, and 40% reported high baseline distress (DT > 4). Patient priorities for discussion included cancer directed therapy (70%), symptom management (70%), and prognosis/planning ahead (60%). At 2-month follow-up, 53% reported decreased distress compared to baseline. Satisfaction with cancer care was high at baseline and follow-up. Most patients preferred shared decision making (77%), and 79% reported decision roles concordant with preferences. Overall, 72% of participants found the IGCDG helpful, 93% found the questionnaire easy to complete, and 44% felt it improved communication with their doctor (49% unsure). Conclusions: Administration of the Individualized Goals of Care Discussion Guide is feasible and provides patients with MBC an opportunity to define their goals of care and priorities for discussion in clinic. Clinical trial information: NCT03375827.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document