Development of an aid to decision-making form (ADF) integrated into a major institutional program in oncology: A tool to support care goal identification.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18646-e18646
Author(s):  
Laurence Vigouret-Viant ◽  
Clemence Legoupil ◽  
Aurelie Bardet ◽  
Celine Laurent ◽  
Michel Ducreux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
P Value ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Advance Care ◽  
Aggressive Care

e18646 Background: For cancer patients, life-threatening complications may be difficult to anticipate, leading to complex medical decision-making processes. Since 2015, the Gustave Roussy Cancer Center has implemented a major institutional program including a Decision-Aid Form (ADF), outlining the anticipation of appropriate care for patient in case of worsening evolution. Methods: Between January and May 2017, all patients transferred from Site 1 to Site 2 of the hospital were prospectively included. In this study, we assessed the acceptability of the ADF, its using and its impact on the patient’s becoming. Results: Out of 206 patients included, 89.3% had an ADF. The planned stratification of care was notified in practically all cases. Conversely, the involvement of the palliative care team was notified in only 29% of the ADF. The value of the WHO/ECOG Performance Status was limited, varying between physicians. Finally, the field “information for patients and relatives” was insufficiently completed. Although a possible transfer to Intensive Care Unit was initially proposed in two-thirds of the patients, the majority (76%) of the 35 patients experiencing an acute event received exclusive medical or palliative care. The level of therapeutic commitment suggested by the ADF was never upgraded, and often revised towards less aggressive care, and especially without excess mortality for the patients who were initially designated to be eligible for intensive care. Moreover, the patient's survival at 6 months seems to be correlated with the anticipated level of care recorded on the FAD (Log-rank P value < 0,0001). Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that setting up a care stratification file in advance is possible in a French cultural setting and it could be helpful for clarifying prognosis assessment. To achieve complete acculturation, our extensive institutional program remains a cornerstone for the development of advance care planning. Since 2017, this program has widely spreaded ADF which is now integrated into the electronic medical record. Each physician can complete and modify the patient's ADF at any stage of the patient's disease course.

Patterns of referral to palliative care in clinical practice in patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 39-39
Author(s):  
Safiya Karim ◽  
Shahid Ahmed
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Symptomatic Disease

39 Background: Recent evidence has shown that patients with stage IV NSCLC benefit from early referral to palliative care (PC). In August 2010, a landmark randomized control trial revealed that patients with advanced NSCLC, who received early PC, had better quality of life, mood and survival (NEJM 2010; 363:733-42). Our study aimed to determine pattern of PC referral in clinical practice, in patients with stage IV NSCLC before and after the publication of the trial, and to assess factors correlated with PC referral. Methods: The study population was comprised of a cohort of patients with stage IV NSCLC, diagnosed between 2009 and 2011, and referred to the Saskatoon Cancer Center. Logistic regression models were used to assess factors correlated with PC referral. Kaplan Meier method was used to estimate survival. Cox regression analyses were used to determine factors correlated with survival. Results: 215 patients with median age of 68 yrs (range: 40-92) and M:F of 108:107 were identified. 101 (47%) patients had comorbid illness, 100 (47%) had ECOG performance status <2, 136 (63%) were married/common law and 161 (75%) had symptomatic disease. 126/251 (58%) were referred to PC. 70/118 (59%) diagnosed before Sep 2010 were referred to PC compared with 56/97 (58%) diagnosed after Sep 2010 (p=NS). The median time to PC referral from date of diagnosis was 51 days (inter-quartile range: 19-155). 33% patients were referred within 4 wks of diagnosis. Symptomatic disease (odd ratio [OR]=3.7, 95% CI =1.8-7.5), bone metastasis (OR = 3.0, 95% CI = 1.6-5.6), and brain metastasis (OR=2.2, 95% CI =1.1-4.5) were correlated with referral to PC. Median survival of whole cohort was 4 months (95% CI: 3.1-4.8). 2nd or 3rd line therapy (Hazard ratio [HR]= 0.54, 95% CI:0.34-0.87), non-smoking status (HR= 0.58, 95% CI:0.38-0.87), chemotherapy (HR 0.64, 95% CI:0.46-0.89), and lack of symptoms (HR=0.68, 95%CI:0.48-0.96) were correlated with better survival. Conclusions: Our study shows that publication of the landmark trial did not influence the pattern of referral to PC at our center. Symptomatic patients and those with metastasis to brain or bone were more often referred to PC. No survival benefit was seen in patients who were referred to PC.

Palliative Considerations for the Patient With Acute Kidney Injury in the Intensive Care Unit

2020 ◽  
pp. 197-208
Author(s):  
Tamara Rubenzik ◽  
Alvin H. Moss
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Acute Kidney Injury ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
High Morbidity ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Care Approach

Acute kidney injury is a common occurrence in the intensive care unit and one that is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. One role for palliative care is to guide medical decision-making regarding management of patients with acute kidney injury. This role can be fulfilled as part of primary palliative care by the intensive care unit and nephrology teams or by specialist palliative care clinicians if there is a need for assistance with conflict resolution. In such discussions, it is important to understand the patient’s prognosis and values, preferences, and goals to inform the shared decision-making discussion about whether to initiate or continue renal replacement therapy. This chapter reviews the literature and guideline recommendations on a palliative care approach to managing critically ill patients with acute kidney injury.

scholarly journals Palliative Performance Scale: Polish validation in hospice setting - a prospective observational study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomasz Dzierżanowski ◽  
Tomasz Gradalski ◽  
Michael Kozlowski
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Score ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Free Standing ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Rehabilitation Outcomes ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Performance Scale

Abstract Background: Measuring functional status in palliative care may help clinicians to assess a patient’s prognosis, recommend adequate therapy, avoid futile or aggressive medical care, consider hospice referral, and evaluate provided rehabilitation outcomes. An optimized, widely used, and validated tool is preferable. The Palliative Performance Scale Version 2 (PPSv2) is currently one of the most commonly used performance scales in palliative settings. The aim of this study is the translation and validation process of a Polish translation of this tool (PPSv2-Polish). Methods: Two hundred patients consecutively admitted to a free-standing hospice were evaluated twice during 2 consecutive days for test-retest reliability. In the first evaluation, two different care providers independently evaluated the same patient to establish inter-rater reliability values. PPS-Polish was compared with the Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status (ECOG PS), and Barthel Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Index to determine its construct validity. Results: A high level of full agreement between test and retest was seen (63%), and a good intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.85 (P<0.0001) was achieved. Excellent agreement between raters was observed when using PPSv2-Polish (Cohen’s kappa 0.91; P<0.0001). Satisfactory correlations with the KPS and good correlations with ECOG PS and Barthel ADL were noticed. Persons who had shorter prognoses and were predominantly bedridden also had lower scores measured by the PPSv2-Polish, KPS and Barthel ADL. A strong correlation of 0.77 between PPSv2-Polish scores and survival time was noted (P<0.0001). Moderate survival correlations were seen between KPS, ECOG PS, and Barthel ADL of 0.41; -0.62; and 0.58, respectively (P<0.0001). Conclusion: PPSv2-Polish is a valid and reliable tool measuring performance status in a hospice population and can be used in daily clinical practice in palliative care and research.

The PROVIEW+ tool: Developing and validating a tool to predict risk of poor performance status and severe symptoms in cancer patients over time.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12095-12095
Author(s):  
Hsien Seow ◽  
Rinku Sutradhar ◽  
Lisa Catherine Barbera ◽  
Peter Tanuseputro ◽  
Dawn Guthrie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Severe Pain ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Low Performance ◽  
Performance Scale ◽  
Over Time

12095 Background: There are numerous predictive cancer tools that focus on survival. However, no tools predict risk of low performance status or severe symptoms, which are important for patient decision-making and early integration of palliative care. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a model for all cancer types that predicts the risk for having low performance status and severe symptoms. Methods: A retrospective, population-based, predictive study using linked administrative data from cancer patients from 2008-2015 in Ontario, Canada. Patients were randomly selected for model derivation (60%) and validation (40%). The derivation cohort was used to develop a multivariable logistic regression model to predict the risk of having the reported outcomes in the subsequent 6 months. Model performance was assessed using discrimination and calibration plots. The main outcome was low performance status using the Palliative Performance Scale. Secondary outcomes included severe pain, dyspnea, well-being, and depression using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System. Outcomes were recalculated after each of 4 annual survivor marks. Results: We identified 255,494 cancer patients (57% female; median age of 64; common cancers were breast (24%) and lung (13%)). At diagnosis, the risk of having low performance status, severe pain, well-being, dyspnea, and depression in 6-months is 1%, 3%, 6%, 13% and 4%, respectively for the reference case (i.e. male, lung cancer, stage I, no symptoms). Generally these covariates increased the outcome risk by > 10% across all models: obstructive lung disease, dementia, diabetes; radiation treatment; hospital admission; high pain; depression; Palliative Performance Scale score of 60-10; issues with appetite; or homecare. Model discrimination was high across all models. Conclusions: The model accurately predicted changing cancer risk for low performance status and severe symptoms over time. Providing accurate predictions of future performance status and symptom severity can support decision-making and earlier initiation of palliative care, even alongside disease modifying therapies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document