scholarly journals Perceptions of vascular access for intravenous systemic therapy and risk factors for lymphedema in early-stage breast cancer— a patient survey

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
N. LeVasseur ◽  
C. Stober ◽  
M. Ibrahim ◽  
S. Gertler ◽  
J. Hilton ◽  
...  

Background The choice of vascular access for systemic therapy administration in breast cancer remains an area of clinical equipoise, and patient preference is not consistently acknowledged. Using a patient survey, we evaluated the patient experience with vascular access during treatment for early-stage breast cancer and explored perceived risk factors for lymphedema.Methods Patients who had received systemic therapy for early-stage breast cancer were surveyed at 2 Canadian cancer centres.Results Responses were received from 187 patients (94%). The route of vascular access was peripheral intravenous line (IV) in 24%, a peripherally inserted central catheter (picc) in 42%, and a surgically inserted central catheter (port) in 34%. Anthracycline-based regimens were associated with a greater use of central vascular access devices (cvads— that is, a picc or port; 86/97, 89%). Trastuzumab use was associated with greater use of ports (49/64, 77%). Although few patients (7%) reported being involved in the decisions about vascular access, most were satisfied or very satisfied (88%) with their access type. Patient preference centred mainly on avoiding delays in the initiation of chemotherapy. Self-reported rates of complications (183 evaluable responses) were infiltration with peripheral IVs (9/44, 20%), local skin infections with piccs (7/77, 9%), and thrombosis with ports (4/62, 6%). Perceived risk factors for lymphedema included use of the surgical arm for blood draws (117/156, 75%) and blood pressure measurement (115/156, 74%).Conclusions Most patients reported being satisfied with the vascular access used for their treatment. Improved education and understanding about the evidence-based requirements for vascular access are needed. Perceived risk factors for lymphedema remain variable and are not evidence-based.

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
N. LeVasseur ◽  
C. Stober ◽  
K. Daigle ◽  
A. Robinson ◽  
S. McDiarmid ◽  
...  

Background Despite advances in systemic therapy choices for patients with early-stage breast cancer, optimal practices for intravenous (IV) access remain unknown. That lack of knowledge holds particularly true for the use of central venous access devices (cvads) such as peripherally inserted central catheters (piccs) and implanted vascular access devices (ports).Methods Using a survey of Canadian oncologists and oncology nurses responsible for the care of breast cancer patients, we evaluated current access practices, perceptions of complications, and perceptions of risk, and we estimated complication rates and evaluated perceived risk factors for lymphedema.Results Survey responses were received from 25 physicians and 57 oncology nurses. Administration of trastuzumab or an anthracycline was associated with a higher likelihood of a cvad being recommended. Other factors associated with recommendation of a cvad included prior difficult IV access and a recommendation from the chemotherapy nurse. Although the complication rates perceived to be associated with the use of piccs and ports remained high, respondents felt that cvads might improve patient quality of life. Risk factors perceived to be associated with the risk of lymphedema were axillary lymph node dissection, radiation to the axilla, and line-associated infection. Factors known to be unrelated to lymphedema risk (specifically, blood draws and blood pressure measurement) continue to be perceived as posing a higher risk.Conclusions Despite widespread use of chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer, the type of venous access used for treatment varies significantly, as do perceptions about the risks of cvad use and the risk for lymphedema development. Further prospective studies are needed to identify best-practice strategies.


2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zeynep Erdogan Iyigun ◽  
Tomris Duymaz ◽  
Ahmet Serkan Ilgun ◽  
Gul Alco ◽  
Cetin Ordu ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (12) ◽  
pp. 3880-3890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chirag Shah ◽  
Rahul Tendulkar ◽  
Timothy Smile ◽  
Anish Nanavati ◽  
Bindu Manyam ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 263-263
Author(s):  
Melanie Powis ◽  
Alejandro Gonzalez ◽  
Rinku Sutradhar ◽  
Katherine Enright ◽  
Nathan Taback ◽  
...  

263 Background: Setting realistic targets for performance on quality indicators (QI) is a consistent challenge in quality improvement. The purpose of this study was to utilize administrative data to define achievable targets for QI in the early stage breast cancer (EBC) population in relation to systemic therapy (ST) delivery based on best performers. Methods: Deterministically linked administrative healthcare databases were used to identify EBC cases diagnosed 2006 – 2010 in Ontario, Canada. Panel of previously established QIs for systemic therapy was applied to patients who met eligibility criteria for the individual indicators. Institutions with less than 10 eligible patients for a specific indicator were excluded. An empiric benchmark was defined as the proportion of patients meeting the indicator from institutions accounting for the top decile of eligible patients. Results: We identified 28,303 EBC patients who received surgery of which 12,252 received adjuvant chemotherapy. Benchmark results are summarized in Table. Conclusions: Many institutions fell considerably below the benchmark. Further analysis of institution-level drivers of high quality care is required to help characterize high performing institutions. [Table: see text]


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6593-6593
Author(s):  
Santosh Gautam ◽  
Robert Paul Zimmerman ◽  
David Joseph Debono ◽  
John Barron ◽  
Gosia Sylwestrzak

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document