Search

Purpose: Guidelines recommend a structured symptom screening (SC) for especially advanced cancer patients (CPs). The aim of this multicenter German prospective quality assurance project KeSBa (Kennzahl Symptom- und Belastungserfassung) was to gain knowledge on SC procedures in Oncology Centers (OCs) for advanced cancer patients and a first impression on the consequences of SC. Methods: The KeSBa project consisted of three phases: pilot, 3 months screening and feedback phase. Participating OCs decided to use either the Minimal Documentation System (MIDOS) or the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) and defined the cutoff values for positive screening results. Results: Out of 172 certified German OCs, 40 (23%) participated in the KeSBa pilot phase, 29 (16.8%) in the 3 months screening phase using MIDOS (n = 18, 58.6%) or IPOS (n = 11, 41.3%) and in the feedback round. 25/29 performed paper-based screening (86.2%). 2.963 CPs were screened. Results were documented for 1255 (42.2%, SC +) positive and 874 (29.5%, SC–) negative screenings depending on the center´s schedules: 452 SC + CPs (28.4%) and 42 SC– CPs (2.6%) had contact to specialized palliative care or other supportive specialist teams afterwards, 458 SC + CPs (28.8%) and 605 SC– CPs (38.1%) remained in standard oncology care. In the feedback round missing resources (personal and IT) and improved communication were mentioned most often. Conclusion: Routine SC is feasible in advanced CPs treated in OCs but associated with considerable workload. In 42.2% of CPs SC was classified as positive, indicating the need of further diagnostics or professional judgment. SC requires staff and IT resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aims: The aim of this study is to investigate the acceptance and benefits of two different strategies to timely integrate specialist palliative care (SPC) in routine cancer care: commonly recommended early SPC counselling versus an informational brochure plus SPC counselling upon patients' request. Methods: Patients diagnosed with incurable cancer within the last 6–12 weeks were sequentially randomized. Endpoints were acceptance of the two strategies after 3 months as well as the use of SPC counselling and psychosocial support, presence of advance directives, palliative care outcome (Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale [IPOS]), and psychosocial distress (Distress Thermometer [DT]) after 3 and 6 months. In a qualitative part, SPC consultations were analyzed using a content analysis. Results: Overall, 43 patients received SPC counselling and 37 a brochure with SPC counselling on demand. In the brochure group, only one patient later registered for SPC counselling from own initiative. SPC timing was appropriate in 70% of patients (75% counselling/61% brochure, n.s.). Sufficiency, helpfulness and relevance of information, provision of security, and help with finding contacts for specific support were perceived adequate in both groups. No significant differences were found regarding potential effects of the interventions on IPOS or DT after 3 and 6 months. The use of psychosocial support was comparable between the groups and 4 patients had new advance directives (3 counselling/1 brochure). Five key themes of SPC consultations were identified: symptoms, rapport, coping, illness understanding, and advance care planning. Conclusions: Both SPC integration strategies were well accepted. However, patients seem not to benefit from a brochure in terms of initiating SPC counselling timely after a palliative cancer diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) on palliative therapy usually have a bad prognosis and suffer from various symptoms. With increasing use of targeted agents in cancer patients at the end of life, the correct assignment of therapy-related symptoms becomes increasingly difficult as cancer-related symptoms usually increase as well. Case Report: We report on 2 cases of patients with SCCHN who received multimodal treatment including palliative therapy with cetuximab. Both patients developed severe thoracic and cervicothoracic pain following treatment. In both cases, extensive paraspinal abscess formation proved to be the underlying cause. One patient was treated conservatively; the other one had to undergo surgical intervention. Conclusions: Awareness of multifaceted therapy-related complications is mandatory when patients receive multimodal treatment including targeted therapies. Unexplained pain syndromes in this context should raise suspicions concerning possible infectious complications and should lead to early use of magnetic resonance imaging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]