Search

Young adult (YA) aged cancer patients have unique psychosocial needs with studies indicating more symptoms and emotional distress compared to older patients. Our study aimed to compare clinical characteristics and symptom distress between YAs and older adults. We retrospectively studied 896 randomly selected patients across 3 age groups: 18–39 YAs (n = 297), 40–64 (n = 300), and 65 and older (n = 299). We compared medical, psychosocial history, Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose (MEDD), Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) scores, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores at the time of initial inpatient consultation with supportive care. YAs were more frequently female and white, with higher ECOG scores, had more self-reported psychiatric history and worse ESAS sleep scores compared to the other age cohort groups. YAs had higher pain expression than those of 65 years and older. YAs were more likely to have children younger than 18 years old, which was associated with worse pain, sleep, and financial distress. In general, YAs did not report higher symptoms distress, with the exception of insomnia and self-reported psychiatric history. Importantly, YAs with children was associated with higher ratings of pain, sleep difficulties, and financial distress. Overall, results suggest YAs may benefit from specialized services to address their unique psychosocial needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with cancer-related pain use opioids for nociceptive pain, while gabapentinoids are common to treat neuropathic pain. The simultaneous use of opioids with gabapentinoids has been associated with an increased risk of opioid-related death. Objectives: Determine the frequency of combined use of gabapentinoids among patients receiving opioids for cancer-related pain. We also examined if concomitant use of opioids and gabapentinoids together was associated with increased scores of fatigue and drowsiness on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) compared to patients on opioids. Design: Retrospective study of patients on opioids and opioids plus gabapentinoids at their third visit to the outpatient Supportive Care Center. Results: We found that 48% (508/1059) of patients were on opioids. Of these patients, 51% (257/508) were on opioids only, and 49% (251/508) were on opioids plus gabapentinoids. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) morphine equivalent daily dose for patients on opioids was 75 (45, 138) mg, and opioids plus gabapentinoids was 68 (38, 150) mg (p = 0.94). The median (IQR) gabapentinoid equivalent daily dose was 900 (300, 1200) mg. The median (IQR) for ESAS-fatigue in patients on opioids was 5 (3, 7), and opioids plus gabapentinoids was 5 (3, 7) (p = 0.27). The median (IQR) for ESAS-drowsiness in patients on opioids was 3 (0, 5), and opioids plus gabapentinoids was 3 (0, 6) (p = 0.11). Conclusion: Almost 50% of advanced cancer patients receiving opioids for pain were exposed to gabapentinoids. Maximal efforts should be made to minimize potential complications from the concomitant use of opioids with gabapentinoids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Increasing the total opioid dose is the standard approach for managing uncontrolled cancer pain. Other than simply increasing the opioid dose, palliative care interventions are multidimensional and may improve pain control in the absence of opioid dose increase. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of patients referred to our inpatient palliative care (IPC) team who achieved clinically improved pain (CIP) without opioid dose increase. Design: We reviewed consecutive patients referred to our IPC team. Setting/Subjects: Eligibility criteria included (1) taking opioid medication; (2) having ≥2 consecutive visits with the IPC team; and (3) an Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) pain score ≥4 at consultation. Measurements: We assessed patient demographics and clinical variables, including cancer type, opioid prescription data (type, route, and oral morphine equivalent daily dose [MEDD]), presence of opioid rotation, psychological consultation, changes in adjuvant medications (e.g., corticosteroids; antiepileptics—gabapentin and pregabalin; benzodiazepines; and neuroleptics), and achievement of CIP. Results: Of the 300 patients enrolled, CIP was achieved in 196 (65%) patients. Of CIP patients, 85 (43%) achieved CIP without an increase in MEDD. CIP without MEDD increase was associated with more adjuvant medication changes (p = 0.003), less opioid rotation (p = 0.005), and lower symptom distress scale of ESAS (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Nearly half of the patients achieved CIP without MEDD increase, suggesting that the multidimensional palliative care intervention is effective in improving pain control in many opioid-tolerant patients without the need to increase the opioid dose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Palliative care encompasses an interdisciplinary team, including mental health care professionals, to address psychological distress of cancer patients.Objectives: To present the implementation of an outreach counseling program via videoconferencing or telephone to patients receiving care in an outpatient palliative care clinic and to compare patients using this service to those who only received psychological counseling in our outpatient clinic.Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of cancer patients seen for psychology counseling services in an outpatient supportive care center between June 2015 and March 2017.Results: We reviewed 2072 unique patients (52% of the total patients seen at the outpatient Supportive Care Center), who had 4567 total counseling encounters across outreach and outpatient settings. A total of 452 (22%) patients participated in a combination of outpatient and outreach counseling services. Patients who participated in outreach services had significantly more encounters (311 [69%] had two to five sessions) compared with those who had outpatient services only (1137 [70%] had one session only) (P < .001). Outreach patients also had shorter times between the initial and follow-up encounters (median 14 days) compared with those who had outpatient services only (median 30 days) (P < .0001).Conclusions: Outreach telehealth counseling services was found to enhance palliative care patient access to psychological counseling. These services represent an additional modality for providing continuous psychological care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The oldest old, described as those aged 85 and older, is a growing cancer population. There are limited studies evaluating the symptoms of the oldest old cancer patient population. Our study aimed to evaluate symptom frequency and clinical symptom change as assessed by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) of the oldest old (≥ 85) compared to older adult (65-84) and general adult (18-64) outpatient cancer patients on initial consult and follow-up visit.Methods: Retrospective review of a total of 441 patients, 200 randomly sampled patients in the general and older adult group and 41 consecutive patients in the oldest old group. Chart review was performed for demographic and clinical information including ESAS.Results: The oldest old group had less advanced tumors and worse performance status and was receiving less cancer therapy. Eighty percent or more of these patients reported fatigue, sleep disturbance, appetite, and drowsiness. They experienced lower frequencies of pain (p < 0.0001), fatigue (p = 0.0338), nausea (p = 0.0151), feeling of well-being (p = 0.0245), sleep disturbance (p = 0.0484), financial distress (p = 0.0002), and spiritual distress (p = 0.0010) compared to the younger groups. Twenty-six to fifty-one percent of the oldest old patients' symptoms improved on the first follow-up visit.Conclusions: Oldest old cancer patients have high frequencies of multiple symptoms on initial referral. However, these symptom frequencies are lower when compared to younger age groups. Additionally, many of their symptoms improved on first follow-up visit in the palliative care clinic. More research is needed to address the needs of this growing cancer population and focus symptoms that can improve with palliative care intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Delirium is the most common neuropsychiatric condition in very ill patients and those at the end of life. Previous case reports found that delirium-induced disinhibition may lead to overexpression of symptoms. It negatively affects communication between patients, family members, and the medical team and can sometimes lead to inappropriate interventions. Better understanding would result in improved care. Our aim was to determine the effect of delirium on the reporting of symptom severity in patients with advanced cancer. Methods: We reviewed 329 consecutive patients admitted to the acute palliative care unit (APCU) without a diagnosis of delirium from January to December 2011. Demographics, Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance status, and Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) on two time points were collected. The first time point was on admission and the second time point for group A was day one (+two days) of delirium. For group B, the second time point was within two to four days before discharge from the APCU. Patients who developed delirium and those who did not develop delirium during the entire course of admission were compared using chi-squared test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Paired t-test was used to assess if the change of ESAS from baseline to follow-up was associated with delirium. Results: Ninety-six of 329 (29%) patients developed delirium during their admission to the APCU. The median time to delirium was two days. There was no difference in the length of stay in the APCU for both groups. Patients who did not have delirium expressed improvement in all their symptoms, while those who developed delirium during hospitalization showed no improvement in physical symptoms and worsening in depression, anxiety, appetite, and well-being. Conclusion: Patients with delirium reported no improvement or worsening symptoms compared to patients without delirium. Screening for delirium is important in patients who continue to report worsening symptoms despite appropriate management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Delirium is one of the most common neuropsychiatric complications in advanced cancer patients with a frequency of up to 85 % before death. It is associated with adverse clinical outcomes such as increased morbidity and mortality as well as significant family and patient distress. The aim of our study is to determine at the frequency of missed delirium (MD) and identify factors associated with MD. Methods: Seven hundred seventy-one consecutive palliative care inpatient consults from August 1, 2009 to January 31, 2010 were reviewed. Demographics, Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), primary referral symptom, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG), and physician diagnosis of delirium were collected along with delirium etiology, subtype, and reversibility. Delirium was diagnosed with a MDAS score of ≥7 or by a palliative medicine specialist using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition Text Revision (DSM-IV TR) Criteria. MD was reported in those patients found to have delirium by the palliative medicine specialists but were referred by the primary team for other reasons besides delirium. Chi-squared test and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test were used to examine the difference on measurements among or between different groups. Univariate logistic regression model was applied to assess for associations for MD. Results: Two hundred fifty-two (33 %) had a diagnosis of delirium by the palliative medicine specialist. One hundred fifty-three (61 %) were missed by the primary referring team. Females comprised 53 % ( n = 81), white 62 % ( n = 95), and pain was the most common referral symptom ( n = 77, 50 %). Hypoactive delirium was the most common subtype of delirium in MD ( n = 47, 63 %). Opioid-related delirium was the most common etiology of MD ( n = 47, 31 %). Patients referred for pain were more likely to have MD (odds ratio (OR) = 2.57, p = 0.0109). Of the 82 patients with delirium that was reversed, 67 % ( n = 55) had a diagnosis of MD. Conclusion: Sixty-one percent of patients with a diagnosis of delirium by a palliative care specialist were missed by the primary referring team. Patients with MD were frequently referred for pain. Universal screening of cancer patients for delirium is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The role of neuroleptics for terminal agitated delirium is controversial. We assessed the effect of three neuroleptic strategies on refractory agitation in patients with cancer with terminal delirium.Methods: In this single-centre, double-blind, parallel-group, randomised trial, patients with advanced cancer, aged at least 18 years, admitted to the palliative and supportive care unit at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA), with refractory agitation, despite low-dose haloperidol, were randomly assigned to receive intravenous haloperidol dose escalation at 2 mg every 4 h, neuroleptic rotation with chlorpromazine at 25 mg every 4 h, or combined haloperidol at 1 mg and chlorpromazine at 12·5 mg every 4 h, until death or discharge. Rescue doses identical to the scheduled doses were administered at inception, and then hourly as needed. Permuted block randomisation (block size six; 1:1:1) was done, stratified by baseline Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) scores. Research staff, clinicians, patients, and caregivers were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was change in RASS score from time 0 to 24 h. Comparisons among group were done by modified intention-to-treat analysis. This completed study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03021486.Findings: Between July 5, 2017, and July 1, 2019, 998 patients were screened for eligibility, with 68 being enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment; 45 received the masked study interventions (escalation n=15, rotation n=16, combination n=14). RASS score decreased significantly within 30 min and remained low at 24 h in the escalation group (n=10, mean RASS score change between 0 h and 24 h -3·6 [95% CI -5·0 to -2·2]), rotation group (n=11, -3·3 [-4·4 to -2·2]), and combination group (n=10, -3·0 [-4·6 to -1·4]), with no difference among groups (p=0·71). The most common serious toxicity was hypotension (escalation n=6 [40%], rotation n=5 [31%], combination n=3 [21%]); there were no treatment-related deaths.Interpretation: Our data provide preliminary evidence that the three strategies of neuroleptics might reduce agitation in patients with terminal agitation. These findings are in the context of the single-centre design, small sample size, and lack of a placebo-only group.Funding: National Institute of Nursing Research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: An understanding of opioid prescription and cost patterns is important to optimize pain management for patients with advanced cancer. This study aimed to determine opioid prescription and cost patterns and to identify opioid prescription predictors in patients with advanced cancer who received inpatient palliative care (IPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed data from 807 consecutive patients with cancer who received IPC in each October from 2008 through 2014. Patient characteristics; opioid types; morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) in milligrams per day of scheduled opioids before, during, and after hospitalization; and in-admission opioid cost per patient were assessed. We determined symptom changes between baseline and follow-up palliative care visits and the in-admission opioid prescription predictors. RESULTS: A total of 714 (88%) of the 807 patients were evaluable. The median MEDD per patient decreased from 150 mg/d in 2008 to 83 mg/d in 2014 (P <.001). The median opioid cost per patient decreased and then increased from $22.97 to $40.35 over the 7 years (P =.03). The median MEDDs increased from IPC to discharge by 67% (P <.001). The median Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale pain improvement at follow-up was 1 (P <.001). Younger patients with advanced cancer (odds ratio [OR[, 0.95; P <. 001) were prescribed higher preadmission MEDDs (OR, 1.01; P <.001) more often in the earlier study years (2014 v 2009: OR, 0.18 [ P =.004] v 0.30 [ P =.02]) and tended to use high MEDDs (> 75 mg/d) during hospitalization. CONCLUSION: The MEDD per person decreased from 2008 to 2014. The opioid cost per patient decreased from 2008 to 2011 and then increased from 2012 to 2014. Age, prescription year, and preadmission opioid doses were significantly associated with opioid doses prescribed to patients with advanced cancer who received IPC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Psychologists can provide unique contributions to interdisciplinary palliative care. Despite research indicating high distress in palliative care cancer patients, little has been reported regarding the feasibility and practice of psychology in this setting.Objectives: To review the integration of clinical psychology practice in a palliative care department at a major comprehensive cancer center.Methods: Retrospective chart review of 1940 unique cancer patients (6451 total patient contacts) referred for psychology services provided by clinical psychologists in palliative care from September 1, 2013 to February 29, 2016.Results: Psychologists provided services to 1644 inpatients (24% of palliative care inpatients) and 296 outpatients (19% of palliative care outpatients). Most of them (85%) received services in the inpatient setting. Most patients were females (57%) and white (68%) with a variety of cancer diagnoses. Adjustment disorders were the most prevalent in both settings with significant differences in other Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th Edition) diagnoses by service location (P < 0.0001). Psychological assessment (86%) and supportive expressive counseling (79%) were the most frequent services provided in the initial consult. Duration of initial visit was significantly longer in outpatient (median 60 minutes) compared with inpatient setting (median 40 minutes) (P < 0.0001). No significant differences were noted between settings regarding the median number of counseling sessions per patient; however, most (70%) only received one or two sessions. Over time, total patient encounters increased in the inpatient setting (P < 0.0001), whereas session lengths in both settings significantly decreased (P < 0.0001).Conclusion: Palliative care psychology services successfully integrated into an interdisciplinary palliative care department and rapidly grew in both inpatient and outpatient settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: The lack of knowledge of the accurate conversion ratio (CR) between intravenous (IV) and oral hydromorphone and opioid rotation ratio (ORR) between IV hydromorphone and oral morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) may lead to poorly controlled pain or overdosing in cancer inpatients.Objectives: We aimed to determine the CR and ORR from IV hydromorphone to oral hydromorphone and MEDD (obtained from oral morphine and oxycodone).Methods: A total of 4745 consecutive inpatient palliative care consults during 2010-14 were reviewed for conversions from IV hydromorphone to oral hydromorphone, morphine or oxycodone. Patient characteristics, symptoms, and opioid doses were determined in patients successfully discharged on oral opioids without readmission within one week. Linear regression analysis was used to estimate the CR or ORR between the 24 hour IV hydromorphone mg dose before conversion and the oral opioid mg dose used before discharge.Results: Among 394 patients on IV hydromorphone, 147 underwent conversion to oral hydromorphone and 247 underwent rotation to oral morphine (163) or oxycodone (84). The median (interquartile range) CR from IV to PO hydromorphone was 2.5 (2.14-2.75) with correlation of 0.95 (P < 0.0001). The median ORR (interquartile range) from IV hydromorphone to MEDD was 11.46 (9.84-13.00) with correlation of 0.93(P < 0.0001). The median ORR was 11.54 in patients receiving <30 mg of IV hydromorphone/day and 9.86 in patients receiving ≥30 mg (P = 0.0004).Conclusion: Our study found that 1 mg of IV hydromorphone is equivalent to 2.5 mg of oral hydromorphone and 11.46 mg of MEDD. Hydromorphone at doses ≥30 mg/day may require a lower ORR to other opioids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Data on the use of question prompt sheets (QPSs) in palliative care are limited. Our team previously developed a single-page QPS using a Delphi process. The main objective of this study was to determine the perception of helpfulness of a QPS in patient-physician communication among advanced cancer outpatients.Methods: Hundred of 104 (96%) eligible patients and 68/68 (100%) caregivers received the QPS during their first palliative care clinic. Twelve palliative medicine specialists also participated in the study. Patient and physician perceptions about the QPS were assessed at the end of the visit. Patients' anxiety was also measured before and after consultation using the Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory.Results: Among the responders, most agreed that the material was helpful in communicating with their doctor (77%), clear to understand (90%), had the right amount of information (87%), and they would use a similar material in the future (76%) and recommend it to other patients (70%). Overall, 92% were satisfied with their consultation visit. Physicians perceived that the QPS was helpful in 68% of the encounters and it did not prolong the consultation in 73% of the encounters. Physician agreement on helpfulness of the QPS was not significantly different from that of the patients (P = 0.3). Patient anxiety improved after consultation from a mean (SD) Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory score of 39.2 (12.8) to 33.8 (10.7), P < 0.0001).Conclusion: The QPS was perceived as helpful in patient-physician communication among advanced cancer outpatients and it did not increase patient anxiety. Physicians similarly reported that the QPS was helpful and it did not prolong clinic visits. Further research is needed for its widespread adoption and integration into routine clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]