Search

Young adults (YAs), defined as individuals between the ages of 18 and 39 years, experience unique challenges when diagnosed with advanced cancer. Using the social constructivist grounded theory approach, we aimed to develop a theoretical understanding of how YAs live day to day with their diagnosis. A sample of 25 YAs (aged 22–39 years) with advanced cancer from across Canada participated in semi-structured interviews. Findings illustrate that the YAs described day-to-day life as an oscillating experience swinging between two opposing disease outcomes: (1) hoping for a cure and (2) facing the possibility of premature death. Oscillating between these potential outcomes was characterized as living in a liminal space wherein participants were unsure how to live from one day to the next. The participants oscillated at various rates, with different factors influencing the rate of oscillation, including inconsistent and poor messaging from their oncologists or treatment team, progression or regression of their cancer, and changes in their physical functioning and mental health. These findings provide a theoretical framework for designing interventions to help YAs adapt to their circumstance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to Canada's opioid crisis, national strategies and guidelines have been developed but primarily focus on opioid use for chronic noncancer pain. Despite the well-established utility of opioids in cancer care, and the growing emphasis on early palliative care, little attention has been paid to opioid risk in this population, where evidence increasingly shows a higher risk of opioid-related harms than was previously thought. The primary objective of this study was to assess oncology clinicians' attitudes, confidence, and practices in managing opioids in outpatients with cancer. This was explored using pilot-tested, profession-specific surveys for physicians/nurse practitioners, nurses and pharmacists. Descriptive analyses were conducted in aggregate and separately based on discipline. Univariate and multiple linear regression analyses were performed to explore relationships between confidence and practices within and across disciplines. The survey was distributed to approximately 400 clinicians in January 2019. Sixty-five responses (27 physicians/nurse practitioners, 31 nurses, 7 pharmacists) were received. Participants endorsed low confidence, differing attitudes, and limited and varied practice in managing and mitigating opioid risks in the cancer population. This study provides valuable insights into knowledge gaps and clinical practices of oncology healthcare professionals in managing opioids and mitigating associated risks for patients with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Assessing quality of life is essential for individuals with advanced cancer, but lengthy assessments can be burdensome. The authors investigated the psychometric characteristics of the FACT-G7, a 7-item quality-of-life measure derived from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale, in advanced cancer.Methods: Data were obtained from outpatients with advanced cancer who were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of early palliative care. At baseline, 228 intervention participants and 233 control participants (N = 461) completed the FACT-G and measures of symptom severity, quality of life near the end of life, problematic medical communication, and satisfaction with care. Follow-up measures were administered monthly for 4 months.Results: The FACT-G7 showed good internal consistency (Cronbach α = .72-.80), and its single-factor structure was supported. It correlated strongly with the FACT-G total, physical, and functional indices and with symptom severity (absolute r = 0.73-0.92); more moderately with the FACT-G emotional index and with symptom impact and preparation for the end of life (r = .40-.71); and least with the FACT-G social/family index and with relationship with health care provider, life completion, problematic medical communication, and care satisfaction measures (absolute r = .26-.44). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status groups differed on FACT-G7 scores, as expected (all P < .001). Improvements in FACT-G7 scores in the intervention group compared with the control group at 3-month (P = .049) and 4-month (P = .034) follow-up supported responsiveness to change and somewhat greater sensitivity than the FACT-G scores.Conclusions: The FACT-G7 is a valid, brief measure particularly of the physical and functional facets of quality of life. It may enable rapid quality-of-life assessments in patients with advanced cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence supporting early palliative care is based on trials of specialised palliative care, but a more sustainable model might involve mainly primary providers. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics of physicians providing primary and specialised palliative care, their attitudes towards early palliative care and their perception of having sufficient resources for its provision. Design: Survey distributed by mail and e-mail. Specialised providers were defined as both receiving palliative care referrals from other physicians and not providing palliative care only for their own patients. Setting/participants: A total of 531 physicians providing palliative care in Canada (71% participation) participated in the study. Results: Of the participants, 257 (48.4%) provided specialised and 274 (51.6%) primary care. Specialists were more likely to have palliative care training (71.8% vs 35.2%), work in urban areas (94.1% vs 75.6%), academic centres (47.8% vs 26.0%) and on teams (82.4% vs 16.8%), and to provide mainly cancer care (84.4% vs 65.1%) (all p < 0.001). Despite strongly favouring early palliative care, only half in each group agreed they had resources to deliver it; agreement was stronger among family physicians, those working on teams and those with greater availability of community and psychosocial support. Primary providers were more likely to agree that renaming the specialty 'supportive care' would increase patient comfort with early palliative care referral (47.4% vs 35.5%, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Despite strongly favouring the concept, both specialists and primary providers lack resources to deliver early palliative care; its provision may be facilitated by team-based care with appropriate support. Opinions differ regarding the value of renaming palliative care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Early palliative care (EPC) is widely recommended but its implementation may be challenging., Objectives: We conducted a qualitative analysis of Canadian palliative care physicians' opinions about conditions necessary to provide EPC., Methods: A survey assessing attitudes and opinions regarding EPC was distributed to physicians providing primary or specialized palliative care, as identified by the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians. The survey included an optional final section for respondents' general comments; we screened these for relevance to our study aims and conducted a thematic analysis of relevant comments., Results: Of 531 completed surveys, 129 (24%) respondents provided written comments, of whom 104 mentioned conditions they felt to be necessary to provide EPC. Four key themes were identified: 1) Clear delineation of roles of primary and specialized palliative care physicians-all physicians should be empowered to provide primary palliative care, with specialists providing additional support; 2) Shared care with needs-dependent referral-primary and specialized palliative care physicians should work collaboratively, with referral to specialized palliative care based on need rather than on prognosis; 3) Adequate resources to support primary palliative care-education, financial incentives, and collaboration with interdisciplinary team members such as nurses and specialized providers were specifically mentioned; 4) Addressing the misconception that palliative care equals end-of-life care-there was particular emphasis on education of both healthcare providers and the public., Conclusion: Changes are necessary at the level of palliative care referral systems, providers, resources, and policy to enable implementation of EPC., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) is legal in an increasing number of countries, but there are concerns that its availability may compromise access to palliative care. We assessed public interest in MAiD, palliative care, both, or neither, and examined characteristics associated with this interest., Methods: We surveyed a representative sample of the adult Canadian public, accessed through a panel from May to June 2019. Weighted generalised multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to determine characteristics associated with interest in referral to palliative care, MAiD, or both, in the event of diagnosis with a serious illness., Results: Of 1362 participants who had heard of palliative care, 611 (44.8% weighted (95% CI 42.1% to 47.5%)) would be interested in both MAiD and palliative care, 322 (23.9% (95% CI 21.5% to 26.2%)) palliative care alone, 171 (12.3% (95% CI 10.5% to 14.1%)) MAiD alone and 258 (19.0% (95% CI 16.9% to 21.2%)) neither. In weighted multinomial logistic regression analyses, interest in both MAiD and palliative care (compared with neither) was associated with better knowledge of the definition of palliative care, older age, female gender, higher education and less religiosity; interest in palliative care alone was associated with better knowledge of the definition of palliative care, older age, female gender and being married/common law; interest in MAiD alone was associated with less religiosity (all p<0.05)., Conclusions: There is substantial public interest in potential referral to both MAiD and palliative care. Simultaneous availability of palliative care should be ensured in jurisdictions where MAiD is legal, and education about palliative care should be a public health priority., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Patients with advanced cancer are increasingly discharged from inpatient settings following focused symptom management admissions. Thromboprophylaxis (TP) is recommended for patients with cancer admitted to acute care settings; less is known about TP use in palliative care (PC) settings. This study explored the opinions of Canadian medical oncologists (MO) and PC physicians regarding the use of TP for inpatients with advanced cancer., Methods: A fractional factorial survey designed to evaluate the impact of patient factors (age, clinical setting, reason for admission, pre-admission performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; ECOG), and risk of bleeding on anticoagulation) and physician demographics on recommending TP was administered by email to Canadian MO and PC physicians. Each respondent received eight vignettes randomly selected from a set of 32. Hierarchical regression was used to evaluate the odds of prescribing TP adjusted for patient factors., Results: 606 MO and 491 PC physicians were surveyed; response rates were 11.1% and 15.0%, respectively. MO were predominantly male (59.7%); PC female (60.3%); most worked in academic environments (90.3% MO; 73.9% PC). Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression demonstrated that all patient factors except age were associated with prescribing TP (ORs range: from 1.34 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.77) for good ECOG, to 2.53 (95% CI 1.9 to 3.37), for reversible reason for admission). Controlling for these factors, medical specialty was independently associated with recommending TP (OR for MO 2.09 (95% CI 1.56 to 2.8))., Conclusions: MO have higher odds of recommending TP for inpatients with advanced cancer than PC physicians. Further research exploring the drivers of these differing practices is warranted., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

COVID-19 was first reported in Wuhan, China, in December 2019; it rapidly spread around the world and was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020. The palliative care program at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada, provides comprehensive care to patients with advanced cancer and their families, through services including an acute palliative care unit, an inpatient consultation service, and an ambulatory palliative care clinic. In the face of a global pandemic, palliative care teams are uniquely placed to support patients with cancer who also have COVID-19. This may include managing severe symptoms such as dyspnea and agitation, as well as guiding advance care planning and goals of care conversations. In tandem, there is a need for palliative care teams to continue to provide care to patients with advanced cancer who are COVID-negative but who are at higher risk of infection and adverse outcomes related to COVID-19. This paper highlights the unique challenges faced by a palliative care team in terms of scaling up services in response to a global pandemic while simultaneously providing ongoing support to their patients with advanced cancer at a tertiary cancer center.