Palliative care needs of cancer outpatients receiving chemotherapy: an audit of a clinical screening project

Morita, Tatsuya; Fujimoto, Koji; Namba, Miki; Sasaki, Naoki; Ito, Tomoko; Yamada, Chika; Ohba, Arisa; Hiroyoshi, Motoki; Niwa, Hiroshi; Yamada, Takeshi; Noda, Tsuneo

doi:10.1007/s00520-007-0271-6

Cited by 50 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(45 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other PC screening tools have been developed, 4,[11][12][13] including the tool from which this one was adapted, 4 but few have undergone validation or other kinds of evaluation. An exception is the NEST (Needs of a Social Nature, Existential Concerns, Symptoms, and Therapeutic Interaction) 13ϩ tool.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a Simple Screening Tool for Identifying Unmet Palliative Care Needs in Patients With Cancer

Glare

Chow

2015

JOP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a Simple Screening Tool for Identifying Unmet Palliative Care Needs in Patients With Cancer

Glare

Chow

2015

JOP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…12 Identifying which patients with advanced cancer need palliative care specialists in a timely fashion therefore is crucial to the development of sustainable programs and improved patient care. 29,30 Our data add to prior research regarding the benefit of concurrent outpatient palliative care. Patients enrolled in Year 1 of the CARE Track intervention who were referred to outpatient palliative care services at the discretion of their oncologists had benefits similar to those in the study by Temel et al 7 in terms decreased hospitalization at the end of life, and increased hospice utilization and length of stay, despite being referred an average of 3-4 months prior to death.…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 55%

CARE Track for Advanced Cancer: Impact and Timing of an Outpatient Palliative Care Clinic

Blackhall

Read

Stukenborg

et al. 2016

Journal of Palliative Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Studies suggest that outpatient palliative care can reduce hospitalization and increase hospice utilization for patients with cancer, however there are insufficient resources to provide palliative care to all patients from time of diagnosis. It is also unclear whether inpatient consultation alone provides similar benefits. A better understanding of the timing, setting, and impact of palliative care for patients with cancer is needed. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to measure timing of referral to outpatient palliative care and impact on end-of-life (EOL) care. Design: The Comprehensive Assessment with Rapid Evaluation and Treatment (CARE Track) program is a phased intervention integrating outpatient palliative care into cancer care. In Year 1 patients were referred at the discretion of their oncologist. Setting: Academic medical center. Measurements: We compared EOL hospitalization, hospice utilization, and costs of care for CARE Track patients compared to those never seen by palliative care or seen only in hospital. Results: Patients were referred a median of 72.5 days prior to death. CARE Track patients had few hospitalizations at end of life, were less likely to die in hospital, had increased hospice utilization, and decreased costs of care; these results were significant even after controlling for differences between groups. Inpatient consultation alone did not impact these variables. However, only approximately half of patients with incurable cancers were referred to this program. Conclusion: Referral outpatient palliative care within 3 months of death improved EOL care and reduced costs, benefits not seen with inpatient care only. However, many patients were never referred, and methods of systematically identifying appropriate patients are needed.

show abstract

“…First of all, the order of the questions was changed. As in other studies (Dabrowski et al, 2007;Morita et al, 2008) the DT was placed after the QoL questionnaires, because patients considered it easier to summarize their global level of distress after reflecting on the specific domains of QoL. Second, the original plan to include mandatory fields in the online assessment was abandoned.…”

Section: Modification Of the Monitor Designmentioning

confidence: 98%

Routine Monitoring of Quality of Life for Patients with Breast Cancer: An Acceptability and Field Test

Fischer

Krol-Warmerdam

Ranke

et al. 2012

Journal of Psychosocial Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As part of the development of a quality of life monitor for women with breast cancer, a qualitative acceptability test was conducted among 10 patients, to assess their suggestions for improvement. Next, a field test was conducted among 50 women with breast cancer receiving radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or both treatments to examine the use of the monitor in daily practice and to assess physicians' and patients' experiences with the monitor. Although patients in general held a positive attitude toward the monitor and compliance was high, patients regularly were unsure about how the quality of life information was used by physicians.

show abstract

Palliative care needs of cancer outpatients receiving chemotherapy: an audit of a clinical screening project

Cited by 50 publications

References 40 publications

Validation of a Simple Screening Tool for Identifying Unmet Palliative Care Needs in Patients With Cancer

Validation of a Simple Screening Tool for Identifying Unmet Palliative Care Needs in Patients With Cancer

CARE Track for Advanced Cancer: Impact and Timing of an Outpatient Palliative Care Clinic

Routine Monitoring of Quality of Life for Patients with Breast Cancer: An Acceptability and Field Test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About