Perspectives of hematology oncology clinicians about integrating palliative care in oncology.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Booker R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7755435 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Perspectives of hematology oncology clinicians about integrating palliative care in oncology.
Booker R R Dunn S S Earp M A MA Sinnarajah A A Biondo P D PD Simon J E JE
Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) 20201201 6
Patients with hematologic malignancies receive palliative care (pc) less frequently and later than patients with solid tumours. We compared survey responses of hematology oncology clinicians with other oncology clinicians to better understand their challenges with providing primary pc or using secondary pc. Patients' negative perceptions of pc and limited time or competing priorities were challenges for all clinicians. Compared with other oncology clinicians, more hematology oncology clinicians ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Clinician education and expertise in palliative care varies widely across pediatric oncology programs. The purpose of this evidence-based practice review was to identify interprofessional palliative care education models applicable to pediatric oncology settings as well as methods for evaluating their impact on clinical practice. RESULTS:Based on a literature search in PubMed, CINAHL and Embase, which identified 13 articles meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria, the following three themes emerged: (1) establishment of effective modalities and teaching strategies, (2) development of an interprofessional palliative care curriculum, and (3) program evaluation to assess impact on providers' self-perceived comfort in delivering palliative care and patient/family perceptions of care received. Remarkably, health professionals reported receiving limited palliative care training, with little evidence of systematic evaluation of practice changes following training completion. Improving palliative care delivery was linked to the development and integration of an interprofessional palliative care curriculum. Suggested evaluation strategies included: (1) eliciting patient and family feedback, (2) standardizing care delivery measures, and (3) evaluating outcomes of care.
| S-EPMC6222984 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundDespite requirements for palliative care training during fellowship, there is a paucity of recent data regarding the attitudes, knowledge, and skills of hematology/ oncology fellows in palliative care.ObjectiveOur aim was to assess fellows' attitudes toward and quality of training in palliative care during fellowship and perceived preparedness to care for patients at the end of life (EOL).MethodsIn May 2013 a cross-sectional survey of hematology/oncology fellows was conducted.ResultsFellows from 93 of 138 fellowship programs responded (67.4%). Of the 347 fellows e-mailed, 176 participated. Nearly all fellows (99%) indicated that physicians have a responsibility to help patients at EOL. Fellows felt their overall training in fellowship was superior to training in EOL care (4.24±0.78 versus 3.53±0.99 on a 5-5 scale where 1=poor and 5=excellent, p<0.0001). Fellows who had a rotation in palliative care during fellowship (44.9%) reported better teaching on managing a patient at EOL than those who did not (3.91±1.0 versus 3.21±0.87, p<0.0001). Fellows reporting better teaching in EOL care felt better prepared to care for patients at EOL (r=0.52, p<0.0001). More than 25% reported not being explicitly taught how to assess prognosis, when to refer a patient to hospice, or how to conduct a family meeting to discuss treatment options.ConclusionMany recent oncology fellows are still inadequately prepared to provide palliative care to their patients. There is significant room for improvement with regards to the quality of palliative care training in U.S. hematology/oncology fellowship programs.
| S-EPMC4696424 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveMany children receiving chemotherapy struggle with therapy-induced side effects. To date, there has been no literature investigating the needs, knowledge, or implementation of osteopathic manipulative treatments (OMT) as a supportive care option in pediatric oncology. We hypothesized that pediatric oncology clinicians, caregivers, and patients have (a) limited knowledge of OMT and (b) dissatisfaction with current supportive care options and (c) would be interested in having OMT available during chemotherapy, once educated.MethodsParticipants included three cohorts: (1) children aged ≥ 9 years, diagnosed with cancer and actively receiving chemotherapy; (2) their caregivers; and (3) oncology clinicians at Nationwide Children's Hospital. Participants completed 1:1 semi-structured interviews, which were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for thematic content regarding their perception of supportive care measures and views on OMT. Quantitative data was summarized descriptively.ResultsA total of 60 participants completed the interview. Participants demonstrated limited awareness of osteopathic medicine; no participant had more than "some" knowledge of OMT. After education about OMT using a brief video, all clinicians, caregivers, and 95% of patients were receptive to OMT as a supportive care option. Major themes included the following: (a) patients have uncontrolled chemotherapy side effects, (b) improved supportive care options are desired, and (c) osteopathic medicine is a favorable supportive care adjunct.ConclusionsPediatric oncology clinicians, caregivers, and patients reported a need for better management of chemotherapy-associated side effects and an interest in utilizing OMT. These findings support further investigation into the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of implementing OMT in the pediatric oncology clinical setting.
| S-EPMC7767897 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Palliative care (PC) is increasingly recognized as essential for oncology care, and several academic societies strongly recommend integrating oncology and palliative care (IOP) in daily practice. Similarly, the Japanese government encouraged the implementation of IOP through the Cancer Control Act of 2007; however, its detailed progress remains unclear. Therefore, this cross-sectional nationwide survey was conducted to investigate the current status and hospital executive physicians' perception of IOP. METHODS:The questionnaire was developed based on IOP indicators with international consensus. It was distributed to executive physicians at all government-designated cancer hospitals (DCHs, n = 399) and matched non-DCHs (n = 478) in November 2017 and the results were compared. RESULTS:In total, 269 (67.4%) DCHs and 259 (54.2%) non-DCHs responded. The number of PC resources in DCHs was significantly higher than those in non-DCHs (e.g., full-time PC physicians and nurses, 52.8% vs. 14.0%, p < 0.001; availability of outpatient PC service ≥3 days per week, 47.6% vs. 20.7%, p < 0.001). Routine symptom screening was more frequently performed in DCHs than in non-DCHs (65.1% vs. 34.7%, p < 0.001). Automatic trigger for PC referral availability was limited (e.g., referral using time trigger, 14.9% vs. 15.3%, p = 0.700). Education and research opportunities were seriously limited in both types of hospitals. Most executive physicians regarded IOP as beneficial for their patients (95.9% vs. 94.7%, p = 0.163) and were willing to facilitate an early referral to PC services (54.7% vs. 60.0%, p < 0.569); however, the majority faced challenges to increase the number of full-time PC staff, and < 30% were planning to increase the staff members. CONCLUSIONS:This survey highlighted a considerable number of IOP indicators met, particularly in DCHs probably due to the government policy. Further efforts are needed to address the serious research/educational gaps.
| S-EPMC6982384 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose:Challenges experienced by staff in the Oncology Services Group at Queensland Children's Hospital led to issues with staff retention, well-being, and stress on team culture. Therefore, a customized program was developed through a needs analysis to improve the well-being and resilience of oncology staff, enabling them to cope with stressors and critical incidents inherent in their everyday work and to flourish. The program included education, on-site counselors, mindfulness sessions, debriefing, well-being resources, and improved engagement, support, and communication. Methods:Evaluation of the program in the first year examined program participation, staff feedback following education workshops and mindfulness sessions, staff retention rates, and the results of an annual organizational staff survey and a program outcome survey. Results:Approximately 76% of staff attended the Introduction to Well-being workshop, and 98% of responses to survey questions were positive. Staff also provided positive feedback on the other well-being workshops and sessions embedded within existing education programs. Employee Assistance Program counseling sessions had an 81% uptake, with a wide variety of presenting issues, 62% related to work. All participants in mindfulness sessions agreed that it was a valuable tool to improve clinical practice, 94% said it had an immediate positive impact on their well-being, and 70% agreed that they were applying mindfulness principles outside the sessions. Staff retention and turnover improved. Staff reported a positive effect on awareness of self-care, addressing risks to resilience, seeking support from trusted colleagues, coping with critical incidents, and the ability to interact positively with patients and families. Conclusion:The evaluation showed a positive impact on staff well-being. Although there was a wide variety of successful interventions reported in the literature, sustainability needs to be considered. Feedback on this program found that staff appreciated being listened to, valued, and supported through the strategies, and the ongoing program will continue to monitor staff needs and be responsive in building their resilience and well-being.
| S-EPMC6241860 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundPractice guidelines recommend palliative care for patients with advanced cancer, but gaps in access and quality of care persist.ObjectiveTo increase goals-of-care (GOC) communication for hospitalized patients with Stage IV cancer.MethodsAn interdisciplinary team designed a quality improvement intervention to enhance oncology palliative care, including training in communication skills and triggers for palliative care consults.Setting/subjectsAll adult inpatients with Stage IV cancer and unplanned admission at an 804-bed hospital affiliated with a National Cancer Institute (NCI) Comprehensive Cancer Center.MeasurementsThe primary quality measure was the percentage of patients with Stage IV cancer who had a GOC discussion during hospitalization; secondary measures included screening for pain, dyspnea, spiritual needs, and outcomes of intensive care, hospice, and 30-day readmission.ResultsIn the 11-month study period, n = 330, Stage IV cancer patients were hospitalized. Comparing the first three months with the final three months, rates of GOC discussion increased from 29% to 48% (p = 0.013), and specialty palliative care consultation increased from 18% to 33%, (p = 0.026). Rates of symptom screening, intensive care unit transfer, hospice, and 30-day re-admission did not change overall. However, patients with specialty palliative care more frequently had pain screening (91% vs. 81%, p = 0.020), spiritual assessment (48% vs. 10%, p < 0.001), and hospice referral (39% vs. 9%, p < 0.001), and they were less likely to be re-admitted within 30 days (12% vs. 21%, p = 0.059).DiscussionInterdisciplinary quality improvement was effective to increase GOC discussions and palliative care consults for patients with Stage IV cancer.
| S-EPMC5749575 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cervical cancer is mostly diagnosed at advanced stages among the majority of women in low-income settings, with palliative care being the only feasible form of care. This study was aimed at investigating palliative care knowledge and access among women with cervical cancer in Harare, Zimbabwe. METHODS:Sequential mixed methods design was used, consisting of two surveys and a qualitative inquiry. A census of 134 women diagnosed with cervical cancer who visited two cancer treating health facilities and one palliative care provider in Harare between January and April, 2018 were enrolled in the study. Seventy-eight health workers were also enrolled in a census in the respective facilities for a survey. Validated structured questionnaires in electronic format were used for both surveys. Descriptive statistics were generated from the surveys after conducting univariate analysis using STATA. Qualitative study used interview/discussion guides for data collection. Thematic analysis was conducted for qualitative data. RESULTS:Mean ages of patients and health workers in the surveys were 52?years (SD?=?12) and 37?years (SD?=?10,respectively. Thirty-two percent of women with cervical cancer reported knowledge of where to seek palliative care. Sixty-eight percent of women with cervical cancer had received treatment, yet only 13% reported receiving palliative care. Few women with cervical cancer associated treatment with pain (13%) and side effects (32%). More women associated cervical cancer with bad smells (81%) and death (84%). Only one of the health workers reported referring patients for palliative care. Seventy-six percent of health workers reported that the majority of patients with cervical cancer sourced their own analgesics from private pharmacies. Qualitative findings revealed a limited or lack of cervical cancer knowledge among nurses especially in primary health care, the existence of stigma among women with cervical cancer and limited implementation of palliative policy. CONCLUSIONS:This study revealed limited knowledge and access to palliative care in a low-income setting due to multi-faceted barriers. These challenges are not unique to the developing world and they present an opportunity for low-income countries to start considering and strategizing the integration of oncology and palliative care models in line with international recommendations.
| S-EPMC7020584 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionTo improve quality across levels of care, we developed a standardized care pathway (SCP) integrating palliative and oncology services for hospitalized and home-dwelling palliative cancer patients in a rural region.MethodsA multifaceted implementation strategy was directed towards a combination of target groups. The implementation was conducted on a system level, and implementation-related activities were registered prospectively. Adult patients with advanced cancer treated with non-curative intent were included and interviewed. Healthcare leaders (HCLs) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in the development of the SCP or exposed to the implementation strategy were interviewed. In addition, HCLs and HCPs exposed to the implementation strategy answered standardized questionnaires. Hospital admissions were registered prospectively.ResultsTo assess the use of the SCP, 129 cancer patients were included. Fifteen patients were interviewed about their experiences with the patient-held record (PHR). Sixty interviews were performed among 1320 HCPs exposed to the implementation strategy. Two hundred and eighty-seven HCPs reported on their training in and use of the SCP. Despite organizational cultural differences, developing an SCP integrating palliative and oncology services across levels of care was feasible. Both HCLs and HCPs reported improved quality of care in the wake of the implementation process. Two and a half years after the implementation was launched, 28% of the HCPs used the SCP and 41% had received training in its use. Patients reported limited use and benefit of the PHR.ConclusionAn SCP may be a usable tool for integrating palliative and oncology services across care levels in a rural region. An extensive implementation process resulted in improvements of process outcomes, yet still limited use of the SCP in clinical practice. HCLs and HCPs reported improved quality of cancer care following the implementation process. Future research should address mandatory elements for usefulness and successful implementation of SCPs for palliative cancer patients.
| S-EPMC8593089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCommunication serves several functions in pediatric oncology, but communication deficiencies persist. Little is known about the broad spectrum of barriers contributing to these deficiencies. Identifying these barriers will support new strategies to improve communication.MethodsThe authors performed 10 focus groups on perceived communication barriers with nurses, nurse practitioners, physicians, and psychosocial professionals across 2 academic institutions. They analyzed transcripts by adapting a multilevel framework from organizational psychology.ResultsThe authors identified 6 levels of barriers to communication from the clinicians' perspectives: individual, team, organization, collaborating hospital, community, and policy. Individual barriers were subdivided into clinician characteristics, family characteristics, or characteristics of the clinician-family interaction. Within each level and sublevel, several manifestations of barriers were identified. Some barriers, such as a lack of comfort with difficult topics (individual), cultural differences (individual), a lack of a shared team mental model (team), and time pressure (organization), manifested similarly across professions and institutions. Other barriers, such as a need for boundaries (individual), intimidation or embarrassment of family (individual), unclear roles and authority (team), and excessive logistical requirements (policy), manifested differently across professions. With the exception of collaborating hospitals, participants from all professions identified barriers from each level. Physicians did not discuss collaborating hospital barriers.ConclusionsNurses, nurse practitioners, physicians, and psychosocial professionals experience communication barriers at multiple levels, which range from individual- to policy-level barriers. Yet their unique clinical roles and duties can lead to different manifestations of some barriers. This multilevel framework might help clinicians and researchers to identify targets for interventions to improve communication experiences for families in pediatric oncology.Lay summaryClinicians and families experience many barriers to communication in pediatric oncology. The authors performed 10 focus groups with 59 clinicians who cared for children with cancer. In these focus groups, barriers to effective communication were discussed. In this article, the authors report on an analysis of the responses. Six levels of barriers to communication were found: individual, team, organization, collaborating hospital, community, and policy. With an understanding of these barriers, interventions can be developed to target these barriers in hopes of improving communication for parents and patients in pediatric oncology.
| S-EPMC8154640 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:In this paper we assess the quality of six deliberative stakeholder consultations regarding the implementation of a precision diagnostic for life-threatening pediatric brain tumors. Decision makers who base policy recommendations on the outputs of consultative exercises can presuppose that all deliberants are well informed of the policy issue, that participation in the deliberative process was fair, and that overcoming implementation barriers will necessarily result in practice change. Additional evidence is therefore needed to substantiate the informational quality of the deliberation, measure the equality of participation and study the effects on stakeholder reasoning to appropriately guide uptake of proposed recommendation(s). METHODS:Using the DeVries framework for assessing the deliberative quality, we analyzed data from 44 post-consultation evaluation surveys completed by pediatric oncology and palliative care teams at two tertiary pediatric healthcare centers in Canada. We also conducted turn-taking and word-contribution analyses from the text transcriptions of each deliberation to assess equality of participation using descriptive statistics. RESULTS:Deliberants agreed the quality of the deliberative process was fair (median ratings ranging from 9-10 out of 10) and the opportunities to receive expert information and discuss with others about the implementation of a new LDT were helpful (9.5 out of 10). While the session improved understanding of the implementation barriers and opportunities, it had marginal effects on deliberants' reasoning about whether LDTs would change their own clinical practice (3-10 out of 10). Participation was proportionate in at least four of the six deliberations, where no deliberant took more than 20% of total turns and contributed equal to, or less than 20% of total words. CONCLUSION:The quality assessment we performed demonstrates high informational value and perceived fairness of two deliberative stakeholder consultations involving pediatric palliative care and oncology teams in Canada. Quality assessments can reveal how the process of deliberation unfolds, whether deliberative outputs are the result of equitable participation among deliberants and what, if any, stakeholder voices may be missing. Such assessments should be routinely reported as a condition of methodological rigor and trustworthiness of deliberative stakeholder engagement research.
| S-EPMC8672505 | biostudies-literature