Quality of Supportive Care for Patients with Advanced Cancer in a VA Medical Center

Identification and Assessment of Breathlessness in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis

CONTEXT

Breathlessness is common in chronic conditions but often goes unidentified by clinicians. It is important to understand how identification and assessment of breathlessness occurs across health care settings, to promote routine outcome assessment and access to treatment.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to summarize how breathlessness is identified and assessed in adults with chronic conditions across different health care settings.

METHODS

This is a systematic review and descriptive narrative synthesis (PROSPERO registration: CRD42018089782). Searches were conducted on Medline, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Embase, and CINAHL (2000-2018) and reference lists. Screening was conducted by two independent reviewers, with access to a third, against inclusion criteria. Data were extracted using a bespoke proforma.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven studies were included, conducted in primary care (n = 9), secondary care (n = 53), and specialist palliative care (n = 35). Twenty-five measures of identification and 41 measures of assessment of breathlessness were used. Primary and secondary care used a range of measures to assess breathlessness severity, cause, and impact for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Specialist palliative care used measures assessing broader symptom severity and function with less focus on overall quality of life. Few studies were identified from primary care.

CONCLUSION

Various measures were identified, reflective of the setting's purpose. However, this highlights missed opportunities for breathlessness management across settings; primary care is particularly well placed to diagnose and support breathlessness. The chronic obstructive pulmonary disease approach (where symptoms and quality of life are part of disease management) could apply to other conditions. Better documentation of holistic patient-reported measures may drive service improvement in specialist palliative care.

Considerations for Quality Improvement in Radiation Oncology Therapy for Patients with Uncomplicated Painful Bone Metastases

Background: There is an increasing need for evidence-based efficiency in providing a growing amount of cancer care. One example of a quality gap is the use of multiple-fraction palliative radiation for patients with advanced cancer who have uncomplicated bone metastases; evidence suggests similar pain outcomes for treatment regimens with a lower burden of treatments. Methods: During the first phase of quality improvement work, we used RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology to understand how radiation oncologists at one academic medical center rate the appropriateness of different treatment regimens for painful uncomplicated bone metastases. We compared radiation oncologist appropriateness ratings for radiation treatments with radiation therapy provided by these oncologists to patients with painful bone metastases between July 2012 and June 2013. Results: Appropriateness ratings showed that single-fraction (8 Gy) treatment (a low burden treatment) was consistently considered an appropriate option to treat a variety of uncomplicated bone metastases. The use of >10 fractions was consistently rated as inappropriate regardless of other factors. Eighty-one patients receiving radiation therapy for painful bone metastases during the study period had an available medical record for chart abstraction. Almost one-third of metastases were considered complicated because of a concern of spinal cord compression, a history of prior irradiation, or an associated pathological fracture. Among uncomplicated bone metastases, 25% were treated with stereotactic body radiation treatment (SBRT). Among the 54 uncomplicated bone metastases treated with conformal radiation, only one was treated with single-fraction treatment and 32% were treated with greater than 10 fractions. Conclusions: Treatment at the study site demonstrates room for improvement in providing low-burden radiation oncology treatments for patients with painful bone metastases. Choosing a radiation treatment schedule for patients with advanced cancer and painful bone metastases requires consideration of many medical and patient-centered factors. Our experience suggests that it will take more than the existence of guidelines to change practice in this area.

Mental Illness and Mental Healthcare Receipt among Hospitalized Veterans with Serious Physical Illnesses

BACKGROUND

Psychosocial distress among patients with limited life expectancy influences treatment decisions, treatment adherence, and physical health. Veterans may be at elevated risk of psychosocial distress at the end of life, and understanding their mental healthcare needs may help identify hospitalized patients to whom psychiatric services should be targeted.

OBJECTIVE

To examine mental illness prevalence and mental health treatment rates among a national sample of hospitalized veterans with serious physical illnesses. Design, Subjects, and Measurements: This was a retrospective study of 11,286 veterans hospitalized in a Veterans Health Administration acute care facility in fiscal year 2011 with diagnoses of advanced cancer, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and/or advanced HIV/AIDS. Prevalent and incident mental illness diagnoses during and before hospitalization and rates of psychotherapy and psychotropic use among patients with incident depression and anxiety were measured.

RESULTS

At least one-quarter of the patients in our sample had a mental illness or substance use disorder. The most common diagnoses at hospitalization were depression (11.4%), followed by alcohol abuse or dependence (5.5%), and post-traumatic stress disorder (4.9%). Of the 831 patients with incident past-year depression and 258 with incident past-year anxiety, nearly two-thirds received at least some psychotherapy or guideline-concordant medication within 90 days of diagnosis. Of 191 patients with incident depression and 47 with incident anxiety at time of hospitalization, fewer than half received mental healthcare before discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Many veterans hospitalized with serious physical illnesses have comorbid mental illnesses and may benefit from depression and anxiety treatment.

Palliative Care Specialist Consultation Is Associated With Supportive Care Quality in Advanced Cancer

CONTEXT

Although recent randomized controlled trials support early palliative care for patients with advanced cancer, the specific processes of care associated with these findings and whether these improvements can be replicated in the broader health care system are uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of palliative care consultation and its association with specific processes of supportive care in a national cohort of Veterans using the Cancer Quality ASSIST (Assessing Symptoms Side Effects and Indicators of Supportive Treatment) measures.

METHODS

We abstracted data from 719 patients' medical records diagnosed with advanced lung, colorectal, or pancreatic cancer in 2008 over a period of three years or until death who received care in the Veterans Affairs Health System to evaluate the association of palliative care specialty consultation with the quality of supportive care overall and by domain using a multivariate regression model.

RESULTS

All but 54 of 719 patients died within three years and 293 received at least one palliative care consult. Patients evaluated by a palliative care specialist at diagnosis scored seven percentage points higher overall (P < 0.001) and 11 percentage points higher (P < 0.001) within the information and care planning domain compared with those without a consult.

CONCLUSION

Early palliative care specialist consultation is associated with better quality of supportive care in three advanced cancers, predominantly driven by improvements in information and care planning. This study supports the effectiveness of early palliative care consultation in three common advanced cancers within the Veterans Affairs Health System and provides a greater understanding of what care processes palliative care teams influence.

Opportunities to maximize value with integrated palliative care

Palliative care involves aggressively addressing and treating psychosocial, spiritual, religious, and family concerns, as well as considering the overall psychosocial structures supporting a patient. The concept of integrated palliative care removes the either/or decision a patient needs to make: they need not decide if they want either aggressive chemotherapy from their oncologist or symptom-guided palliative care but rather they can be comanaged by several clinicians, including a palliative care clinician, to maximize the benefit to them. One common misconception about palliative care, and supportive care in general, is that it amounts to “doing nothing” or “giving up” on aggressive treatments for patients. Rather, palliative care involves very aggressive care, targeted at patient symptoms, quality-of-life, psychosocial needs, family needs, and others. Integrating palliative care into the care plan for individuals with advanced diseases does not necessarily imply that a patient must forego other treatment options, including those aimed at a cure, prolonging of life, or palliation. Implementing interventions to understand patient preferences and to ensure those preferences are addressed, including preferences related to palliative and supportive care, is vital in improving the patient-centeredness and value of surgical care. Given our aging population and the disproportionate cost of end-of-life care, this holds great hope in bending the cost curve of health care spending, ensuring patient-centeredness, and improving quality and value of care. Level 1 evidence supports this model, and it has been achieved in several settings; the next necessary step is to disseminate such models more broadly.

Symptom trends in the last year of life from 1998 to 2010: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Calls for improvement in end-of-life care have focused attention on the management of pain and other troubling symptoms at the end of life.

OBJECTIVE

To describe changes in pain intensity and symptom prevalence during the last year of life from 1998 to 2010.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

The HRS (Health and Retirement Study), a nationally representative longitudinal survey of community-dwelling U.S. residents aged 51 years or older.

PARTICIPANTS

7204 HRS participants who died while enrolled in the study and their family respondents.

MEASUREMENTS

Proxy-reported pain during the last year of life and other symptoms for at least 1 month during the last year of life. Trends in pain intensity and symptom prevalence were analyzed for all decedents and within the categories of sudden death, cancer, congestive heart failure or chronic lung disease, and frailty.

RESULTS

Between 1998 and 2010, proxy reports of the prevalence of any pain increased for all decedents from 54.3% (95% CI, 51.6% to 57.1%) to 60.8% (CI, 58.2% to 63.4%), an increase of 11.9% (CI, 3.1% to 21.4%). Reported prevalences of depression and periodic confusion also increased for all decedents by 26.6% (CI, 14.5% to 40.1%) and 31.3% (CI, 18.6% to 45.1%), respectively. Individual symptoms increased in prevalence among specific decedent categories, except in cancer, which showed no significant changes. The prevalence of moderate or severe pain did not change among all decedents or in any specific decedent category.

LIMITATION

Use of proxy reports and limited information about some patient and surrogate variables.

CONCLUSION

Despite national efforts to improve end-of-life care, proxy reports of pain and other alarming symptoms in the last year of life increased from 1998 to 2010.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institute of Nursing Research.

Community-Partnered Collaboration to Build an Integrated Palliative Care Clinic

Background:

We partnered with patients, families, and palliative care clinicians to develop an integrated urology–palliative care clinic for patients with metastatic cancer. We assessed clinician satisfaction with a multidisciplinary palliative care clinic model.

Methods:

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 clinicians who practice in our integrated clinic. We analyzed transcripts using a multistage, cutting-and-sorting technique in an inductive approach based on grounded theory analysis. Finally, we administered a validated physician job satisfaction survey.

Results:

Clinicians found that referring a patient to palliative care in the urology clinic was feasible and appropriate. Patients were receptive to supportive care, and clinicians perceived that quality of care improved following the intervention.

Conclusion:

An integrated, patient-centered model for individuals with advanced urologic malignancies is feasible and well received by practitioners.

Changes in the care of non-small-cell lung cancer after audit and feedback: the Florida initiative for quality cancer care

PURPOSE

Audit and feedback have been widely used to enhance the performance of various medical practices. Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is one of the most common diseases encountered in medical oncology practice. We investigated the use of audit and feedback to improve the care of NSCLC.

METHODS

Medical records were reviewed for patients with NSCLC first seen by a medical oncologist in 2006 (n = 518) and 2009 (n = 573) at 10 oncology practices participating in the Florida Initiative for Quality Cancer Care. In 2008, feedback from 2006 audit results was provided to practices, which then independently undertook steps to improve their performance. Sixteen quality-of-care indicators (QCIs) were evaluated on both time points and were examined for changes in adherence over time.

RESULTS

A statistically significant increase in adherence was observed for five of 16 QCIs. Adherence to brain staging using magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scan for stage III NSCLC (57.8% in 2006 v 82.8% in 2009; P = .001), availability of chemotherapy flow sheet (89.2% v 97.0%; P < .001), documentation of performance status for stage III and IV disease (43.4% v 51.3%; P < .001), availability of pathology report for patients undergoing surgery (95.2% v 99.2%; P = .02), and availability of signed chemotherapy consent (69.5% v 76.3%; P = .04). There were no statistically significant decreases in adherence on any QCIs.

CONCLUSION

Audit with feedback was associated with a modest but important improvement in the treatment of NSCLC. Whether these changes are durable will require long-term follow-up.

American Society for Radiation Oncology's Performance Assessment for the Advancement of Radiation Oncology Treatment: A practical approach for informing practice improvement

PURPOSE

Performance Assessment for the Advancement of Radiation Oncology Treatment (PAAROT) is a practice quality improvement program. This study seeks to determine baseline performance rates and practice variation from PAAROT data.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The cohort includes all physicians from academic, hospital, and free-standing settings who completed at least 10 consecutive self-audited medical records in the PAAROT program (version 2.5) from 2010 to 2011 (n = 519 medical records). Mean performance rates were analyzed at the physician and medical record levels and, where appropriate, were stratified by the physician's practice setting.

RESULTS

Forty-nine physicians were included in the study; 22 (45%), 17 (35%), and 10 (20%) physicians practiced in a hospital, academic, or a free-standing setting, respectively. The measures with a high adoption rate (more than 80%) include the following: documentation of history and physical; review of physics and dosimetry plan by radiation oncologist; patient informed risks of therapy; evaluation of acute symptoms during therapy; pathology in consultation note; communication of treatment summary within 30 days of treatment completion; documentation of intent of treatment, use of clinical guidelines or published data; and documentation of American Joint Committee on Cancer staging. Lower rates of adoption were noted (mean, 65%; range, 0-100%) when these measures were converted to a composite measure. Low adherence was noted for screening of a pain using a standard scale (mean, 58%; range, 0-100%). Physicians from an academic setting scored higher on the composite measure (40%) compared with those from a hospital setting (36%) and from a free-standing setting (24%); (P < .001). Physicians from a hospital setting scored higher on the quality indicator of screening for pain (54%) compared with physicians from an academic setting (35%) and free-standing setting (11%) (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This first assessment of PAAROT (version 2.5) data provides an initial snapshot on the use of quality indicators and practice patterns for radiation oncology. Self-reported practice data and the use of quality indicators will become important for the purpose of continuous, prospective evidence-based learning on an individual basis. Despite the small sample size, the data from this study will help address potential improvement opportunities for the next iteration of the PAAROT program.

Evaluating the quality of supportive oncology using patient-reported data

PURPOSE

Patient-reported data may provide valuable information for oncology quality measurement. We evaluated applying patient-reported data from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium national study to quality indicators addressing supportive oncology domains.

METHODS

We analyzed surveys including validated instruments for symptoms and care planning from 4,174 patients newly diagnosed with lung or colorectal cancer. We adapted existing supportive oncology indicators for use with patient-reported data from Cancer Quality-ASSIST and the American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Oncology Practice Initiative. Where feasible, we examined indicators using medical record data for comparison purposes.

RESULTS

Using patient-reported data, the percentage of patients meeting indicator criteria for screening ranged from 74% (significant depressive symptoms) to 93% (pain, nausea/vomiting). The percentage meeting indicator criteria for symptom treatment ranged from 73% (significant depressive symptoms) to 99% (nausea/vomiting). Symptom severity did not affect the results. Using medical record data, the percentage meeting indicator criteria varied between 4% (significant depressive symptoms) and 23% (pain). For information and care planning, 44% met criteria for discussion about resuscitation and 32% for hospice discussion using survey data. Using medical record data, 11% met criteria for goals-of-care discussion in intensive care and 46% for hospice/pain management/palliative care referral before death.

CONCLUSION

Quality of care for symptoms measured using patient self-report was higher than when including medical record data. Use of patient-reported and medical record data allowed measurement of different perspectives on care planning indicators. Patient-reported data provide a complementary, patient-centered perspective on the quality of supportive oncology care.

Quality of end-of-life care for patients with advanced cancer in an academic medical center

PURPOSE

We assessed key aspects of the quality of end-of-life care using validated explicit process quality measures in an academic medical center (hospital and cancer center) before expanding to a broader palliative care initiative.

METHODS

We evaluated 21 indicators most relevant to end-of-life care from the Cancer Quality-ASSIST supportive oncology indicator set for 238 patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors who died between 2-15 months after diagnosis. These included outpatient and hospital indicators for cancer symptoms and information and care planning that met criteria for feasibility, reliability, and validity. We abstracted detailed information from medical records to specify the necessary data elements.

RESULTS

Overall adherence was 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 50%-56%); this varied widely among indicators. Adherence was highest for pain indicators; in particular, 97% of eligible subjects' hospitalizations had documented screening for pain, and, after an outpatient pain medication was changed, 97% of patients had a pain assessment at the subsequent visit. For other symptoms, adherence ranged from 0% for documentation of life expectancy for patients starting parenteral or enteral nutrition to 87% for assessment of nausea or vomiting on hospital admission. For information and care planning, results ranged from 6% for documentation of ventilation preferences prior to intubation to 68% for documented communication of risks and benefits or prognosis prior to starting chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, Cancer Quality-ASSIST indicators are useful for practical quality assessment of cancer end-of-life care in an academic medical center. These results will serve as useful data for targeting areas for quality improvement and measuring progress.