Marit S. Jordhøy

A palliative-care intervention and death at home: a cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND The Palliative Medicine Unit at University Hospital of Trondheim, Norway, started an intervention programme that aims to enable patients to spend more time at home and die there if they prefer. Close cooperation was needed with the community health-care professionals, who acted as the principal formal caregivers, and a multidisciplinary consultant team coordinated the care. We did a cluster randomised trial to assess the interventions effectiveness compared with conventional care METHODS Community health-care districts in and around Trondheim, Norway, were defined as the clusters to be randomised. We enrolled 434 patients (235 assigned intervention and 199 conventional care [controls]) in these districts who had incurable malignant disease and an expected survival of 2-9 months. Main outcomes were place of death and time spent in institutions in the last month of life. FINDINGS 395 patients died. Of these, more intervention patients than controls died at home (54 [25%] vs 26 [15%], p<0.05). The time spent at home was not significantly increased, although intervention patients spent a smaller proportion of time in nursing homes in the last month of life than did controls (7.2 vs 14.6%, p<0.05). Hospital use was similar in the two groups. INTERPRETATION The palliative-care intervention enabled more patients to die at home. More resources for care in the home (palliative care training and staff) and an increased focus on use of nursing homes would be necessary, however, to increase time at home and reduce hospital admissions.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment can predict complications in elderly patients after elective surgery for colorectal cancer: A prospective observational cohort study

OBJECTIVE To examine the association between the outcomes of a pre-operative comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and the risk of severe post-operative complications in elderly patients electively operated for colorectal cancer. METHODS One hundred seventy-eight consecutive patients ≥ 70 years electively operated for all stages of colorectal cancer were prospectively examined. A pre-operative CGA was performed, and patients were categorized as fit, intermediate, or frail. The main outcome measure was severe complications within 30 days of surgery. RESULTS Twenty-one patients (12%) were categorized as fit, 81 (46%) as intermediate, and 76 (43%) as frail. Eighty-three patients experienced severe complications, including three deaths; 7/21 (33%) of fit patients, 29/81 (36%) of intermediate patients and 47/76 (62%) of frail patients (p=0.002). Increasing age and ASA classification were not associated with complications in this series. CONCLUSION CGA can identify frail patients who have a significantly increased risk of severe complications after elective surgery for colorectal cancer.

Family Satisfaction with End-of-Life Care for Cancer Patients in a Cluster Randomized Trial

The main aim of this study was to examine similarities and differences in satisfaction with care between 112 family members who were close to patients who had participated in an intervention with a comprehensive palliative care program and the 68 family members in a conventional care program (controls). The FAMCARE Scale measured satisfaction with care at one month after the time of death. The majority of respondents reported high satisfaction with care. The respondents related to the patients in the intervention group reported significantly higher satisfaction with care than the respondents related to the patients in the control group. This difference remained unchanged after controlling for a range of other relevant factors: relationship to the deceased, sex and age of the respondent, sex and age of the patient, time since inclusion in the study, and place of death.

Cluster-randomized trials

Cluster-randomized trials represent an important experimental design, supplementing ordinary randomized clinical trials. They are particularly relevant when evaluating interventions at the level of clinic, hospital, district or region. They are necessary when it is not feasible to randomize individual patients, and desirable when there may be contamination between clusters. But they also carry serious design and analysis implications, and the use of clusters as the unit of randomization must be justified. Sample sizes will usually need to be greatly increased, an adequate number of clusters is essential, and the statistical analysis must allow for the cluster design. And one should rigorously guard against selection bias.

Quality of life in advanced cancer patients: the impact of sociodemographic and medical characteristics

Population-based surveys have shown that health-related quality of life (HRQL) is influenced by patients’ characteristics such as age, gender, living situation and diagnoses. The present study explores the impact of such factors on the HRQL of severely ill cancer patients. The study sample included 395 cancer patients who participated in a cluster randomised trial of palliative care. Median survival was 13 weeks. HRQL assessments (using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire) were compared among subgroups of relevant patients’ characteristics (ANOVA), and the significance of individual covariates was explored by multivariate linear regression. Most EORTC QLQ-C30 scores showed minor differences between genders. Higher age was associated with less sleeping disturbance, less pain and better emotional functioning. No positive impact of living with a partner was found. Performance status and/or time from assessment to death were significantly associated with most functioning and symptom scores. We concluded that although the overall impact of sociodemographic characteristics may seem less important to HRQL scores among advanced cancer patients than in general populations, age and gender should be allowed for. Performance status and closeness to death also need to be reported.

Chronic non-malignant pain patients report as poor health-related quality of life as palliative cancer patients

Background: Patients with chronic non‐malignant pain (CNMP) conditions are known to report reduced health‐related quality of life (HRQoL). The objective of this exploratory study was to compare HRQoL between patients admitted to a multidisciplinary pain centre, palliative cancer (PC) patients and national norms.

Influence of comorbidity on survival, toxicity and health-related quality of life in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving platinum-doublet chemotherapy.

AIM OF THE STUDY To investigate whether patients with severe comorbidity receiving platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a shorter overall survival, experience more toxicity or more deterioration of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than other patients during treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients enrolled onto a phase III trial comparing pemetrexed/carboplatin with gemcitabine/carboplatin as first-line therapy of stage IIIB/IV NSCLC were analysed. Eligible patients had performance status 0-2 and adequate kidney/liver/bone-marrow function. Comorbidity was assessed from hospital medical records using the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G). Toxicity was graded using the CTCAE v3.0 and the patients reported HRQoL on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30/LC13. RESULTS Data from 402 of the 436 of the patients enrolled onto the phase III trial were analysed. The patients with severe comorbidity had similar survival as other patients (6.9 versus 8.1months; p=.34), similar frequency of neutropenia (48% versus 42%; p=.16), but experienced more neutropenic fevers (12% versus 5%; p=.012) and deaths from neutropenic infections (3% versus 0%; p=.027). They had more thrombocytopenia (46% versus 36%; p=.03), but not more thrombocytopenic bleedings (3% versus 4%; p=.65). In general, the patients with severe comorbidity reported poorer HRQoL, but not significantly more deterioration of HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS The results from our study suggest that patients with advanced NSCLC who have severe co-existing disorders benefit from and tolerate platinum-doublet chemotherapy as well as other patients. They do, however, appear to have a higher risk of acquiring infections when neutropenic.

Place of death: hospital-based advanced home care versus conventional care A prospective study in palliative cancer care

The purpose of this prospective nonrandomized study was to evaluate time spent at home, place of death and differences in sociodemographic and medical characteristics of patients, with cancer in palliative stage, receiving either hospital-based advanced home care (AHC), including 24-hour service by a multidisciplinary palliative care team or conventional hospital care (CC). Recruitment to the AHC group and to the study was a two-step procedure. The patients were assigned to either hospital-based AHC or CC according to their preferences. Following this, the patients were asked to participate in the study. Patients were eligible for the study if they had malignant disease, were older than 18 years and had a survival expectancy of 2-12 months. A total of 297 patients entered the study and 280 died during the study period of two and a half years, 117 in the AHC group and 163 in the CC group. Significantly more patients died at home in the AHC group (45%) compared with the CC group (10%). Preference for and referral to hospital-based AHC were not related to sociodemographic or medical characteristics. However, death at home was associated with living together with someone. Advanced hospital-based home care targeting seriously ill cancer patients with a wish to remain at home enable a substantial number of patients to die in the place they desire.

Classification of pain in cancer patients – a systematic literature review

One of the aims of the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative (EPCRC) is to achieve consensus on a classification system for cancer pain. We performed a systematic literature review to identify existing classification systems and domains/items used to classify cancer patients with pain. In a systematic search in the databases Medline and Embase, covering 1986–2006, 692 hits were obtained. 92 papers were evaluated to address pain classification. Six standardised classification systems were identified; three of them systematically developed and partially validated. Both pain characteristics and patient characteristics relevant for cancer pain classification were included in the classification systems. All but one of the standardised systems aim at predicting treatment response or adequacy of treatment. Several domains and items used to describe cancer pain but not formally described as part of a classification system were also identified and systematised. The existing approaches to pain classification in cancer patients are different, mostly not thoroughly validated, and none is widely applied. An internationally accepted classification system for cancer pain could improve research and cancer pain management. This systematic review suggests a need for developing an international consensus on how to classify pain in cancer patients.

Measuring quality of palliative care: psychometric properties of the FAMCARE Scale.

This study measures quality of palliative care in 181 family members (i.e. spouse, child) to cancer victims with terminal disease 1 month after the time of death. The specific aim was to explore the underlying factor structure and dimensionality of the 20 items of the FAMCARE Scale, measuring family satisfaction with health care given to the patient and to them. The results from a factor analysis, a Mokken Scaling Program analysis, and a reliability analysis, showed that 19 out of the 20 items form a strong one-dimensional scale. Since the scale is one-dimensional, the possibility of reducing the number of items should be explored in future research. Our recommendation is to measure satisfaction with care 1–2 months after the death of the patient. One should also explore the possibilities of measuring satisfaction with care prospectively as an integral part of the palliative care program.