Melanie Lovell

A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Standardized Educational Intervention for Patients with Cancer Pain

CONTEXT Published literature has not defined the effectiveness of standardized educational tools that can be self-administered in the general oncology population with pain. OBJECTIVES We sought to determine if an educational intervention consisting of a video and/or booklet for adults with cancer pain could improve knowledge and attitudes about cancer pain management, pain levels, pain interference, anxiety, quality of life, and analgesic use. METHODS Eligible participants had advanced cancer, a pain score >/=2 of 10 in the last week, English proficiency, an estimated prognosis of more than one month, and were receiving outpatient cancer treatment at participating hospitals. Participants completed baseline assessments and then were randomly allocated to receive a booklet, a video, both, or neither, in addition to standard care. Outcome measures at two and four weeks included the Barriers Questionnaire (BQ), Brief Pain Inventory, Global Quality of Life Scale, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Adequacy of analgesia and severity of pain were assessed with the Pain Management Index and a daily pain diary. RESULTS One hundred fifty-eight participants were recruited from 21 sites over 42 months. Baseline mean barriers scores were lower than reported in previous Australian studies at 1.33 (standard deviation: 0.92). Mean average pain and worst pain scores improved significantly in patients receiving both the video and booklet by 1.17 (standard error [SE]: 0.51, P=0.02) and 1.12 (SE: 0.57, P=0.05), respectively, on a 0-10 scale. The addiction subscale of the BQ score was improved by 0.44 (SE: 0.19) for participants receiving any part of the intervention (P=0.03). CONCLUSION Provision of a video and/or booklet for people with cancer pain was a feasible and effective adjunct to the management of cancer pain.

Patient Education, Coaching, and Self-Management for Cancer Pain

PURPOSE Multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses have identified the effectiveness of patient education in improving cancer pain management. However, the mechanisms by which patient education improves pain outcomes are uncertain, as are the optimal delivery, content, timing, frequency, and duration. This review provides best-bet recommendations based on available evidence to guide service managers and clinicians in developing a patient education program. METHODS We used patient-centered care, self-management, coaching, and a behavior change wheel as lenses through which to consider the evidence for elements of patient education most likely to be effective within the context of other strategies for overcoming barriers to cancer pain assessment and management. RESULTS The evidence suggests that optimal strategies include those that are patient-centered and tailored to individual needs, are embedded within health professional-patient communication and therapeutic relationships, empower patients to self-manage and coordinate their care, and are routinely integrated into standard cancer care. An approach that integrates patient education with processes and systems to ensure implementation of key standards for pain assessment and management and education of health professionals has been shown to be most effective. CONCLUSION Patient education is effective in reducing cancer pain and should be standard practice in all settings. For optimal results, patient education should be integrated with other strategies for implementing evidence-based, person-centered care and overcoming barriers at the levels of patient, provider, and health system.

Australian survey of current practice and guideline use in adult cancer pain assessment and management: perspectives of oncologists.

Cancer pain continues to be undertreated in up to half of cases, despite the availability of evidence‐based guidelines. This study aimed to: (i) identify barriers and facilitators to adult cancer pain assessment and management, as perceived by Australian health professionals; (ii) establish the perceived need for new Australian guidelines and implementation strategy; (iii) identify which guidelines are used; (iv) identify barriers and facilitators to guideline use. This article focuses on the perceptions of responding oncologists.

Australian survey of current practice and guideline use in adult cancer pain assessment and management: Perspectives of palliative care physicians

BACKGROUND Cancer pain continues to be undertreated, despite the availability of evidence-based guidelines. The Australian National Pain Strategy identified establishment of systems and guidelines to adequately manage cancer pain as a high priority. OBJECTIVES This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to adult cancer pain assessment and management as perceived by Australian health professionals; establish the perceived need for new Australian guidelines and implementation strategies; identify which guidelines are used; and identify barriers and facilitators to guideline use. This article focuses on the perceptions of responding palliative care physicians. DESIGN A cross-sectional survey was administered online. PARTICIPANTS Invitations were circulated via peak bodies and clinical leaders. Comments were coded independently by two researchers. RESULTS Ninety-two palliative care physicians responded to the survey; 39% of the national total. The majority reported barriers to pain management, including insufficient access to nonpharmacologic interventions, poor coordination between services, and management challenges posed by comorbidities. Forty-five percent reported using pain guidelines, most commonly the Australian Therapeutic Guidelines-Palliative Care. Respondents were largely supportive of the development of new Australian guidelines and implementation strategies, in particular any offering advice on specific cases of cancer pain (e.g., neuropathic), patient self-management resources, assessment of patient priorities, and disciplinary roles. CONCLUSION Barriers to evidence-based practice identified by our survey might be addressed via strategies to support decision making and coordination of care (e.g., a clinical pathway). Particular attention should be paid to promoting access to nonpharmacologic interventions and patient education, and improving referral and care coordination.

Spirituality: what is its role in pain medicine?

BACKGROUND For many years, spirituality has been regarded as an integral aspect of patient care in fields closely allied to pain medicine such as palliative and supportive care. Despite this, it has received relatively little attention within the field of pain medicine itself. Reasons for this may include a lack of understanding of what spirituality means, doubtfulness of its relevance, an uncertainty about how it may be addressed, or a lack of awareness of how addressing spirituality may be of benefit. METHODS A review of the literature was conducted to determine the changing conceptual frameworks that have been applied to pain medicine, the emergence of the biopsychospiritual approach and what that means as well as evidence for the benefits of incorporation of this approach for the management of pain. RESULTS Although the concept of spirituality is broad, there is now greater consensus on what is meant by this term. Many authors and consensus panels have explored the concept and formulated a conceptual framework and an approach that is inclusive, accessible, relevant, and applicable to people with a wide range of health conditions. In addition, there is accumulating evidence that interventions that address the issue of spirituality have benefits for physical and emotional health. CONCLUSIONS Given the firm place that spirituality now holds within other fields and the mounting evidence for its relevance and benefit for people with pain, there is increasing evidence to support the inclusion of spiritual factors as an important component in the assessment and treatment of pain.

Patients’ experiences and perspectives of multiple concurrent symptoms in advanced cancer: a semi-structured interview study

PurposePatients with advanced cancer typically experience multiple concurrent symptoms, which have a detrimental impact on patient outcomes. No studies to date have qualitatively explored advanced cancer patients’ perceptions of multiple symptoms in oncology and palliative care settings. Understanding the experience of multiple symptoms can inform integrated clinical pathways for treating, assessing and reducing symptom burden. This study aims to describe the beliefs, attitudes and experiences of patients with multiple symptoms in advanced cancer.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 58 advanced cancer patients (23 inpatients and 35 outpatients), recruited purposively from two palliative care centres and two hospital-based oncology departments in Sydney, Australia. Transcripts were analysed thematically.ResultsSix major themes were identified: imminence of death and deterioration (impending death, anticipatory fear); overwhelming loss of control (symptom volatility, debilitating exhaustion, demoralisation, isolation); impinging on autonomy and identity (losing independence, refusal to a diminished self, self-advocacy, reluctance to burden others); psychological adaptation (accepting the impossibility of recovery, seeking distractions, maintaining hope, mindfulness, accommodating self-limitations), burden of self-management responsibility (perpetual self-monitoring, ambiguity in self-report, urgency of decision making, optimising management); and valuing security and empowerment (safety in coordinated care, compassionate care, fear of medical abandonment, dependence on social support). Patients transitioning from oncology to palliative care settings were more vulnerable to self-management burden.ConclusionMultiple symptoms have a profound impact on patients’ autonomy, function and psychological state. Multiple symptom management and integrated care is needed to empower advanced cancer patients and reduce their struggles with self-management burden, hopelessness, isolation, fear of abandonment and mortality anxieties.

Pharmacovigilance in hospice/palliative care: net effect of gabapentin for neuropathic pain

Objective Hospice/palliative care patients may differ from better studied populations, and data from other populations cannot necessarily be extrapolated into hospice/palliative care clinical practice. Pharmacovigilance studies provide opportunities to understand the harms and benefits of medications in routine practice. Gabapentin, a γ-amino butyric acid analogue antiepileptic drug, is commonly prescribed for neuropathic pain in hospice/palliative care. Most of the evidence however relates to non-malignant, chronic pain syndromes (diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, central pain syndromes, fibromyalgia). The aim of this study was to quantify the immediate and short-term clinical benefits and harms of gabapentin in routine hospice/palliative care practice. Design Multisite, prospective, consecutive cohort. Population 127 patients, 114 of whom had cancer, who started gabapentin for neuropathic pain as part of routine clinical care. Settings 42 centres from seven countries. Data were collected at three time points—at baseline, at day 7 (and at any time; immediate and short-term harms) and at day 21 (clinical benefits). Results At day 21, the average dose of gabapentin for those still using it (n=68) was 653 mg/24 h (range 0–1800 mg) and 54 (42%) reported benefits, of whom 7 (6%) experienced complete pain resolution. Harms were reported in 39/127 (30%) patients at day 7, the most frequent of which were cognitive disturbance, somnolence, nausea and dizziness. Ten patients had their medication ceased due to harms. The presence of significant comorbidities, higher dose and increasing age increased the likelihood of harm. Conclusions Overall, 42% of people experienced benefit at a level that resulted in continued use at 21 days.

Supportive care of women with breast cancer: key concerns and practical solutions.

Patients diagnosed with breast cancer may have supportive care needs for many years after diagnosis. High quality multidisciplinary care can help address these needs and reduce the physical and psychological effects of breast cancer and its treatment. Ovarian suppression and extended endocrine therapy benefits are associated with vasomotor, musculoskeletal, sexual and bone density‐related side effects. Aromatase inhibitor musculoskeletal syndrome is a common reason for treatment discontinuation. Treatment strategies include education, exercise, simple analgesia and a change to tamoxifen or another aromatase inhibitor. Chemotherapy‐induced alopecia may be a constant reminder of breast cancer to the patient, family, friends, acquaintances and even strangers. Alopecia can be prevented in some patients using scalp‐cooling technology applied at the time of chemotherapy infusion. The adverse impact of breast cancer diagnosis and treatment on sexual wellbeing is under‐reported. Identification of physical and psychological impacts is needed for implementation of treatment strategies. Fear of cancer recurrence reduces quality of life and increases distress, with subsequent impact on role functioning. Identification and multidisciplinary management are key, with referral to psychosocial services recommended where indicated. The benefits of exercise include reduced fatigue, better mental health and reduced musculoskeletal symptoms, and may also include reduced incidence of breast cancer recurrence. Identification and management of unmet supportive care needs are key aspects of breast cancer care, to maximise quality of life and minimise breast cancer recurrence.

Clinicians' Perspectives on Managing Symptom Clusters in Advanced Cancer: A Semistructured Interview Study

CONTEXT Managing symptom clusters or multiple concurrent symptoms in patients with advanced cancer remains a clinical challenge. The optimal processes constituting effective management of symptom clusters remain uncertain. OBJECTIVES To describe the attitudes and strategies of clinicians in managing multiple co-occurring symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS Semistructured interviews were conducted with 48 clinicians (palliative care physicians [n = 10], oncologists [n = 6], general practitioners [n = 6], nurses [n = 12], and allied health providers [n = 14]), purposively recruited from two acute hospitals, two palliative care centers, and four community general practices in Sydney, Australia. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis and adapted grounded theory. RESULTS Six themes were identified: uncertainty in decision making (inadequacy of scientific evidence, relying on experiential knowledge, and pressure to optimize care); attunement to patient and family (sensitivity to multiple cues, prioritizing individual preferences, addressing psychosocial and physical interactions, and opening Pandoras box); deciphering cause to guide intervention (disaggregating symptoms and interactions, flexibility in assessment, and curtailing investigative intrusiveness); balancing complexities in medical management (trading off side effects, minimizing mismatched goals, and urgency in resolving severe symptoms); fostering hope and empowerment (allaying fear of the unknown, encouraging meaning making, championing patient empowerment, and truth telling); and depending on multidisciplinary expertise (maximizing knowledge exchange, sharing management responsibility, contending with hierarchical tensions, and isolation and discontinuity of care). CONCLUSION Management of symptom clusters, as both an art and a science, is currently fraught with uncertainty in decision making. Strengthening multidisciplinary collaboration, continuity of care, more pragmatic planning of clinical trials to address more than one symptom, and training in symptom cluster management are required.

Clinical trials of medicinal cannabis for appetite-related symptoms from advanced cancer: a survey of preferences, attitudes and beliefs among patients willing to consider participation

Australian clinical trials are planned to evaluate medicinal cannabis in a range of clinical contexts.