Cargando…
Prognosis Discussion and Referral to Community Palliative Care Services in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Treated in a Tertiary Cancer Centre
Advanced pancreatic cancer is associated with a poor prognosis, often less than 1 year. Honest prognosis discussions guide early community palliative care services input, facilitating timely advance care planning and improving quality of life. The aims were to assess if patients were offered prognos...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10606359/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37893876 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11202802 |
_version_ | 1785127297455489024 |
---|---|
author | Clelland, Sarah Nuttall, Christina L. Stott, Helen E. Cope, Joseph Barratt, Natalie L. Farrell, Kelly Eyong, Manyi V. Gleeson, Jack P. Lamarca, Angela Hubner, Richard A. Valle, Juan W. McNamara, Mairéad G. |
author_facet | Clelland, Sarah Nuttall, Christina L. Stott, Helen E. Cope, Joseph Barratt, Natalie L. Farrell, Kelly Eyong, Manyi V. Gleeson, Jack P. Lamarca, Angela Hubner, Richard A. Valle, Juan W. McNamara, Mairéad G. |
author_sort | Clelland, Sarah |
collection | PubMed |
description | Advanced pancreatic cancer is associated with a poor prognosis, often less than 1 year. Honest prognosis discussions guide early community palliative care services input, facilitating timely advance care planning and improving quality of life. The aims were to assess if patients were offered prognosis discussions and community palliative care services referral. A retrospective analysis of consecutive case-notes of new advanced pancreatic cancer patients was conducted. Chi-squared test assessed the association with prognosis discussion and community palliative care services referral. In total, 365 cases (60%) had a documented prognosis discussion at any time-point in the treatment pathway; 54.4% during the first appointment. The frequency of prognosis discussion was greater with nurse clinician review at first appointment (p < 0.001). In total, 171 patients (28.1%) were known to community palliative care services at the first appointment. Of those not known, 171 (39.1%) and 143 (32.7%) were referred at this initial time-point or later, respectively. There was a significant association between the referral to community palliative care services at first appointment and the reviewing professional (this was greatest for nurse clinicians (frequency 65.2%)) (p < 0.001), and also if reviewed by clinical nurse specialist at first visit or not (47.8% vs. 35.6%) (p < 0.01). Prognosis discussions were documented in approximately two-thirds of cases, highlighting missed opportunities. Prognosis discussion was associated with clinician review and was most frequent for nurse clinician, as was referral to community palliative care services. Clinical nurse specialist review increased referral to community palliative care services if seen at the initial visit. Multi-disciplinary review, specifically nursing, therefore, during the first consultation is imperative and additive. It should be considered best practice to offer and negotiate the content and timing of prognosis discussions with cancer patients, and revisit this offer throughout their treatment pathway. Greater attention to prognosis discussion documentation is recommended. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10606359 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106063592023-10-28 Prognosis Discussion and Referral to Community Palliative Care Services in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Treated in a Tertiary Cancer Centre Clelland, Sarah Nuttall, Christina L. Stott, Helen E. Cope, Joseph Barratt, Natalie L. Farrell, Kelly Eyong, Manyi V. Gleeson, Jack P. Lamarca, Angela Hubner, Richard A. Valle, Juan W. McNamara, Mairéad G. Healthcare (Basel) Article Advanced pancreatic cancer is associated with a poor prognosis, often less than 1 year. Honest prognosis discussions guide early community palliative care services input, facilitating timely advance care planning and improving quality of life. The aims were to assess if patients were offered prognosis discussions and community palliative care services referral. A retrospective analysis of consecutive case-notes of new advanced pancreatic cancer patients was conducted. Chi-squared test assessed the association with prognosis discussion and community palliative care services referral. In total, 365 cases (60%) had a documented prognosis discussion at any time-point in the treatment pathway; 54.4% during the first appointment. The frequency of prognosis discussion was greater with nurse clinician review at first appointment (p < 0.001). In total, 171 patients (28.1%) were known to community palliative care services at the first appointment. Of those not known, 171 (39.1%) and 143 (32.7%) were referred at this initial time-point or later, respectively. There was a significant association between the referral to community palliative care services at first appointment and the reviewing professional (this was greatest for nurse clinicians (frequency 65.2%)) (p < 0.001), and also if reviewed by clinical nurse specialist at first visit or not (47.8% vs. 35.6%) (p < 0.01). Prognosis discussions were documented in approximately two-thirds of cases, highlighting missed opportunities. Prognosis discussion was associated with clinician review and was most frequent for nurse clinician, as was referral to community palliative care services. Clinical nurse specialist review increased referral to community palliative care services if seen at the initial visit. Multi-disciplinary review, specifically nursing, therefore, during the first consultation is imperative and additive. It should be considered best practice to offer and negotiate the content and timing of prognosis discussions with cancer patients, and revisit this offer throughout their treatment pathway. Greater attention to prognosis discussion documentation is recommended. MDPI 2023-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10606359/ /pubmed/37893876 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11202802 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Clelland, Sarah Nuttall, Christina L. Stott, Helen E. Cope, Joseph Barratt, Natalie L. Farrell, Kelly Eyong, Manyi V. Gleeson, Jack P. Lamarca, Angela Hubner, Richard A. Valle, Juan W. McNamara, Mairéad G. Prognosis Discussion and Referral to Community Palliative Care Services in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Treated in a Tertiary Cancer Centre |
title | Prognosis Discussion and Referral to Community Palliative Care Services in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Treated in a Tertiary Cancer Centre |
title_full | Prognosis Discussion and Referral to Community Palliative Care Services in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Treated in a Tertiary Cancer Centre |
title_fullStr | Prognosis Discussion and Referral to Community Palliative Care Services in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Treated in a Tertiary Cancer Centre |
title_full_unstemmed | Prognosis Discussion and Referral to Community Palliative Care Services in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Treated in a Tertiary Cancer Centre |
title_short | Prognosis Discussion and Referral to Community Palliative Care Services in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Treated in a Tertiary Cancer Centre |
title_sort | prognosis discussion and referral to community palliative care services in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer treated in a tertiary cancer centre |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10606359/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37893876 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11202802 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT clellandsarah prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT nuttallchristinal prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT stotthelene prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT copejoseph prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT barrattnataliel prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT farrellkelly prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT eyongmanyiv prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT gleesonjackp prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT lamarcaangela prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT hubnerricharda prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT vallejuanw prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre AT mcnamaramaireadg prognosisdiscussionandreferraltocommunitypalliativecareservicesinpatientswithadvancedpancreaticcancertreatedinatertiarycancercentre |