Cargando…

Evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels

BACKGROUND: Dyspnea is common in patients with advanced cancer. Diagnostic procedures in patients with dyspnea are mandatory but often time-consuming and hamper rapid treatment of the underlying refractory symptoms. Opioids are the first-line drugs for the treatment of refractory dyspnea in palliati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hackner, Klaus, Heim, Magdalena, Masel, Eva Katharina, Riedl, Gunther, Weber, Michael, Strieder, Matthäus, Danninger, Sandra, Pecherstorfer, Martin, Kreye, Gudrun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9135814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35338391
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-06996-6
_version_ 1784714045940563968
author Hackner, Klaus
Heim, Magdalena
Masel, Eva Katharina
Riedl, Gunther
Weber, Michael
Strieder, Matthäus
Danninger, Sandra
Pecherstorfer, Martin
Kreye, Gudrun
author_facet Hackner, Klaus
Heim, Magdalena
Masel, Eva Katharina
Riedl, Gunther
Weber, Michael
Strieder, Matthäus
Danninger, Sandra
Pecherstorfer, Martin
Kreye, Gudrun
author_sort Hackner, Klaus
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Dyspnea is common in patients with advanced cancer. Diagnostic procedures in patients with dyspnea are mandatory but often time-consuming and hamper rapid treatment of the underlying refractory symptoms. Opioids are the first-line drugs for the treatment of refractory dyspnea in palliative care patients with advanced lung cancer. METHODS: To evaluate the knowledge levels of medical doctors with different educational levels on the diagnosis of and treatment options for dyspnea in patients with advanced lung cancer in a palliative care setting, a case report and survey were distributed to physicians at the University Hospital Krems, describing acute dyspnea in a 64-year-old stage IV lung cancer patient. A total of 18 diagnostic and 22 therapeutic options were included in the survey. The physicians were asked to suggest and rank in order of preference their diagnosis and treatment options. Statistical analyses of the data were performed, including comparison of the responses of the senior doctors and the physicians in training. RESULTS: A total of 106 surveys were completed. The respondents were 82 senior physicians and 24 physicians in training (response rates of 86% and 80%, respectively). Regarding diagnostic investigations, inspection and reading the patient’s chart were the most important diagnostic tools chosen by the respondents. The choices of performing blood gas analysis (p = 0.01) and measurement of oxygen saturation (p = 0.048) revealed a significant difference between the groups, both investigations performed more frequently by the physicians in training. As for non-pharmacological treatment options, providing psychological support was one of the most relevant options selected. A significant difference was seen in choosing the option of improving a patient’s position in relation to level of training (65.9% senior physicians vs. 30.4% physicians in training, p = 0.04). Regarding pharmacological treatment options, oxygen application was the most chosen approach. The second most frequent drug chosen was a ß-2 agonist. Only 9.8% of the senior physicians and 8.7% of the physicians in training suggested oral opioids as a treatment option, whereas intravenous opioids were suggested by 43.9% of the senior physicians and 21.7% of the physicians in training (p = 0.089). For subcutaneous application of opioids, the percentage of usage was significantly higher for the physicians in training than for the senior physicians (78.3% vs. 48.8%, p = 0.017, respectively). CONCLUSION: The gold standard treatment for treating refractory dyspnea in patients with advanced lung cancer is opioids. Nevertheless, this pharmacological treatment option was not ranked as the most important. Discussing hypothetical cases of patients with advanced lung cancer and refractory dyspnea with experienced doctors as well as doctors at the beginning of their training may help improve symptom control for these patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-06996-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9135814
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91358142022-05-28 Evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels Hackner, Klaus Heim, Magdalena Masel, Eva Katharina Riedl, Gunther Weber, Michael Strieder, Matthäus Danninger, Sandra Pecherstorfer, Martin Kreye, Gudrun Support Care Cancer Original Article BACKGROUND: Dyspnea is common in patients with advanced cancer. Diagnostic procedures in patients with dyspnea are mandatory but often time-consuming and hamper rapid treatment of the underlying refractory symptoms. Opioids are the first-line drugs for the treatment of refractory dyspnea in palliative care patients with advanced lung cancer. METHODS: To evaluate the knowledge levels of medical doctors with different educational levels on the diagnosis of and treatment options for dyspnea in patients with advanced lung cancer in a palliative care setting, a case report and survey were distributed to physicians at the University Hospital Krems, describing acute dyspnea in a 64-year-old stage IV lung cancer patient. A total of 18 diagnostic and 22 therapeutic options were included in the survey. The physicians were asked to suggest and rank in order of preference their diagnosis and treatment options. Statistical analyses of the data were performed, including comparison of the responses of the senior doctors and the physicians in training. RESULTS: A total of 106 surveys were completed. The respondents were 82 senior physicians and 24 physicians in training (response rates of 86% and 80%, respectively). Regarding diagnostic investigations, inspection and reading the patient’s chart were the most important diagnostic tools chosen by the respondents. The choices of performing blood gas analysis (p = 0.01) and measurement of oxygen saturation (p = 0.048) revealed a significant difference between the groups, both investigations performed more frequently by the physicians in training. As for non-pharmacological treatment options, providing psychological support was one of the most relevant options selected. A significant difference was seen in choosing the option of improving a patient’s position in relation to level of training (65.9% senior physicians vs. 30.4% physicians in training, p = 0.04). Regarding pharmacological treatment options, oxygen application was the most chosen approach. The second most frequent drug chosen was a ß-2 agonist. Only 9.8% of the senior physicians and 8.7% of the physicians in training suggested oral opioids as a treatment option, whereas intravenous opioids were suggested by 43.9% of the senior physicians and 21.7% of the physicians in training (p = 0.089). For subcutaneous application of opioids, the percentage of usage was significantly higher for the physicians in training than for the senior physicians (78.3% vs. 48.8%, p = 0.017, respectively). CONCLUSION: The gold standard treatment for treating refractory dyspnea in patients with advanced lung cancer is opioids. Nevertheless, this pharmacological treatment option was not ranked as the most important. Discussing hypothetical cases of patients with advanced lung cancer and refractory dyspnea with experienced doctors as well as doctors at the beginning of their training may help improve symptom control for these patients. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-06996-6. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-03-25 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9135814/ /pubmed/35338391 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-06996-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Hackner, Klaus
Heim, Magdalena
Masel, Eva Katharina
Riedl, Gunther
Weber, Michael
Strieder, Matthäus
Danninger, Sandra
Pecherstorfer, Martin
Kreye, Gudrun
Evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels
title Evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels
title_full Evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels
title_fullStr Evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels
title_short Evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels
title_sort evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9135814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35338391
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-06996-6
work_keys_str_mv AT hacknerklaus evaluationofdiagnosticandtreatmentapproachestoacutedyspneainapalliativecaresettingamongmedicaldoctorswithdifferenteducationallevels
AT heimmagdalena evaluationofdiagnosticandtreatmentapproachestoacutedyspneainapalliativecaresettingamongmedicaldoctorswithdifferenteducationallevels
AT maselevakatharina evaluationofdiagnosticandtreatmentapproachestoacutedyspneainapalliativecaresettingamongmedicaldoctorswithdifferenteducationallevels
AT riedlgunther evaluationofdiagnosticandtreatmentapproachestoacutedyspneainapalliativecaresettingamongmedicaldoctorswithdifferenteducationallevels
AT webermichael evaluationofdiagnosticandtreatmentapproachestoacutedyspneainapalliativecaresettingamongmedicaldoctorswithdifferenteducationallevels
AT striedermatthaus evaluationofdiagnosticandtreatmentapproachestoacutedyspneainapalliativecaresettingamongmedicaldoctorswithdifferenteducationallevels
AT danningersandra evaluationofdiagnosticandtreatmentapproachestoacutedyspneainapalliativecaresettingamongmedicaldoctorswithdifferenteducationallevels
AT pecherstorfermartin evaluationofdiagnosticandtreatmentapproachestoacutedyspneainapalliativecaresettingamongmedicaldoctorswithdifferenteducationallevels
AT kreyegudrun evaluationofdiagnosticandtreatmentapproachestoacutedyspneainapalliativecaresettingamongmedicaldoctorswithdifferenteducationallevels