Thromboprophylaxis for inpatient with advanced cancer receiving palliative care: A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: The benefits and risks of thromboprophylaxis usage in patients with advanced cancer at the end of their lives remain unknown, especially with the lack of randomized studies. This study aimed to describe the clinical use of thromboprophylaxis in those patients under palliative care. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study. It was performed on patients admitted to the Palliative Care Center. RESULTS: A total of 719 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age was 62.97 (13.65) years. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence was 5.4% (n = 39). At the time of admission, 31.29% (n = 225) of patients were on thromboprophylaxis. At death time, 17.5% (n = 126) of patients were on thromboprophylaxis (41.3% on primary and 58.7% on secondary thromboprophylaxis). The incidence of clinically suspected fatal VTE was 6.5% (n = 47). Surprisingly, clinically suspected VTE was higher statistically in patients with thromboprophylaxis rather than in non-thromboprophylaxis (p < .001). By using linear regression, only higher PPI scores on admission were independent negative predictors of length of stay (OR:4.429, 95% CI: 5.460-3.398, p < .001). The development of clinically suspected fatal VTE, whatever the status of thromboprophylaxis, did not affect the length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Thromboprophylaxis does not decrease the risk of clinically suspected fatal VTE in patients with advanced disease in their terminal phase. Patients with poor performance status and a short prognosis are unlikely to benefit from thromboprophylaxis.

The pattern of change in opioid and adjuvant prescriptions for cancer pain before and after referral to a comprehensive program in the Palliative Care Center in Kuwait.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related pain is a complicated symptom that often coincides with fatigue, depression, and anxiety. Although many safe treatments are available, inadequate control of Cancer-related pain continues to lead to suffering in cancer patients. This study's aim is to describe pain control, and the pattern of change in opioid and adjuvant medication prescriptions, before and after referral to the Palliative Care Center. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in adult cancer patients the Palliative Care Center between January 1, 2016 and December 30, 2017. We measured pain intensity and other associated symptoms via the Revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) and documented detailed analgesics and adjuvant medication history before starting any palliative care and on days 0, 3, 6, and 14. RESULTS: The analysis included 240 patients whose cancer-related pain, anxiety, and depression scores meaningfully improved by day 6. The changes in the median (interquartile ranges) of Cancer-related pain, anxiety, and depression scores from day 0 to day 6 were: 6 (4-8) to 3 (1-4); 6 (4-9) to 2 (1-4); and 3 (2-6) to 2 (1-4), respectively, with p < 0.001 for all. Morphine was the most common opioid administered; the percentage using it increased from 20.4% (n = 49) before referral to 49.6% (n = 119) on day 6 (p < 0.001). The median morphine equivalent daily dose decreased from a median (interquartile ranges) of 60(31-93) mg/day before referral to 34(22-66) mg/day on day 6 (p < 0.001). There was also a statistically significant increase in the percentage of patients taking adjuvant medications, from 38.8% before referral to 84.2% on day 6 (p < 0.001). Comparing D0 to D6, the number of patients using Gabapentinoids significantly increased from 57(23.75%) to 79(32.9%) (p < 0.001), amitriptyline dramatically increased from 14 (5.8%) to 44 (18.3%) (p < 0.001), and other antidepressant drugs increased from 15 (6.2%) to 34 (14.1%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: After referral to the Palliative Care Center, patients' pain and other symptoms scores decreased significantly, even with lower median morphine equivalent daily doses, arguably through more appropriately directed opioid use. This is evidence for the effectiveness of the comprehensive program at the Palliative Care Center in Kuwait.

Development of palliative care attitude and knowledge (PCAK) questionnaire for physicians in Kuwait.

BACKGROUND: Over the past five decades, palliative care has changed from helping patients at the end of life into a highly dedicated service focused on delivering supportive care to patients with life-limiting illnesses throughout the disease trajectory. To date there is no common agreement on universally applicable measurement tool to know the areas of weakness in physicians' understanding of palliative care and identifying misconceptions about palliative care. This paper describes the development of a reliable and valid questionnaire to provide a measure of the attitude and knowledge of physicians toward palliative care (PCAK). METHODS: Item pool was generated paying particular attention to content and face validity. The initial version of the questionnaire was piloted and assessed based on psychometric criteria. Items which did not reach acceptable validity were excluded, and the final 37 item version was administered to two groups differing in their palliative care attitude and knowledge on two occasions to assess the construct validity and test-retest reliability. Two hundred thirty two physicians working in primary care clinics and general hospitals completed the questionnaire at the piloting stage. The final version (PCAK) was administered to 35 oncologists and 76 physicians. SPSS v20 was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Of the Pilot study, 20 items were excluded because didn't meet the criteria for item difficulty and discrimination. Item-to-total-score correlations (r) was ranging from 0.347 up to 0.806. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was high ranging from 0.636 to 0.824. While testing the final PCAK, oncologist scored consistently higher than the other physicians on all sections of the questionnaire (P < 0.001) suggesting good construct validity. Test to retest reliability for each section was very high, ranging from 0.879 to 0.97 and the overall reliability was 0.95. The internal consistency reliability of each section was very good ranging from 0.681 ± 0.893. CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate that PCAK meets psychometric criteria for reliability and construct validity. It provides a useful scale to assess the attitude and knowledge of physicians about palliative care helping in planning of educational programs for physicians.