RESUMEN
Introduction Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) experience unique physical and psychosocial challenges that impact their health and quality of life. Early implementation of palliative care has been shown to improve various health care outcomes. Objective The aim of the present study was to evaluate the patterns of referral of patients with HNC to outpatient palliative care as they relate to utilization of resources and end-of-life discussions. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 245 patients with HNC referred to outpatient palliative care services at two Louisiana tertiary care centers from June 1, 2014, to October 1, 2019. The control group consisted of those that were referred but did not follow-up. Reasons for referral were obtained, and outcome measures such as emergency department (ED) visits, hospital readmissions, and advance care planning (ACP) documentation were assessed according to predictive variables. Results There were 177 patients in the treatment group and 68 in the control group. Patients were more likely to follow up to outpatient palliative care services if referred for pain management. Hospital system, prior inpatient palliative care, and number of outpatient visits were associated with an increased likelihood for ED visits and hospital readmissions. Those in the palliative care treatment group were also more likely to have ACP discussions. Conclusion Early implementation of outpatient palliative care among patients with HNC can initiate ACP discussions. However, there are discrepancies in referral reasons to palliative care and continued existing barriers to its effective utilization.
RESUMEN
Abstract Introduction Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) experience unique physical and psychosocial challenges that impact their health and quality of life. Early implementation of palliative care has been shown to improve various health care outcomes. Objective The aim of the present study was to evaluate the patterns of referral of patients with HNC to outpatient palliative care as they relate to utilization of resources and end-of-life discussions. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 245 patients with HNC referred to outpatient palliative care services at two Louisiana tertiary care centers from June 1, 2014, to October 1, 2019. The control group consisted of those that were referred but did not follow-up. Reasons for referral were obtained, and outcome measures such as emergency department (ED) visits, hospital readmissions, and advance care planning (ACP) documentation were assessed according to predictive variables. Results There were 177 patients in the treatment group and 68 in the control group. Patients were more likely to follow up to outpatient palliative care services if referred for pain management. Hospital system, prior inpatient palliative care, and number of outpatient visits were associated with an increased likelihood for ED visits and hospital readmissions. Those in the palliative care treatment group were also more likely to have ACP discussions. Conclusion Early implementation of outpatient palliative care among patients with HNC can initiate ACP discussions. However, there are discrepancies in referral reasons to palliative care and continued existing barriers to its effective utilization.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To assess the readability of online tracheostomy care resources. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Academic center. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A Google search was performed for "tracheostomy care" in January 2014. The top 50 results were categorized into major versus minor websites and patient-oriented versus professional-oriented resources. These websites were evaluated with the following readability tools: Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Gunning Frequency of Gobbledygook (GFOG). RESULTS: Readability scores for the websites were FRES 57.21 ± 16.71 (possible range = 0-100), FKGL 8.33 ± 2.84 (possible range = 3-12), SMOG 11.25 ± 2.49 (possible range = 3-19), and GFOG 11.43 ± 4.07 (possible range = 3-19). There was no significant difference in all 4 readability scores between major (n = 41) and minor (n = 9) websites. Professional-oriented websites (n = 19) had the following readability scores: FRES 40.77 ± 11.69, FKGL 10.93 ± 2.48, SMOG 13.29 ± 2.32, and GFOG 14.91 ± 3.98. Patient-oriented websites (n = 31) had the following readability scores: FRES 67.29 ± 9.91, FKGL 6.73 ± 1.61, SMOG 10.01 ± 1.64, and GFOG 9.30 ± 2.27. Professional-oriented websites had more difficult readability scores than patient-oriented websites for FRES (P < .00), FKGL (P < .00), SMOG (P < .00), and GFOG (P < .00). CONCLUSION: Online tracheostomy care resources were written at a level more difficult than the recommended fourth- to sixth-grade level for written health information. There was no significant difference in readability between major and minor websites. Professional-oriented websites were more difficult to read than patient-oriented websites.