Implementation of an oncology exercise and wellness rehabilitation program to enhance survivorship: the Beaumont Health System experience.

We developed a multidisciplinary approach to oncology rehabilitation by setting up a physical therapy screening program in a dedicated multidisciplinary clinic to improve survivorship care in the community oncology setting. In June 2011, an oncology rehabilitation program was launched as part of the overall survivorship program to provide patients with an introduction to cancer services, consultation with multiple clinicians, education about their diagnoses, and recommendation for rehabilitation services during or after treatment. The consultation was in conjunction with specialists at the multidisciplinary clinics that were already established within the organization. A dedicated and trained oncology physical therapist participated in the comprehensive multidisciplinary discussion. From the beginning of the program in June 2011 until December 2012, 288 patients (231 women and 57 men) entered the oncology exercise and wellness rehabilitation program. The establishment of the program improved the quality of care for cancer patients as demonstrated by the number of patients screened before treatment recommendations. The program also served the need for continued health and wellness for those in survivorship.

Toxicities and costs of placing prophylactic and reactive percutaneous gastrostomy tubes in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancers treated with chemoradiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: We compared dependence rates, complications, toxicities, and costs associated with prophylactic versus reactive percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement. METHODS: One hundred ninety-three patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: The 1-year and 2-year actuarial PEG tube dependence rate of the entire cohort was 24% and 13%, respectively. There was no difference in the PEG tube dependence rates between those placed prophylactically versus reactively. Patients who received a PEG tube reactively had a significantly higher stricture rate (p = .03) and aspiration rate (p < .001) compared to the prophylactic group. There were significantly fewer hospitalizations in the prophylactic group compared to the reactive group (p = .003). When accounting for both PEG placement and hospitalizations, the prophylactic approach was found to be more cost effective. CONCLUSION: PEG tubes placed prophylactically were associated with lower rates of strictures, aspirations, hospitalizations, and costs compared to those placed reactively.