Reducing Futile Acute Care Services for Terminally Ill Patients With Cancer: The Dignity Project.

PURPOSE: Patients with terminal diseases frequently undergo interventions that are futile and may be detrimental to their quality of life. We conducted a quality improvement project aimed to reduce the utilization of futile acute care services (ACSs) for patients with cancer treated with a palliative intent. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team reviewed the records of terminally ill patients with cancer who died between November 2017 and May 2018, during their admission at our institution. The review aimed to assess the magnitude of improper utilization of ACSs and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). Lack of timely documentation of the goals of care (GOCs) was the main reason for this problem. We defined timely documentation as the availability of electronic documentation of patients' GOC before the need for ACSs. Interventions were implemented to improve the process; postintervention data were captured and compared with the baseline data. RESULTS: After the delivery of staff education and the implementation of mandatory documentation of the GOCs in the healthcare electronic record system, the timely documentation of the GOCs for patients with a palliative intent increased significantly from 59% at baseline to 83% in the postintervention phase. The impact of this intervention led to a decrease in admissions to the ICU from 26% to 12% and an estimated annual cost saving of $777,600 in US dollars. CONCLUSION: Our interventions resulted in improved documentation of the GOCs and decrease in the utilization of ACSs including ICU admissions and the associated cost.

Improving Quality of Cancer Care by Participating in Quality Oncology Practice Initiative Certification Program.

PURPOSE: ASCO developed the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) to ensure patient safety in oncology outpatient services. We evaluated the impact of participation in QOPI certification on patient care at our institution. METHODS: To participate in QOPI, we created a multidisciplinary team, and we chose the required modules and began QOPI participation per program requirement. In the initial round, we scored lower than the required score of 75% to be eligible for QOPI certification. We then implemented multiple measures and interventions, and we conducted multiple Plan, Do, Study, Act cycles (PSDA) cycles to achieve our goal. RESULTS: Our score in the initial round was 68%; in the second round, our score remained low at 65%; in the third round, we exceeded the target score by achieving 93%. We completed the certification process with a site visit. In October 2018, we became the first QOPI-certified center in the Middle East and Asia. CONCLUSION: We learned many lessons during our journey toward QOPI certification. Essential elements of success included timely assembly of the right multidisciplinary team and clear communication between team members within the institution and with the ASCO QOPI team.

Managing Oncology Services During a Major Coronavirus Outbreak: Lessons From the Saudi Arabia Experience.

Outbreaks of infectious etiology, particularly those caused by a novel virus that has no known treatment or vaccine, may result in the interruption of medical care provided to patients with cancer and put them at risk for undertreatment in addition to the risk of being exposed to infection, a life-threatening event among patients with cancer. This article describes the approach used to manage patients with cancer during a large-scale Middle East respiratory syndrome-coronavirus hospital outbreak in Saudi Arabia to ensure continuity of care and minimize harm from treatment interruption or acquiring infection. The approach taken toward managing this high-risk situation (COVID-19) could be easily adopted by health care organizations and would be helpful to ensure readiness for the occurrence of future outbreaks of different infectious etiologies like those recent episodes of new coronavirus.

Modelling risk assessment for cervical cancer in symptomatic Saudi women.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether the utility of cervical cancer screening could be improved by combining multiple factors in addition to the pap test. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 300 symptomatic women who were suspected to have cervical cancer and referred for biopsy examination at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia between February 2017 and December 2017. Results: A high risk of cervical cancer in Saudi women was associated with 4 risk factors: family history (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.216; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.433-12.400), vaginal bleeding (aOR, 3.959; 95% CI, 1.272-12.318), hypertension (aOR, 4.554; 95% CI, 1.606-12.912), and an abnormal pap smear test (aOR, 13.985; 95% CI, 5.108-38.284). The model yields an adequate utility (area under the curve, 87.5%, 95% CI, 80.9-94.0%) with acceptable goodness-of-fit (p=0.6915). Conclusion: The pap smear test alone is inadequate to assess high risk for cervical cancer in our center. Early detection of cervical cancer may require consideration of a combination of factors including the pap test. This study has shown that using a combination of abnormal family history, vaginal bleeding, hypertension, and the pap smear test improved the effectiveness of cervical cancer screening.

Does Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Impact Prognosis in Advanced-Stage Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Optimally Debulked at Surgery?

OBJECTIVE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been shown to be noninferior to primary surgery in advanced stage ovarian cancer. We examined the impact of the neoadjuvant approach in patients with optimal residuals (<1 cm). METHODS: Retrospective review of optimally debulked stage 3/4 ovarian cancer was performed. Chi-square tests were used to detect significant associations between categorical variables. A Cox regression model was built to predict patients' overall survival, adjusting for age, tumour grade, histology, use of adjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy, residual status, and primary treatment modality. RESULTS: One hundred one patients were reviewed. Median age was 60.5 (range 39-85). NAC was used in 34 patients. Serous histology was documented in 60 of 101 patients (59%). Microscopic residuals were achieved in 70 patients (69%). There was no significant association between primary treatment modality and microscopic residuals status. With a median follow-up time of 33 months, progression was observed in 53% of patients, with a median progression-free survival of 19.4 months. The use of NAC was an independent adverse prognostic factor (hazard ratio 5.79; 95% CI 2.15-15.55, P = 0.001) for overall survival. Macroscopic residual was an independent adverse prognostic factor (hazard ratio 10.76; 95% CI 2.98-38.89, P < 0.001). The overall Kaplan-Meier median survival estimate was 54.5 months (95% CI 50.64-58.36) in the primary surgery group compared with 41.43 months (95% CI 35.58-47.29) in those given NAC (P = 0.002) CONCLUSION: Primary surgery should be the preferred approach in patients with an initial high likelihood of being optimally cytoreduced.

Does modality of adjuvant chemotherapy after interval surgical debulking matter in epithelial ovarian cancer?: An exploratory analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This article aimed to study the role of adjuvant intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and optimal interval surgical debulking. METHOD: All patients with epithelial ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed from 2007 to 2009. Demographics, related diseases, and survival outcome data were abstracted from the medical records. χ statistics were applied to categorical variables. Cox regression was used to model progression-free survival (PFS), adjusting for age, residual status, and use of adjuvant IP chemotherapy. All P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were reviewed. The median age was 63.3 years. The majority had stage III disease with serous histology. Optimal residual (<1 cm) after interval debulking was achieved in 34 (54%) of 63 patients. Sixteen patients chose to receive adjuvant IP chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 26.2 months. Fifty-one patients had progressed, with a median PFS of 17.5 months. Adjuvant IP chemotherapy was not predictive of PFS (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-3.44; P = 0.89). The estimated median overall survival was 37.8 months (95% CI, 29.9-45.7) in the intravenous group versus 48.1 months (95% CI, 37.9-58.3) in the IP-treated patients (P = 0.162). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant IP chemotherapy was not predictive of survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in our small exploratory study. The role of IP chemotherapy in this setting needs to be further studied in a larger prospective patient cohort.