Stakeholder perspectives on the impact of COVID-19 on oncology services: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: As COVID-19 spread across the globe, cancer services were required to rapidly pivot to minimise risks without compromising outcomes for patients or staff. The aim of this study was to document changes to oncology services as a result of COVID-19 from the perspectives of both providers and receivers of care during the initial phase of the pandemic. METHODS: Participants were recruited between June and December 2020 through an email invitation via professional or consumer organisations, two hospital-based oncology services and snowballing. Semi-structured interviews focused on health service changes and their impacts, which were then analysed by thematic analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients, 16 carers and 29 health professionals were recruited. Fifteen patients (n = 47%) had localised disease, and 19 (n = 59%) were currently receiving treatment. Oncology staff included oncologists, palliative care physicians, nurses, allied health and psychosocial practitioners. Four themes arose from the data: safety, increased stress and burnout, communication challenges and quality of cancer care. CONCLUSIONS: There is an ongoing need for cancer-specific information from a single, trusted source to inform medical practitioners and patients/carers. More data are required to inform evidence-based guidelines for cancer care during future pandemics. All stakeholders require ongoing support to avoid stress and burnout.

Palliative medicine referrals for hepatocellular carcinoma: a national survey of gastroenterologists.

OBJECTIVES: Palliative care (PC) service involvement for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients is suboptimal and little is known about the underlying reasons for this. We aimed to study clinicians' experience and attitudes towards PC in HCC. METHODS: A nationwide survey was conducted of consultants/trainees recruited from the Gastroenterological Society of Australia membership directory. Clinician demographics, experience and attitudes towards PC use for HCC patients were collected. RESULTS: There were 160 participants. Most attended weekly multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM, 60%) and had no formal PC training (71%). MDTM with PC attendance was reported by 12%. Rates of PC referral increased incrementally from BCLC 0/A to D patients but were not universal even in advanced (46%) or terminal (87%) stages. Most acknowledged PC patient discussions occurred too late (61%). Those with prior PC training were more likely to refer BCLC 0/A and B patients for early PC. Referral rates for outpatient PC were higher in respondents who attended MDTM with PC present across all BCLC stages. PC service was rated good/very good by 70%/81% for outpatients/inpatients. Barriers to PC referral included clinician-perceived negative patient associations with PC (83%), clinician-perceived patient/caregiver lack of acceptance (81%/77%) and insufficient time (70%). CONCLUSIONS: PC referral for HCC patients is not universal and occurs late even in late-stage disease. Prior PC training and/or PC presence at MDTM positively influences referral practices. Barriers to PC referral are not related to quality of PC services but rather to clinician-perceived patients' negative reactions to or lack of acceptance of PC.

Palliative care in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma is a common cancer with a poor prognosis, associated with high economic costs and a significant burden of disease. While it is often asymptomatic in the early stages, patients may experience great discomfort from advanced disease, treatment adverse effects, or decompensation of underlying cirrhosis. Palliative care has the potential to markedly improve quality of life, physical, and psychological symptoms in patients with end-stage liver disease, and has been shown to prolong survival in some nonhepatocellular carcinoma malignancies. However, this service is underutilized in hepatocellular carcinoma, and referrals are frequently late due to factors such as stigmatization, inadequate resources, lack of education for nonpalliative care physicians and inadequate modeling for integration of palliative and supportive care within liver disease services. In the future, education workshops, population-based awareness campaigns, increased funding and improved models of care, may improve the uptake of palliative care and subsequently optimize patient care, particularly towards the end of life.

Advance care planning for haemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is a chronic, debilitative and progressive illness that may need interventions such as dialysis, transplantation, dietary and fluid restrictions. Most patients with ESKD will require renal replacement therapy, such as kidney transplantation or maintenance dialysis. Advance care planning traditionally encompass instructions via living wills, and concern patient preferences about interventions such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation and feeding tubes, or circumstances around assigning surrogate decision makers. Most people undergoing haemodialysis are not aware of advance care planning and few patients formalise their wishes as advance directives and of those who do, many do not discuss their decisions with a physician. Advance care planning involves planning for future healthcare decisions and preferences of the patient in advance while comprehension is intact. It is an essential part of good palliative care that likely improves the lives and deaths of haemodialysis patients. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to determine whether advance care planning in haemodialysis patients, compared with no or less structured forms of advance care planning, can result in fewer hospital admissions or less use of treatments with life-prolonging or curative intent, and if patient's wishes were followed at end-of-life. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 27 June 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. We also searched the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Social Work Abstracts (OvidSP). SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs (RCTs in which allocation to treatment was obtained by alternation, use of alternate medical records, date of birth or other predictable methods) looking at advance care planning versus no form of advance care planning in haemodialysis patients was considered for inclusion without language restriction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extraction was carried out independently by two authors using standard data extraction forms. Studies reported in non-English language journals were translated before assessment. Where more than one publication of one study exists, reports were grouped together and the publication with the most complete data was used in the analyses. Where relevant outcomes are only published in earlier versions these data were used. Any discrepancies between published versions were highlighted. Non-randomised controlled studies were excluded. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies (three reports) that involved 337 participants which investigated advance care planning for people with ESKD. Neither of the included studies reported outcomes relevant to this review. Study quality was assessed as suboptimal. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found sparse data that were assessed at suboptimal quality and therefore we were unable to formulate conclusions about whether advance care planning can influence numbers of hospital admissions and treatment required by people with ESKD, or if patients' advance care directives were followed at end-of-life. Further well designed and adequately powered RCTs are needed to better inform patient and clinical decision-making about advance care planning and advance directives among people with ESKD who are undergoing dialysis.