[Community-Based Comprehensive Care System and Cancer Treatment Coordination System from the Viewpoint of Designated Cancer Hospitals].

In promoting the community-based comprehensive care system, designated cancer hospitals are required to provide decision- making support for treatment and care in the face of increasingly sophisticated and diverse treatments, to promote hospitalization and discharge support to shorten the length of hospital stay, and to implement multidisciplinary cooperation for coordination of treatment and care due to the increasing number of elderly and multi-morbidity cancer patients. However, it is difficult at present to link and integrate designated cancer hospitals, which are required to provide cancer treatment in each secondary medical care area, and community comprehensive care systems, which provide medical care and care to support daily life and autonomy and independence of patients and their families in the patients' living areas. In the future, through the promotion of networking and educational activities for healthcare professionals, as demonstrated in previous studies, it will be necessary to establish a system in which cancer treatment and community-based comprehensive care systems are linked to provide high-quality medical care and care to cancer patients.

Prognostic awareness in Japanese patients with advanced cancer: a follow-up cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer have been reported to be more likely to receive goal-concordant care if they have accurate prognostic awareness. However, many patients do not have this awareness. This study aimed to examine the prognostic awareness among Japanese patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: This single-center, follow-up cohort study included Japanese patients with advanced cancer who received chemotherapy at Tohoku University Hospital between January 2015 and January 2016. Patients were surveyed at enrollment and followed up for clinical events for 5 years thereafter. We compared (i) the patients' prognostic awareness with both actual survival time and physician's prediction of survival and (ii) physician's prediction of survival time with actual survival. Factors associated with accurate prognostic awareness were identified by univariate analysis. RESULTS: Of the 133 patients eligible for the study, 57 patients were analyzed. Only 10 (17.5%) patients had accurate prognostic awareness. Forty-three patients (75.4%) were optimistic about their prognosis; >80% of patients were more optimistic than their physicians about their prognosis. The physicians' predictions were accurate in for patients (37.5%). Accurate prognostic awareness was associated with physician's explanation of the prognosis and patients' perception of a good death. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of the patients with advanced cancer in this study had prognostic awareness that was more optimistic in comparison with their actual survival, and most were more optimistic than their physicians about their prognosis. Further research is needed to develop programs to facilitate the discussion of life expectancy with patients in a manner that is consistent with their preferences.

The effect of palliative care team intervention and symptom improvement using patient-reported outcomes: a multicenter prospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Hospital-based palliative care teams (HPCTs) are widespread internationally, but multicenter studies about their effectiveness, using patient-reported outcomes (PROs), are limited to Australia and a few other countries. We conducted a multicenter, prospective observational study in Japan to explore the effectiveness of the HPCTs using PROs. METHODS: Nationwide, eight hospitals participated in the study. We included newly referred patients for one month in 2021 and followed them for one month. We asked the patients to complete the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale or the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System as PROs at the time of the intervention, three days later, and weekly after the intervention. RESULTS: A total of 318 participants were enrolled, of whom 86% were patients with cancer, 56% were undergoing cancer treatment, and 20% received the Best Supportive Care. After one week, the following 12 symptoms showed more than a 60% improvement from severe to moderate or less: vomiting (100%), shortness of breath (86%), nausea (83%), practical problems (80%), drowsiness (76%), pain (72%), poor sharing of feelings with family or friends (72%), weakness (71%), constipation (69%), not feeling at peace (64%), lack of information (63%), and sore or dry mouth (61%). Symptoms with improvement from severe/moderate to mild or less were vomiting (71%) and practical problems (68%). CONCLUSION: This multicenter study showed that HPCTs effectively improved symptoms in several severe conditions, as assessed by PROs. This study also demonstrated the difficulty of relieving symptoms in patients in palliative care and the need for improved care.

Are family relationships associated with family conflict in advanced cancer patients?

OBJECTIVES: Family conflict during end-of-life care is an important issue for advanced cancer patients and their families, although studies are lacking. We investigated the association between family relationships and family conflict in advanced cancer patients. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of a nationwide multicenter questionnaire survey targeting the bereaved family members of cancer patients who died in palliative care units, general wards, or at home to evaluate the quality of end-of-life care in Japan. RESULTS: A total of 1084 questionnaires (63.0%) were returned and we analyzed a total of 908 responses. In total, 38.0% of family members reported at least one family conflict during end-of-life care, and the most frequent family conflict was "about certain family members not pulling their weight" (23.5%). Multivariate linear analysis revealed family members who asserted their opinions (p < 0.001), family assessment device score (p < 0.001), worries about family finances during cancer treatment (p < 0.001), family members contacted after illness were helpful (p = 0.003), female patients (p = 0.03), and family with family relationship index ≤7 (p = 0.04) were positively associated with the outcome-family conflict (OFC) score. Proxy decision maker was selected by the patient (p = 0.003), people listened to families' worries or problems (p = 0.003), physician gave sufficient explanation (p = 0.003), living will before their illness (p = 0.038) and female bereaved family members (p = 0.046) were negatively associated with the OFC score. CONCLUSIONS: It may be important for health care providers to actively assess the possibility of family conflicts according to family relationships, such as a proxy decision maker having been selected by the patient.

Association of a home-based nursing service during chemotherapy with the transfer to home care immediately after the last chemotherapy treatment in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate timing of introducing the home-based nursing service to patients with advanced cancer has not been clarified. This study conducted a retrospective cohort study to investigate the associations of the early utilization of the home-based nursing service during chemotherapy with the place of care immediately after the last chemotherapy treatment in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Among the patients referred to the palliative care team of the University of Tsukuba Hospital between January 2018 and December 2019, patients with advanced cancer undergoing chemotherapy or before the start of chemotherapy at referral were included. The study patients who utilized the home-based nursing service during chemotherapy were classified into the early utilization group. The primary endpoint was the place of care immediately after the last chemotherapy treatment. RESULTS: Of the 1154 patients referred to the palliative care team during the study period, 261 were eligible for this study. Of these patients, 15.3% of patients (n = 40) received the home-based nursing service during chemotherapy. The proportion of patients transferred to home care after the last chemotherapy treatment was 17.5% in the early utilization group and 7.2% in the control group. The multivariate analysis revealed that the early utilization of the home-based nursing service during chemotherapy was significantly associated with the transfer to home care (odds ratio = 3.077; 95% confidence interval, 1.113-8.502). CONCLUSION: The early utilization of the home-based nursing service during chemotherapy might be associated with the transfer to home care immediately after the last chemotherapy treatment.

Mortality risks of body mass index and energy intake trajectories in institutionalized elderly people: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Many factors can identify the mortality risks of institutionalized elderly people; among all such factors, body mass index (BMI) and energy intake (EI) can be employed as independent predictors. The objective of this study was to elucidate about the mortality risks and the trajectory of two parameters obtained from continuously monitored data. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study targeted 218 elderly people who were admitted to a nursing home for at least 6 months between 2007 and 2020 and passed away at the nursing home. BMI and EI (kcal) per body weight (BW) were continuously measured until death. RESULTS: BMI continued to decrease for 5 years until death. The rate of change of BMI significantly increased for 3 years before death (P = 0.004). In contrast, the rate of change of EI per BW significantly increased after 1 year before death (P < 0.001); in addition, 2 months before death, this rate of change significantly exceeded that of BMI (P = 0.007). In the four risk groups that were examined, a BMI of <18.0 + EI per BW of <29.2 and a BMI of <17.3 + EI per BW of <28.3 were significantly correlated with a high risk of death (log-rank test: P < 0.001, P = 0.002, respectively). There was no significant difference in the hazard ratio based on the age at the time of admission; however, when EI per BW was <23.8, the risk of death was significantly higher [hazard ratio = 4.36; 95% confidence interval: 2.31-8.24]. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly people in the current study presented a tendency toward decreasing BMI starting 60 months prior to death even if EI per BW remained constant. In the 1 year before death, EI per BW rapidly decreased. When the rate of change of EI per BW exceeded the rate of decrease of BMI, it was considered to be the point of no return when death was imminent. Our study showed that identifying mortality risks from the relationship between the trajectories of the two parameters that were continuously measured for several months to years is possible.

"The surprise questions" using variable time frames in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Several studies supported the usefulness of "the surprise question" in terms of 1-year mortality of patients. "The surprise question" requires a "Yes" or "No" answer to the question "Would I be surprised if this patient died in [specific time frame]." However, the 1-year time frame is often too long for advanced cancer patients seen by palliative care personnel. "The surprise question" with shorter time frames is needed for decision making. We examined the accuracy of "the surprise question" for 7-day, 21-day, and 42-day survival in hospitalized patients admitted to palliative care units (PCUs). METHOD: This was a prospective multicenter cohort study of 130 adult patients with advanced cancer admitted to 7 hospital-based PCUs in South Korea. The accuracy of "the surprise question" was compared with that of the temporal question for clinician's prediction of survival. RESULTS: We analyzed 130 inpatients who died in PCUs during the study period. The median survival was 21.0 days. The sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy for the 7-day "the surprise question" were 46.7, 88.7, and 83.9%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy for the 7-day temporal question were 6.7, 98.3, and 87.7%, respectively. The c-indices of the 7-day "the surprise question" and 7-day temporal question were 0.662 (95% CI: 0.539-0.785) and 0.521 (95% CI: 0.464-0.579), respectively. The c-indices of the 42-day "the surprise question" and 42-day temporal question were 0.554 (95% CI: 0.509-0.599) and 0.616 (95% CI: 0.569-0.663), respectively. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Surprisingly, "the surprise questions" and temporal questions had similar accuracies. The high specificities for the 7-day "the surprise question" and 7- and 21-day temporal question suggest they may be useful to rule in death if positive.

The association of family functioning and psychological distress in the bereaved families of patients with advanced cancer: a nationwide survey of bereaved family members.

OBJECTIVES: Family conflict and family functioning were regarded as changeable factors associated with complicated grief (CG) and major depressive disorder (MDD) in the bereaved families of patients with advanced cancer, although the evidence is limited. We explored the family functioning associated with CG and MDD developing either independently or co-morbidly in the bereaved families of patients with advanced cancer who died in palliative care units (PCUs). METHODS: This study comprised a nationwide cross-sectional questionnaire survey of bereaved family members of cancer patients who died in Japanese PCUs participating in evaluation of the quality of end-of-life care. RESULTS: A total of 529 questionnaires (69.2%) were returned, and we analyzed a total of 458 responses. A total of 14.2% of participants were considered as having CG, 22.5% as having moderate to severe depression, and 9.6% as having co-morbid symptoms. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that many family members insulted or yelled at one another (odd ratio [OR]: 2.99, p = 0.046; OR:2.57, p = 0.033), and conflict regarding what is meant by a good death (OR:3.60, p = 0.026; OR:4.06, p = 0.004) was significantly positively associated with CG, MDD, and co-morbid symptom. CONCLUSIONS: Specific family conflicts may increase the incidence of CG, MDD, and co-morbid symptoms in the bereaved families of patients with advanced cancer. Our results may encourage health care providers to approach discussions about end-of-life issue with the patient and their family in advance, especially focusing on what is considered a good death for the patient, which may prevent or resolve the family conflict.

Differences among institutions in the prevalence of and indications for urinary catheterization of advanced cancer patients at palliative care units: A multicenter prospective cohort study (EASED).

BACKGROUND: Studies on the appropriate use of urinary catheters for cancer patients at the end of life are limited. AIM: To clarify the differences among institutions in the prevalence of and indications for urinary catheterization of advanced cancer patients at palliative care units. DESIGN: Pre-planned secondary analysis of a multicenter, prospective cohort study; East-Asian collaborative cross-cultural Study to Elucidate the Dying process (EASED). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: This study enrolled consecutive advanced cancer patients admitted to palliative care units between January and December 2017. The final study group comprised 1212 patients from 21 institutions throughout Japan. RESULTS: Out of the 1212 patients, 380 (31.4%; 95% confidence interval, 28.7%-34.0%) underwent urinary catheterization during their palliative care unit stay, and the prevalence of urinary catheterization in patients who died at palliative care units by institution ranged from 0.0% to 55.4%. When the 21 participating institutions were equally divided into three groups according to the institutional prevalence of catheterization, patients with difficulty in moving safely, exhaustion on movement, and restlessness or agitation were more likely to be catheterized in institutions with a high prevalence of catheterization than in those with a low or moderate prevalence (p < 0.008, p = 0.008, and p < 0.008, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study revealed that the institutional prevalence of urinary catheterization in advanced cancer patients at palliative care units widely varied. Further studies are needed to establish the appropriate use of urinary catheters, especially in patients with difficulty in moving safely, exhaustion on movement, and restlessness or agitation.

HOme-based Longitudinal Investigation of the multidiSciplinary Team Integrated Care (HOLISTIC): protocol of a prospective nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The use of home health care (HHC) is increasing worldwide. This may have an impact not only on patients and their caregivers' health but on care resource utilization and costs. We lack information on the impact of HHC on the broader dimensions of health status and care resource utilization. More understanding of the longitudinal HHC impact on HHC patients and caregivers is also needed. Moreover, we know little about the synergy between HHC and social care. Therefore, the present study aims to observe longitudinal changes in health, care resource utilization and costs and caregiving burden among HHC recipients and their caregivers in Taiwan. METHODS: A prospective cohort study "Home-based Longitudinal Investigation of the Multidisciplinary Team Integrated Care (HOLISTIC)" will be conducted and 600 eligible patient-caregiver dyads will be recruited and followed with comprehensive quantitative assessments during six home investigations over two years. The measurements include physical function, psychological health, cognitive function, wellbeing, shared decision making and advance care planning, palliative care and quality of dying, caregiving burden, continuity and coordination of care, care resource utilization, and costs. DISCUSSION: The HOLISTIC study offers the opportunity to comprehensively understand longitudinal changes in health conditions, care resource utilization and costs and caregiving burden among HHC patients and caregivers. It will provide new insights for clinical practitioners and policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier is NCT04250103 which has been registered on 31st January 2020.

End-of-life care preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers: a nationwide survey in Japan.

BACKGROUND: A better understanding of differences between the preferences of the general public and the recommendations of healthcare providers with regard to end-of-life (EOL) care may facilitate EOL discussion. METHODS: The aim of this study was to clarify differences between preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers with regard to treatment, EOL care, and life-sustaining treatment (LST) based on a hypothetical scenario involving a patient with advanced cancer. This study comprised exploratory post-hoc analyses of "The Survey of Public Attitude Towards Medical Care at the End of life", which was a population based, cross-sectional anonymous survey in Japan to investigate public attitudes toward medical care at the end of life. Persons living in Japan over 20 years old were randomly selected nationwide. Physicians, nurses, and care staff were recruited at randomly selected facilities throughout Japan. The general public data from the original study was combined to the data of healthcare providers in order to conduct exploratory post-hoc analyses. The preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers with regard to EOL care and LST was assessed based on the hypothetical scenario of an advanced cancer patient. RESULTS: All returned questionnaires were analyzed: 973 from the general public, 1039 from physicians, 1854 from nurses, and 752 from care staff (response rates of 16.2, 23.1, 30.9, and 37.6%, respectively). The proportion of the general public who wanted "chemotherapy or radiation", "ventilation", and "cardiopulmonary resuscitation" was significantly higher than the frequency of these options being recommended by physicians, nurses, and care staff, but the general public preference for "cardiopulmonary resuscitation" was significantly lower than the frequency of its recommendation by care staff. CONCLUSION: Regarding a hypothetical scenario for advanced cancer, the general public preferred more aggressive treatment and more frequent LST than that recommended by healthcare providers.

Frequency of discussing and documenting advance care planning in primary care: secondary analysis of a multicenter cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: To improve the quality of advance care planning (ACP) in primary care, it is important to understand the frequency of and topics involved in the ACP discussion between patients and their family physicians (FPs). METHODS: A secondary analysis of a previous multicenter cross-sectional observational study was performed. The primary outcome of this analysis was the frequency of and topics involved in the ACP discussion between outpatients and FPs. In March 2017, 22 family physicians at 17 clinics scheduled a day to assess outpatients and enrolled patients older than 65 years who were recognized by FPs as having regular visits. We defined three ACP discussion topics: 1) future decline in activities of daily living (ADL), 2) future inability to eat, and 3) surrogate decision makers. FPs assessed whether they had ever discussed any ACP topics with each patient and their family members, and if they had documented the results of these discussions in medical records before patients were enrolled in the present study. We defined patients as being at risk of deteriorating and dying if they had at least 2 positive general indicators or at least 1 positive disease-specific indicator in the Japanese version of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool. RESULTS: In total, 382 patients with a mean age of 77.4 ± 7.9 years were enrolled, and 63.1% were female. Seventy-nine patients (20.7%) had discussed at least one ACP topic with their FPs. However, only 23 patients (6.0%) had discussed an ACP topic with family members and their FPs, with the results being documented in their medical records. The topic of future ADL decline was discussed and documented more often than the other two topics. Patients at risk of deteriorating and dying discussed ACP topics significantly more often than those not at risk of deteriorating and dying (39.4% vs. 16.8%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: FPs may discuss ACP with some of their patients, but may not often document the results of this discussion in medical records. FPs need to be encouraged to discuss ACP with patients and family members and describe the decisions reached in medical records.

Adding a Wider Range and "Hope for the Best, and Prepare for the Worst" Statement: Preferences of Patients with Cancer for Prognostic Communication.

INTRODUCTION: Although various phrases to communicate prognoses based on a certain concept have been proposed, no study has systematically investigated preferences of patients with cancer for actual phrases. We investigated whether phrases with a wider range and additional "hope for the best, and prepare for the worst" (hope/prepare) statement would be more preferable and explored variables associated with patients' preferences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a cross-sectional survey, 412 outpatients with cancer self-assessed their preferences for 13 phrases conveying prognostic information (e.g., phrases with or without median, typical range, and/or best/worst cases, and those with or without a hope/prepare statement) on a 6-point scale (1 = not at all preferable; 6 = very preferable). We evaluated demographic data and the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations and conducted multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: Regarding phrases with various ranges, the one including the median, typical range, and best/worst cases was more preferable (mean ± SD, 3.8 ± 1.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6-3.9) than the one with the median and typical range (3.4 ± 1.2; 3.3-3.6) or the one with only the median (3.2 ± 1.3; 3.1-3.3). Concerning the hope/prepare statement, the phrase including the median, typical range, uncertainty, and hope/prepare statement was more preferable (3.8 ± 1.4; 3.7-3.9) than the one without the statement (3.5 ± 1.2; 3.4-3.6). In multivariate analyses, task-oriented coping was significantly correlated with preferences for phrases with explicit information. CONCLUSION: Overall, phrases with a wider range and the hope/prepare statement were preferable to those without them. When patients with cancer ask about prognoses, especially those with task-oriented coping, clinicians may provide explicit information with a wider range and the hope/prepare statement. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Discussing prognoses with patients with advanced cancer is among the most important conversations for clinicians. In this cross-sectional survey to systematically investigate preferences of 412 patients with cancer for phrases conveying prognostic information, phrases with the median, typical range, and best/worst cases and those with the "hope for the best and prepare for the worst" (hope/prepare) statement were the most preferred. When patients with cancer ask about prognoses, clinicians may provide explicit information with a wider range and include the hope/prepare statement.

Prevalence and predictors of conflict in the families of patients with advanced cancer: A nationwide survey of bereaved family members.

OBJECTIVES: Family conflict has several adverse impacts on caregivers. Thus, there is significant value in determining the prevalence and predictors of family conflict, which can enable the health care provider to intervene if family conflict arises during end-of-life care. Accordingly, we aimed to explore the prevalence and predictors of conflict among the families of patients with advanced cancer who died in palliative care units. METHODS: This study was a nationwide multicenter questionnaire survey of bereaved family members of cancer patients who died in Japanese palliative care units participating in evaluation of the quality of end-of-life care. RESULTS: We sent out 764 questionnaires, and 529 questionnaires (69.2%) were returned. As 70 family members refused to participate and we could not identify the answers in one questionnaire, we analyzed a total of 458 responses. The average Outcome-Family Conflict score was 13.5 ± 4.9 (maximum score: 39.5), and 42.2% of family members reported at least one family conflict during end-of-life care. Greater family conflict was significantly associated with younger family age, with family members asserting control over decision making for patient care and with communication constraints among family members, although absent family members "coming out of the woodwork" reduced family conflict. CONCLUSIONS: Many families of patients with advanced cancer experienced conflict during end-of-life care. Family members asserting control over decision making and communication constraints among family members after diagnosis of cancer can predict the occurrence of family conflict. Absent family members "coming out of the woodwork" might reduce family conflict in particular cultures.

The distress and benefit to bereaved family members of participating in a post-bereavement survey.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have simultaneously collected quantitative data regarding the positive and negative effects of participating in post-bereavement surveys. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional postal questionnaire survey in October 2013. Potential participants were caregivers for family members who had died in four inpatient palliative care units, two home hospices, and a general hospital. We collected opinions regarding the distress and benefit of completing a post-bereavement survey. After collecting data, we provided feedback to participating institutions in the form of study results and de-identified open-ended comments. RESULTS: Of 692 potential participants, 596 were sent questionnaires; 393 returned questionnaires were valid and analyzed. Of the respondents, 62% reported being distressed by completing the questionnaire. Female participants and those who were mentally ill during the caregiving period reported more distress. However, 86% of respondents reported they found the questionnaire beneficial. Better quality of end-of-life care and respondent depression were associated with more benefit. Major benefits were: contributing to the development of end-of-life care as a family (63%); expressing gratitude to the hospital and medical staff (60%); and looking back and reflecting on the end-of-life period (40%). Feeling benefit was not correlated with feeling distressed (P = -0.02). CONCLUSION: In this large-scale study on the effects of post-bereavement surveys in Japan, many bereaved family members reported that completing the survey was beneficial. In addition to possibly having feelings of distress, post-bereavement surveys might also be beneficial to end-of-life care facilities.

Adding items that assess changes in activities of daily living does not improve the predictive accuracy of the Palliative Prognostic Index.

BACKGROUND: Changes in activities of daily living in cancer patients may predict their survival. The Palliative Prognostic Index is a useful tool to evaluate cancer patients, and adding an item about activities of daily living changes might improve its predictive value. AIM: To clarify whether adding an item about activities of daily living changes improves the accuracy of Palliative Prognostic Index. DESIGN: Multicenter prospective cohort study. SETTING: A total of 58 palliative care services in Japan. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged >20 years diagnosed with locally extensive or metastatic cancer (including hematological neoplasms) who had been admitted to palliative care units, were receiving care by hospital-based palliative care teams, or were receiving home-based palliative care. Palliative care physicians recorded clinical variables at the first assessment and followed up patients 6 months later. RESULTS: A total of 2425 subjects were recruited and 2343 of these had analyzable data. The C-statistic of the original Palliative Prognostic Index was 0.801, and those of modified Palliative Prognostic Indices ranged from 0.793 to 0.805 at 3 weeks. For 6-week survival predictions, the C-statistic of the original Palliative Prognostic Index was 0.802, and those of modified Palliative Prognostic Indices ranged from 0.791 to 0.799. The weighted kappa of the original Palliative Prognostic Index was 0.510, and those of modified Palliative Prognostic Indices ranged from 0.484 to 0.508. CONCLUSION: Adding items about activities of daily living changes to the Palliative Prognostic Index did not improve prognostic value in advanced cancer patients.

Development the Care Evaluation Scale Version 2.0: a modified version of a measure for bereaved family members to evaluate the structure and process of palliative care for cancer patient.

BACKGROUND: The Care Evaluation Scale (CES1.0) was designed to allow bereaved family members to evaluate the structure and process of care, but has been associated with a high frequency of misresponses. The objective of this study was to develop a modified version of CES1.0 (CES2.0) that would eliminate misresponses while maintaining good reliability and validity. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire survey by mail in October 2013. The participants were bereaved family members of patients who died from cancer in seven institutions in Japan. All family members were asked to complete CES2.0, the short form CES1.0, items on overall care satisfaction, the Family Satisfaction with Advanced Cancer Care (FAMCARE) Scale, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Brief Grief Questionnaire (BGQ). To examine test-retest reliability, all participants were asked to complete a second CES2.0. RESULTS: Of 596 questionnaires sent, 461 (77%) were returned and 393 (66%) were analyzed. In the short form CES1.0, 17.1% of the responses were identified as misresponses. No misresponses were found in CES2.0. We identified 10 CES2.0 subscales similar to those in CES1.0 using exploratory factor analysis. Cronbach's alpha was 0.96, and the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.83. Correlations were found between CES2.0 and overall satisfaction (r = 0.83) and FAMCARE (r = 0.58). In addition, total CES2.0 scores were negatively correlated with the PHQ-9 (r = -0.22) and BGQ (r = -0.10). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that CES2.0 eliminated misresponses associated with CES1.0 while maintaining good reliability and validity and greatly improving test-retest reliability.

Multicenter cohort study on the survival time of cancer patients dying at home or in a hospital: Does place matter?

BACKGROUND: Although the place of death has a great influence on the quality of death and dying for cancer patients, whether the survival time differs according to the place of death is unclear. The primary aim of this study was to explore potential differences in the survival time of cancer patients dying at home or in a hospital. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective cohort study was conducted in Japan from September 2012 through April 2014 and involved 58 specialist palliative care services. RESULTS: Among the 2426 patients recruited, 2069 patients were analyzed for this study: 1582 receiving hospital-based palliative care and 487 receiving home-based palliative care. A total of 1607 patients actually died in a hospital, and 462 patients died at home. The survival of patients who died at home was significantly longer than the survival of patients who died in a hospital in the days' prognosis group (estimated median survival time, 13 days [95% confidence interval (CI), 10.3-15.7 days] vs 9 days [95% CI, 8.0-10.0 days]; P = .006) and in the weeks' prognosis group (36 days [95% CI, 29.9-42.1 days] vs 29 days [95% CI, 26.5-31.5 days]; P = .007) as defined by Prognosis in Palliative Care Study predictor model A. No significant difference was identified in the months' prognosis group. Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed that the place of death had a significant influence on the survival time in both unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78-0.96; P < .01) and adjusted models (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with cancer patients who died in a hospital, cancer patients who died at home had similar or longer survival. Cancer 2016;122:1453-1460. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Surprise Questions for Survival Prediction in Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Predicting the short-term survival in cancer patients is an important issue for patients, family, and oncologists. Although the prognostic accuracy of the surprise question has value in 1-year mortality for cancer patients, the prognostic value for short-term survival has not been formally assessed. The primary aim of the present study was to assess the prognostic value of the surprise question for 7-day and 30-day survival in patients with advanced cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The present multicenter prospective cohort study was conducted in Japan from September 2012 through April 2014, involving 16 palliative care units, 19 hospital-based palliative care teams, and 23 home-based palliative care services. RESULTS: We recruited 2,425 patients and included 2,361 for analysis: 912 from hospital-based palliative care teams, 895 from hospital palliative care units, and 554 from home-based palliative care services. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the 7-day survival surprise question were 84.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.7%-88.0%), 68.0% (95% CI, 67.3%-68.5%), 30.3% (95% CI, 28.9%-31.5%), and 96.4% (95% CI, 95.5%-97.2%), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for the 30-day surprise question were 95.6% (95% CI, 94.4%-96.6%), 37.0% (95% CI, 35.9%-37.9%), 57.6% (95% CI, 56.8%-58.2%), and 90.4% (95% CI, 87.7%-92.6%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Surprise questions are useful for screening patients for short survival. However, the high false-positive rates do not allow clinicians to provide definitive prognosis prediction. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The findings of this study indicate that clinicians can screen patients for 7- or 30-day survival using surprise questions with 90% or more sensitivity. Clinicians cannot provide accurate prognosis estimation, and all patients will not always die within the defined periods. The screened patients can be regarded as the subjects to be prepared for approaching death, and proactive discussion would be useful for such patients.

A comparison of estimated drug costs of potentially inappropriate medications between older patients receiving nurse home visit services and patients receiving pharmacist home visit services: a cross-sectional and propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: There have been no multicenter studies that estimated the relations of either nurse or pharmacist home visit program to drug costs of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). This study aimed to establish whether patients who used nurse or pharmacist home visit programs (nurse or pharmacist program) had lower drug costs of PIMs than those who did not use nurse or pharmacist programs for older patients living at home. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in home care settings in Japan, involving 430 patients aged 65 or older, of whom 276 were female. All received regular home visits from five clinics between May and December 2013. After the PIMs were identified with the Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria, we estimated the drug costs based on actual pharmaceutical prices and measured against who using nurse or pharmacist programs after a propensity score weighted adjustment. RESULTS: Patients who used nurse programs had lower drug cost of PIMs than those who did not use, but it was not significantly different (5.9 ± 13.1 vs 7.1 ± 13.9 USD per month, P = 0.199). The cost of PIMs for patients who used pharmacist programs also had no difference. (7.2 ± 14.5 vs 5.5 ± 11.5 USD per month, P = 0.06). In the patient groups who used nurse programs, patients who also used pharmacist programs had significantly higher costs of PIMs than those who used only nurse programs (5.5 ± 13.9 vs 2.5 ± 6.0 USD per month, P = 0.006). In patients group who did not use pharmacist programs, patients who only used nurse programs had significantly lower costs of PIMs than those who did not use nurse programs (3.6 ± 7.7 vs 5.8 ± 12.7 USD per month, P = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who used nurse program have a trend towards lower drug costs of PIMs than those who used nurse and pharmacist program or pharmacist program alone. Although this study tried to adjust the potential confounders as possible as we could by using propensity score analysis, further studies are needed to confirm our results.