The 2nd Annual US Celebration of World Hospice and Palliative Care Day: A virtual coming together to support equity in palliative care access.

OBJECTIVE: On October 5-6, 2021, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Supportive Care Service and Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences hosted the 2nd Annual United States (US) Celebration of World Hospice and Palliative Care Day (WHPCD). The purpose of this article is to describe the event within the broader context of the international WHPCD theme: "Leave No One Behind - Equity in Access to Palliative Care." We reflect on lessons learned in anticipation of the 3rd annual conference to be held October 3-4, 2022. METHODS: Description of the 2nd annual event, conference planning team reflection, and attendee evaluation responses. RESULTS: The Worldwide Hospice Palliative Care Alliance launched WHPCD in 2005 as an annual unified day of action to celebrate and support hospice and palliative care around the world. The 2021 US-based innovative virtual conference featured 37 interprofessional hospice and palliative care specialists and patient and family caregiver speakers across 11 diverse sessions with a focus on health equity and COVID-19 considerations. Two primary aims continue to guide the event: community building and wisdom sharing at the intersection of art and science. 278 registrants from at least 14 countries and 21 different states across the US joined the program, which served as a global debriefing for hospice and palliative care workers from diverse settings, contexts, and disciplines. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: The US WHPCD Celebration creates a virtual coming together for collective reflection on hospice and palliative care delivery amid vast changes in clinical practice, research, and policy, both locally and globally. In addition, our goal to ensure an internationally relevant, culturally inclusive, and multidisciplinary agenda will continue to draw increased participation worldwide during future annual events.

Needs and Perspectives of Cancer Center Stakeholders for Access to Patient Values in the Electronic Health Record.

PURPOSE: High-quality cancer care must incorporate patients' personal values in decision making throughout illness. Unfortunately, patient values are neither consistently elicited nor easily accessible in the electronic health record (EHR). Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center is deploying a major EHR innovation, called the Patient Values Tab, which provides ready access to patients' values and personhood. To inform the Tab's design, we interviewed a large, diverse group of institutional stakeholders to understand their user needs for this Tab. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected through semistructured, audio-recorded, in-person, individual interviews. An interdisciplinary team of four coders conducted a process of thematic content analysis. Thematic saturation was achieved, and member checking was performed. RESULTS: A total of 110 stakeholders were approached and interviewed. Participants comprised a wide range of disciplines or professions and others involved in hospital and/or clinic administration. Analysis revealed the following themes related to important Tab content: personhood, support system or resources, social history, communication preferences, future planning, end of life, and illness and treatment understanding. Participants also discussed implementation considerations, the Tab's potential to improve communication, and privacy implications. CONCLUSION: This study focused on a major EHR innovation to centralize information about values and personhood of patients with cancer. We elicited views of over 100 institutional stakeholders through in-depth interviews that were rigorously analyzed, yielding themes related to content and format that helped guide the Tab's design. The interviews generated a sense of ownership and enthusiasm for the Tab among future users. The Tab's introduction advances the use of the EHR as a driver of the delivery of patient-centered care.

Pancreatic cancer-A disease in need: Optimizing and integrating supportive care.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy that continues to be challenging to treat. PDAC has the lowest 5-year relative survival rate compared with all other solid tumor malignancies and is expected to become the second-leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States by 2030. Given the high mortality, there is an increasing role for concurrent anticancer and supportive care in the management of patients with PDAC with the aims of maximizing length of life, quality of life, and symptom control. Emerging trends in supportive care that can be integrated into the clinical management of patients with PDAC include standardized supportive care screening, early integration of supportive care into routine cancer care, early implementation of outpatient-based advance care planning, and utilization of electronic patient-reported outcomes for improved symptom management and quality of life. The most common symptoms experienced are nausea, constipation, weight loss, diarrhea, anorexia, and abdominal and back pain. This review article includes current supportive management strategies for these and others. Common disease-related complications include biliary and duodenal obstruction requiring endoscopic procedures and venous thromboembolic events. Patients with PDAC continue to have a poor prognosis. Systemic therapy options are able to palliate the high symptom burden but have a modest impact on overall survival. Early integration of supportive care can lead to improved outcomes.

What if Acupuncture Were Covered by Insurance for Pain Management? A Cross-Sectional Study of Cancer Patients at One Academic Center and 11 Community Hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: In response to the national opioid crisis, governmental and medical organizations have called for broader insurance coverage of acupuncture to improve access to nonpharmacologic pain therapies, especially in cancer populations, where undertreatment of pain is prevalent. We evaluated whether cancer patients would be willing to use insurance-covered acupuncture for pain. DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of cancer patients with pain at one academic center and 11 community hospitals. METHODS: We used logistic regression models to examine factors associated with willingness to use insurance-covered acupuncture for pain. RESULTS: Among 634 cancer patients, 304 (47.9%) reported willingness to use insurance-covered acupuncture for pain. In univariate analyses, patients were more likely to report willingness if they had severe pain (odds ratio [OR] = 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-2.45) but were less likely if they were nonwhite (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.39-0.90) or had only received high school education or less (OR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.32-0.65). After adjusting for attitudes and beliefs in multivariable analyses, willingness was no longer significantly associated with education (adjusted OR [aOR] = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.50-1.21) and was more negatively associated with nonwhite race (aOR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.29-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one in two cancer patients was willing to use insurance-covered acupuncture for pain. Willingness was influenced by patients' attitudes and beliefs, which are potentially modifiable through counseling and education. Further research on racial disparities is needed to close the gap in utilization as acupuncture is integrated into insurance plans in response to the opioid crisis.

Stakeholders' Perceptions and Information Needs Regarding Research Medical Donation.

CONTEXT: Research Medical Donation (RMD), which entails collecting human tissue within hours after death, benefits cancer research but data are limited regarding barriers institutions face accruing patients to RMD programs. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to generate stakeholder perspectives to best inform the complex RMD process, which includes communicating with patients and their proxies and procuring tissue in a timely manner, all the while respecting end-of-life care sensitivities. METHODS: We explored perceived core needs and challenges of RMD by engaging stakeholders (cancer clinicians, patients, and their caregivers) in eight teleconference focus groups. Breast, pancreatic, and lung cancer clinicians comprised two groups. Each cancer separately had two groups for patients and their caregivers combined. Qualitative analysis of focus group transcripts included identifying and reaching group consensus on transcript themes and establishing agreement on consensus templates to identify primary common and divergent themes. RESULTS: A total of 45 people (13 clinicians, 24 patients, eight caregivers) participated in the groups. The themes identified were as follows: 1) clinicians and patients had limited previous knowledge about RMD; 2) RMD was perceived to mainly benefit research; 3) logistical and privacy questions arose; 4) introducing RMD was deemed sensitive, with patient-specific timing; 5) rare and/or virulent cancers appeared associated with willingness to participate in RMD. CONCLUSION: Patients, families, and cancer clinicians have generally low knowledge of RMD but, upon learning about it, deem it valuable for scientific advancement (particularly for rare and virulent cancers), necessary to be carried out with individualized sensitivity to end-of-life issues, and through training programs with involved clinical staff.

Survival, Healthcare Utilization, and End-of-life Care Among Older Adults With Malignancy-associated Bowel Obstruction: Comparative Study of Surgery, Venting Gastrostomy, or Medical Management.

OBJECTIVE: To compare survival, readmissions, and end-of-life care after palliative procedures compared with medical management for malignancy-associated bowel obstruction (MBO). BACKGROUND: MBO is a late complication of intra-abdominal malignancy for which surgeons are frequently consulted. Decisions about palliative treatments, which include medical management, surgery, or venting gastrostomy tube (VGT), are hampered by the paucity of outcomes data relevant to patients approaching the end of life. METHODS: Retrospective study using 2001 to 2012 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data of patients 65 years or older with stage IV ovarian or pancreatic cancer who were hospitalized for MBO. Multivariate competing-risks regression models were used to compare the following outcomes: survival, readmission for MBO, hospice enrollment, intensive care unit (ICU) care in the last days of life, and location of death in an acute care hospital. RESULTS: Median survival after MBO admission was 76 days (interquartile range 26-319 days). Survival was shorter after VGT [38 days (interquartile range 23-69)] than medical management [72 days (23-312)] or surgery [128 days (42-483)]. As compared to medical management, patients treated with VGT had fewer readmissions [subdistribution hazard ratio 0.41 (0.29-0.58)], increased hospice enrollment [1.65 (1.42-1.91)], and less ICU care [0.69 (0.52-0.93)] and in-hospital death [0.47 (0.36-0.63)]. Surgery was associated with fewer readmissions [0.69 (0.59-0.80)], decreased hospice enrollment [0.84 (0.76-0.92)], and higher likelihood of ICU care [1.38 (1.17-1.64)]. CONCLUSIONS: VGT is associated with fewer readmissions and lower intensity healthcare utilization at the end of life than do medical management or surgery. Given the limited survival, regardless of management, hospitalization with MBO carries prognostic significance and presents a critical opportunity to identify patients' priorities for end-of-life care.

Provider Differences in Use of Implanted Ports in Older Adults With Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Identifying unwarranted variation in health care can highlight opportunities to reduce harm. One often discretionary process in oncology is use of implanted ports to administer intravenous chemotherapy. While there are benefits, ports carry risks. This study's objective was to assess provider-driven variation in port use among cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective assessment using population-based SEER-Medicare data to assess differences in port use across health care providers of older adults with cancer. Participants included over 18,000 patients ages 66 and older diagnosed with breast, colorectal, lung, or pancreatic cancer in 2005-2007, treated by approximately 2900 providers. We identified port use for patients receiving treatment from hospital outpatient facilities versus physicians' offices. Our main analysis assessed the likelihood of a patient receiving a port given port use by the provider's last patient. For a subset of high-use providers, we examined individual provider-level variation by estimating the risk-adjusted likelihood of insertion. RESULTS: Patients receiving chemotherapy in hospital outpatient facilities were significantly less likely to receive a port than those treated in physicians' offices, with adjusted odds ratios (AOR) varying from 0.50 to 0.75 across cancer sites. Implanting a port was associated with increased likelihood of port insertion in the provider's next patient (AOR varied from 1.71 to 2.25). Significant between-provider variation was found among providers with at least 10 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the idea that there is provider-driven variation in the use of ports for chemotherapy administration. This variation highlights an opportunity to standardize practice and reduce unnecessary use.