Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Support Care Cancer ; 32(1): 66, 2023 Dec 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38150077

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This study examined the 30-day unplanned readmission rate in the medical oncology population before and after the implementation of an institution-wide multicomponent interdisciplinary goals of care (myGOC) program. METHODS: This retrospective study compared the 30-day unplanned readmission rates in consecutive medical patients during the pre-implementation period (May 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019) and the post-implementation period (May 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020). Secondary outcomes included 7-day unplanned readmission rates, inpatient do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, and palliative care consults. We randomly selected a hospitalization encounter for each unique patient during each study period for statistical analysis. A multivariate analysis model was used to examine the association between 30-day unplanned readmission rates and implementation of the myGOC program. RESULTS: There were 7028 and 5982 unique medical patients during the pre- and post-implementation period, respectively. The overall 30-day unplanned readmission rate decreased from 24.0 to 21.3% after implementation of the myGOC program. After adjusting for covariates, the myGOC program implementation remained significantly associated with a reduction in 30-day unplanned readmission rates (OR [95% CI] 0.85 [0.77, 0.95], p = 0.003). Other factors significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of a 30-day unplanned readmission were an inpatient DNR order, advanced care planning documentation, and an emergent admission type. We also observed a significant decrease in 7-day unplanned readmission rates (OR [95% CI] 0.75 [0.64, 0.89]) after implementation of the myGOC program. CONCLUSION: The 30-day and 7-day unplanned readmission rates decreased in our hospital after implementation of a system-wide multicomponent GOC intervention.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Patient Readmission , Humans , Goals , Retrospective Studies , Hospitalization , Inpatients , Neoplasms/therapy
2.
Am J Infect Control ; 51(5): 506-513, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35901993

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in health care settings endangers patients with cancer. As knowledge of the transmission of COVID-19 emerged, strategies for preventing nosocomial COVID-19 were updated. We describe our early experience with nosocomial respiratory viral infections (RVIs) at a cancer center in the first year of the pandemic (March 2020-March 2021). METHODS: Nosocomial RVIs were identified through our infection control prospective surveillance program, which conducted epidemiologic investigations of all microbiologically documented RVIs. Data was presented as frequencies and percentages or medians and ranges. RESULTS: A total of 35 of 3944 (0.9%) documented RVIs were determined to have been nosocomial acquired. Majority of RVIs were due to SARS CoV-2 (13/35; 37%) or by rhinovirus/enterovirus (12/35; 34%). A cluster investigation of the first 3 patients with nosocomial COVID-19 determined that transmission most likely occurred from employees to patients. Five patients (38%) required mechanical ventilation and 4 (31%) died during the same hospital encounter. CONCLUSIONS: Our investigation of the cluster led to enhancement of our infection control measures. The implications of COVID-19 vaccination on infection control policies is still unclear and further studies are needed to delineate its impact on the transmission of COVID-19 in a hospital setting.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Neoplasms , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Prospective Studies , Hospitals , Neoplasms/epidemiology
3.
J Clin Oncol ; 41(3): 579-589, 2023 01 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36201711

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Many hospitals have established goals-of-care programs in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic; however, few have reported their outcomes. We examined the impact of a multicomponent interdisciplinary goals-of-care program on intensive care unit (ICU) mortality and hospital outcomes for medical inpatients with cancer. METHODS: This single-center study with a quasi-experimental design included consecutive adult patients with cancer admitted to medical units at the MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, during the 8-month preimplementation (May 1, 2019-December 31, 2019) and postimplementation period (May 1, 2020-December 31, 2020). The primary outcome was ICU mortality. Secondary outcomes included ICU length of stay, hospital mortality, and proportion/timing of care plan documentation. Propensity score weighting was used to adjust for differences in potential covariates, including age, sex, cancer diagnosis, race/ethnicity, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. RESULTS: This study involved 12,941 hospitalized patients with cancer (pre n = 6,977; post n = 5,964) including 1,365 ICU admissions (pre n = 727; post n = 638). After multicomponent goals-of-care program initiation, we observed a significant reduction in ICU mortality (28.2% v 21.9%; change -6.3%, 95% CI, -9.6 to -3.1; P = .0001). We also observed significant decreases in length of ICU stay (mean change -1.4 days, 95% CI, -2.0 to -0.7; P < .0001) and in-hospital mortality (7% v 6.1%, mean change -0.9%, 95% CI, -1.5 to -0.3; P = .004). The proportion of hospitalized patients with an in-hospital do-not-resuscitate order increased significantly from 14.7% to 19.6% after implementation (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.3 to 1.5; P < .0001), and do-not-resuscitate order was established earlier (mean difference -3.0 days, 95% CI, -3.9 to -2.1; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: This study showed improvement in hospital outcomes and care plan documentation after implementation of a system-wide, multicomponent goals-of-care intervention.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Adult , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Length of Stay , Inpatients , Goals , Propensity Score , Intensive Care Units , Hospital Mortality , Retrospective Studies , Neoplasms/therapy
4.
Support Care Cancer ; 30(9): 7783-7788, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35705751

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Several studies have confirmed increased mortality among patients with both COVID-19 and cancer. It remains important to continue to report observations of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in this vulnerable population. The purpose of this study is to describe the hospitalization characteristics and outcomes of patients with both cancer and COVID-19 admitted to our comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: This was a descriptive study of the first COVID-19-related hospitalization among adult patients with cancer admitted to our institution. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient demographics, clinical as well as hospitalization characteristics. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 212 patients were included in our cohort with a mean age of 59 years. Fifty-four percent of patients had history of solid tumor malignancy and 46% had hematologic malignancies. Eighty-five percent of our cohort had active malignancy. The mean length of stay (LOS) for hospitalization was 11.2 days (median LOS of 6 days). Twenty-five percent had severe disease and 10.8% died during their initial hospitalization. Those who had severe disease had worse survival at the end of the observation period. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 among cancer patients causes significant morbidity and mortality as well as repeat hospitalizations. Continued study of COVID-19 in this vulnerable population is essential in order to better inform evolving treatment algorithms, public health policies, and infection control protocols, especially for institutions caring for patients with cancer.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Hospitalization , Humans , Infection Control , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Cancer Med ; 10(18): 6199-6206, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34313031

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the 30-day hospital readmission rate, reasons, and risk factors for patients with cancer who were discharged to home setting after acute inpatient rehabilitation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a secondary retrospective analysis of participants in a completed prospective survey study that assessed the continuity of care and functional safety concerns upon discharge and 30 days after discharge in adults. Patients were enrolled from September 5, 2018, to February 7, 2020, at a large academic quaternary cancer center with National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Center designation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Thirty-day hospital readmission rate, descriptive summary of reasons for readmissions, and statistical analyses of risk factors related to readmission. RESULTS: Fifty-five (21%) of the 257 patients were readmitted to hospital within 30 days of discharge from acute inpatient rehabilitation. The reasons for readmissions were infection (20, 7.8%), neoplasm (9, 3.5%), neurological (7, 2.7%), gastrointestinal disorder (6, 2.3%), renal failure (3, 1.1%), acute coronary syndrome (3, 1.1%), heart failure (1, 0.4%), fracture (1, 0.4%), hematuria (1, 0.4%), wound (1, 0.4%), nephrolithiasis (1, 0.4%), hypervolemia (1, 0.4%), and pain (1, 0.4%). Multivariate logistic regression modeling indicated that having a lower locomotion score (OR = 1.29; 95% CI, 1.07-1.56; p = 0.007) at discharge, having an increased number of medications (OR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01-1.25; p = 0.028) at discharge, and having a lower hemoglobin at discharge (OR = 1.31; 95% CI, 1.03-1.66; p = 0.031) were independently associated with 30-day readmission. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Among adult patients with cancer discharged to home setting after acute inpatient rehabilitation, the 30-day readmission rate of 21% was higher than that reported for other rehabilitation populations but within the range reported for patients with cancer who did not undergo acute inpatient rehabilitation.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms/rehabilitation , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Cancer Care Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge/statistics & numerical data , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , United States
6.
Integr Cancer Ther ; 19: 1534735420909903, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32153208

ABSTRACT

Introduction: There is limited research regarding the benefits of mind-body practices such as meditation in hospitalized patients with an active diagnosis of any cancer type. Methods: We conducted a prospective, randomized, clinical trial (NCT03445572) comparing 2 meditative practices-Isha Kriya (IK) and meditative slow breathing (MSB)-versus wait-list controls in hospitalized cancer patients. Our aim was to determine the feasibility of meditation practice in cancer inpatients. Feasibility was defined as recruitment of more than 50% of the eligible patients approached and at least 60% of the patients having meditated at least 4 days by day 7. Acceptability was assessed on day 7 as a positive response on at least 2 questions on the modified Global Symptom Evaluation (GSE) scale. Results: Forty patients (39% of the eligible patients approached) consented to participate in the study and were randomly assigned to the MSB (n = 13), IK (n = 14), or wait-list (n = 13) groups. Of the 27 patients assigned to receive MSB and IK meditations, day 7 data were available for 18 patients. Fifteen of the 18 patients meditated at least once in the first 7 days, and most (12/15) responded positively on the GSE. Conclusion: Both IK and MSB meditations were acceptable among the hospitalized cancer patients. Feasibility for enrollment and practice was likely not achieved due to limited uninterrupted time for daily meditation, high levels of morbidity in some participants, and limited research staff support. Shorter term outcomes should be explored in future meditation studies involving hospitalized cancer patients.


Subject(s)
Inpatients , Meditation/methods , Mind-Body Therapies/methods , Neoplasms , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Inpatients/psychology , Inpatients/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Needs Assessment , Neoplasms/physiopathology , Neoplasms/psychology , Neoplasms/therapy , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Psychosocial Support Systems , Severity of Illness Index , Time Factors
7.
Am J Hosp Palliat Care ; 37(9): 707-715, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31986903

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In patients with advanced cancer, prolongation of life with treatment often incurs substantial emotional and financial expense. Among hospitalized patients with cancer since acute kidney injury (AKI) is known to be associated with much higher odds for hospital mortality, we investigated whether renal replacement therapy (RRT) use in the intensive care unit (ICU) was a significant independent predictor of worse outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients admitted in 2005 to 2014 who were diagnosed with stage IV solid tumors, had AKI, and a nephrology consult. The main outcomes were survival times from the landmark time points, inpatient mortality, and longer term survival after hospital discharge. Logistic regression and Cox proportional regression were used to compare inpatient mortality and longer term survival between RRT and non-RRT groups. Propensity score-matched landmark survival analyses were performed with 2 landmark time points chosen at day 2 and at day 7 from ICU admission. RESULTS: Of the 465 patients with stage IV cancer admitted to the ICU with AKI, 176 needed RRT. In the multivariate logistic regression model after adjusting for baseline serum albumin and baseline maximum Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), the patients who received RRT were not significantly different from non-RRT patients in inpatient mortality (odds ratio: 1.004 [95% confidence interval: 0.598-1.684], P = .9892). In total, 189 patients were evaluated for the impact of RRT on long-term survival and concluded that RRT was not significantly associated with long-term survival after discharge for patients who discharged alive. Landmark analyses at day 2 and day 7 confirmed the same findings. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that receiving RRT in the ICU was not significantly associated with inpatient mortality, survival times from the landmark time points, and long-term survival after discharge for patients with stage IV cancer with AKI.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Renal Replacement Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Acute Kidney Injury/mortality , Aged , Cancer Care Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/pathology , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Retrospective Studies , Survival Analysis
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL