Use of opioids in patients with cancer with hepatic impairment-a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Opioids are recommended for moderate-to-severe cancer pain; however, in patients with cancer, impaired hepatic function can affect opioid metabolism. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence for the use of opioids in patients with cancer with hepatic impairment. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted and the following databases searched: AMED (-2021), MEDLINE (-2021), EMBASECLASSIC + EMBASE (-2021) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (-2021). Eligible studies met the following criteria: patients with cancer-related pain, taking an opioid (as defined by the WHO Guidelines for the pharmacological and radiotherapeutic management of cancer pain in adults and adolescents); >18 years of age; patients with hepatic impairment defined using recognised or study-defined definitions; clinical outcome hepatic impairment related; and primary studies. All eligible studies were appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. RESULTS: Three studies (n=95) were eligible but heterogeneity meant meta-analysis was not possible. Each individual study focused on only one each of oxycodone±hydrocotarnine, oxycodone/naloxone and morphine. No recommendations could be formulated on the preferred opioid in patients with hepatic impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Morphine is the preferred opioid in hepatic impairment owing to clinical experience and pharmacokinetics. This review, however, found little clinical evidence to support this. Dose adjustments of morphine and the oxycodone formulations reviewed remain necessary in the absence of quality evidence. Overall, the quality of existing evidence on opioid treatments in cancer pain and hepatic impairment is low and there remains a need for high-quality clinical studies examining this.

A qualitative study of nursing staff experiences of delirium in the hospice setting.

BACKGROUND:: Delirium is a common condition occurring in 13-42% of people admitted to palliative care units and up to 88% of these patients are at the end of their lives. It is frequently unrecognised and distressing to all those affected-patients, families and health professionals. In addition, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding its trajectory and optimal management, both of which can be inconsistent. AIMS:: This study aims to explore the experience of nursing staff who are caring for patients with delirium in the hospice environment and understand any potential barriers to its management. METHODS:: Semistructured interviews using emotional touchpoints were conducted with 12 nurses and six healthcare assistants in three hospices in North East England. Data was analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. FINDINGS:: The results highlighted gaps in knowledge and understanding in the management of delirium. The results demonstrated delirium had significant emotional effects, which were associated with uncertainty in managing the condition and the impact of this uncertainty on the relationship between staff and patients. CONCLUSION:: This study highlights the emotional impact of caring for patients with delirium. Future work is needed to address the areas of uncertainty identified and ascertain how to best support nursing staff in these challenges.

Screening for delirium in specialist palliative care inpatient units: perceptions and outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) indicate that palliative care patients are at high risk of delirium and should be screened for it using the short confusion assessment method (short CAM). This study aimed to assess the perceptions of the short CAM for delirium screening amongst health-care workers in specialist palliative care inpatient units (SPCUs) and to investigate its use as a screening instrument. METHODS: Patients in 5 SPCUs in the North East of England were screened for delirium using the short CAM and a staff survey assessed the acceptability of the short-CAM in this setting. RESULTS: Of the 63 staff surveyed, 79.4% felt screening for delirium was important and 59.3% found the short CAM 'not at all' burdensome to complete. However, only 40.7% felt that the short-CAM often accurately reflected patients' conditions and none felt it always accurately reflected patients' condition. Of 298 patients screened, 20% screened positive on the short CAM. Malignant and intra-cerebral diseases were significant independent predictors of a positive screen. Hospice length of stay and in-hospice mortality were higher in those with a positive result (66.7%) than in those without (38.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals deem delirium screening to be important in SPCUs, but may not support routine use of the short CAM. This could reflect a limited perceived impact on care and lack of confidence in this tool to reflect a complex patient group.