Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) versus usual care for patients with advanced cancer: a mixed methods study.

PURPOSE: Although early palliative care is recommended, resource limitations prevent its routine implementation. We report on the preliminary findings of a mixed methods study involving a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) and qualitative interviews. METHODS: Adults with advanced solid tumors and an oncologist-estimated prognosis of 6-36 months were randomized to STEP or symptom screening alone. STEP involved symptom screening at each outpatient oncology visit; moderate to severe scores triggered an email to a palliative care nurse, who offered referral to in-person outpatient palliative care. Patient-reported outcomes of quality of life (FACT-G7; primary outcome), depression (PHQ-9), symptom control (ESAS-r-CS), and satisfaction with care (FAMCARE P-16) were measured at baseline and 2, 4, and 6 months. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a subset of participants. RESULTS: From Aug/2019 to Mar/2020 (trial halted due to COVID-19 pandemic), 69 participants were randomized to STEP (n = 33) or usual care (n = 36). At 6 months, 45% of STEP arm patients and 17% of screening alone participants had received palliative care (p = 0.009). Nonsignificant differences for all outcomes favored STEP: difference in change scores for FACT-G7 = 1.67 (95% CI: -1.43, 4.77); ESAS-r-CS = -5.51 (-14.29, 3.27); FAMCARE P-16 = 4.10 (-0.31, 8.51); PHQ-9 = -2.41 (-5.02, 0.20). Sixteen patients completed qualitative interviews, describing symptom screening as helpful to initiate communication; triggered referral as initially jarring but ultimately beneficial; and referral to palliative care as timely. CONCLUSION: Despite lack of power for this halted trial, preliminary results favored STEP and qualitative results demonstrated acceptability. Findings will inform an RCT of combined in-person and virtual STEP.

Caregiver bereavement outcomes in advanced cancer: associations with quality of death and patient age.

PURPOSE: We investigated relationships between domains of quality of dying and death in patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers' bereavement outcomes and the moderating effect of patient age at death. METHODS: Bereaved caregivers of deceased patients with advanced cancer who had participated in an early palliative care trial completed measures of grief (Texas Revised Inventory of Grief [TRIG]), complicated grief (Prolonged Grief Inventory [PG-13]), and depression (Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression [CESD-10]). They also completed the Quality of Dying and Death measure (QODD), which assesses patients' symptom control, preparation for death, connectedness with loved ones, and sense of peace with death. RESULTS: A total of 157 bereaved caregivers completed the study. When patient age × QODD subscale interactions were included, greater death preparation was related to less grief at patient death (past TRIG: ß = - .25, p = .04), less current grief (present TRIG: ß = - .26, p = .03), less complicated grief (PG-13: ß = - .37, p = .001), and less depression (CESD-10: ß = - .35, p = .005). Greater symptom control was related to less current grief (present TRIG: ß = - .27, p = .02), less complicated grief (PG-13: ß = - .24, p = .03), and less depression (CESD-10: ß = - .29, p = .01). Significant patient age × connectedness interaction effects for current grief (present TRIG: ß = .30, p = .02) and complicated grief (PG-13: ß = .29, p = .007) indicated that, with less connectedness, younger patient age at death was associated with greater caregiver grief. CONCLUSION: Better end-of-life death preparation and symptom control for patients with cancer may attenuate later caregiver grief and depression. Less connectedness between younger patients and their families may adversely affect caregiver grief.

Timing of Palliative Care Referral Before and After Evidence from Trials Supporting Early Palliative Care.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from randomized controlled trials has demonstrated benefits in quality of life outcomes from early palliative care concurrent with standard oncology care in patients with advanced cancer. We hypothesized that there would be earlier referral to outpatient palliative care at a comprehensive cancer center following this evidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Administrative databases were reviewed for two cohorts of patients: the pre-evidence cohort was seen in outpatient palliative care between June and November 2006, and the post-evidence cohort was seen between June and November 2015. Timing of referral was categorized, according to time from referral to death, as early (>12 months), intermediate (>6 months to 12 months), and late (≤6 months from referral to death). Univariable and multivariable ordinal logistic regression analyses were used to determine demographic and medical factors associated with timing of referral. RESULTS: Late referrals decreased from 68.8% pre-evidence to 44.8% post-evidence; early referrals increased from 13.4% to 31.1% (p < .0001). The median time from palliative care referral to death increased from 3.5 to 7.0 months (p < .0001); time from diagnosis to referral was also reduced (p < .05). On multivariable regression analysis, earlier referral to palliative care was associated with post-evidence group (p < .0001), adjusting for shorter time since diagnosis (p < .0001), referral for pain and symptom management (p = .002), and patient sex (p = .04). Late referrals were reduced to <50% in the breast, gynecological, genitourinary, lung, and gastrointestinal tumor sites. CONCLUSIONS: Following robust evidence from trials supporting early palliative care for patients with advanced cancer, patients were referred substantially earlier to outpatient palliative care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Following published evidence demonstrating the benefit of early referral to palliative care for patients with advanced cancer, there was a substantial increase in early referrals to outpatient palliative care at a comprehensive cancer center. The increase in early referrals occurred mainly in tumor sites that have been included in trials of early palliative care. These results indicate that oncologists' referral practices can change if positive consequences of earlier referral are demonstrated. Future research should focus on demonstrating benefits of early palliative care for tumor sites that have tended to be omitted from early palliative care trials.

Phase II Trial of Symptom Screening With Targeted Early Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Routine early palliative care (EPC) improves quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced cancer, but it may not be necessary for all patients. We assessed the feasibility of Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) in a phase II trial. METHODS: Patients with advanced cancer were recruited from medical oncology clinics. Symptoms were screened at each visit using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (ESAS-r); moderate to severe scores (screen-positive) triggered an email to a palliative care nurse, who called the patient and offered EPC. Patient-reported outcomes of QoL, depression, symptom control, and satisfaction with care were measured at baseline and at 2, 4, and 6 months. The primary aim was to determine feasibility, according to predefined criteria. Secondary aims were to assess whether STEP identified patients with worse patient-reported outcomes and whether screen-positive patients who accepted and received EPC had better outcomes over time than those who did not receive EPC. RESULTS: In total, 116 patients were enrolled, of which 89 (77%) completed screening for ≥70% of visits. Of the 70 screen-positive patients, 39 (56%) received EPC during the 6-month study and 4 (6%) received EPC after the study end. Measure completion was 76% at 2 months, 68% at 4 months, and 63% at 6 months. Among screen-negative patients, QoL, depression, and symptom control were substantially better than for screen-positive patients at baseline (all P<.0001) and remained stable over time. Among screen-positive patients, mood and symptom control improved over time for those who accepted and received EPC and worsened for those who did not receive EPC (P<.01 for trend over time), with no difference in QoL or satisfaction with care. CONCLUSIONS: STEP is feasible in ambulatory patients with advanced cancer and distinguishes between patients who remain stable without EPC and those who benefit from targeted EPC. Acceptance of the triggered EPC visit should be encouraged. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04044040.

"I didn't want to be in charge and yet I was": Bereaved caregivers' accounts of providing home care for family members with advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To describe bereaved caregivers' experiences of providing care at home for patients with advanced cancer, while interacting with home care services. METHODS: Caregivers of patients who had completed a 4-month randomized controlled trial of early palliative care versus standard oncology care were recruited 6 months to 5 years after the patient's death. All patients except one (control) had eventually received palliative care. In semi-structured interviews, participants were asked about their experiences of caregiving. Grounded theory guided all aspects of the study. RESULTS: Sixty-one bereaved caregivers (30 intervention, 31 control) were interviewed, including spouses (33), adult children (19), and other family (9). There were no differences in themes between control and intervention groups. The core category of Taking charge encompassed caregivers' assumption of active roles in care, often in the face of inadequate formal support. There were 4 interrelated subcategories: (1) Navigating the system-navigating the complexities of the home care system to access resources and supports; (2) Engaging with professional caregivers-interacting with visiting personnel to advocate for consistency and quality of care; (3) Preparing for death-seeking out information about what to expect at the end of life; and (4) Managing after death-managing multiple administrative responsibilities in the emotionally charged period following death. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers were often thrust into assuming control in order to compensate for deficiencies in formal palliative home care services. Policies, quality indicators, and guidelines are needed to ensure the provision of comprehensive, interdisciplinary home palliative care.

Factors associated with discharge disposition on an acute palliative care unit.

PURPOSE: Acute palliative care units (APCUs) admit patients with cancer for symptom control, transition to community palliative care units or hospice (CPCU/H), or end-of-life care. Prognostication early in the course of admission is crucial for decision-making. We retrospectively evaluated factors associated with patients' discharge disposition on an APCU in a cancer center. METHODS: We evaluated demographic, administrative, and clinical data for all patients admitted to the APCU in 2015. Clinical data included cancer diagnosis, delirium screening, and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) symptoms. An ESAS sub-score composed of fatigue, drowsiness, shortness of breath, and appetite (FDSA) was also investigated. Factors associated with patients' discharge disposition (home, CPCU/H, died on APCU) were identified using three-level multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 280 patients, the median age was 65.5 and median length of stay was 10 days; 155 (55.4%) were admitted for symptom control, 65 (23.2%) for transition to CPCU/H, and 60 (21.4%) for terminal care. Discharge dispositions were as follows: 156 (55.7%) died, 63 (22.5%) returned home, and 61 (21.8%) were transferred to CPCU/H. On multivariable analysis, patients who died were less likely to be older (OR 0.97, p = 0.01), or to be admitted for symptom control (OR 0.06, p < 0.0001), and more likely to have a higher FDSA score 21-40 (OR 3.02, p = 0.004). Patients discharged to CPCU/H were less likely to have been admitted for symptom control (OR 0.06, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Age, reason for admission, and the FDSA symptom cluster on admission are variables that can inform clinicians about probable discharge disposition on an APCU.

Caregiver quality of life in advanced cancer: Qualitative results from a trial of early palliative care.

BACKGROUND: Early involvement of palliative care improves patient quality of life; however, quantitative studies have not yet demonstrated a similar effect for caregivers, for whom the construct of quality of life is less well developed. AIM: To conceptualise quality of life of caregivers from their own perspective and to explore differences in themes between those who did or did not receive an early palliative care intervention. DESIGN: Qualitative grounded theory study. SETTING: Tertiary comprehensive cancer centre. PARTICIPANTS: Following participation in a cluster-randomised trial of early palliative care, 23 caregivers (14 intervention and 9 control) of patients with advanced cancer participated in semi-structured interviews to discuss their quality of life. RESULTS: The core category was 'living in the patient's world'. Five related themes were 'burden of illness and caregiving', 'assuming the caregiver role', 'renegotiating relationships', 'confronting mortality' and 'maintaining resilience'. There was thematic consistency between trial arms, except for the last two themes, which had distinct differences. Participants in the intervention group engaged in open discussion about the end of life, balanced hope with realism and had increased confidence from a range of professional supports. Controls tended to engage in 'deliberate ignorance' about the future, felt uncertain about how they would cope and lacked knowledge of available supports. CONCLUSIONS: Caregiver quality of life is influenced profoundly by the interaction with the patient and should be measured with specific questionnaires that include content related to confronting mortality and professional supports. This would improve delineation of quality of life for caregivers and allow greater sensitivity to change. Registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT01248624.

Experiences of patients and caregivers with early palliative care: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Early palliative care improves quality of life and satisfaction with care and is increasingly endorsed for patients with advanced cancer. However, little is known about the experience of receiving early palliative care from a patient and caregiver perspective. AIM: The aim of this qualitative study was to determine, from a participant perspective, the experience of receiving early palliative care and elements of that care. DESIGN: Qualitative grounded theory study using individual interviews. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: The study took place at a comprehensive cancer centre. Patients ( n = 26) and caregivers ( n = 14) from the intervention arm of a cluster-randomised controlled trial of early palliative care versus standard oncology care participated in qualitative interviews. Participants were asked to comment on their quality of life, the quality of care provided over the intervention period and their experiences with the palliative care team. RESULTS: Participants described feeling supported and guided in their illness experience and in their navigation of the healthcare system. Specific elements of early palliative care included prompt, personalised symptom management; holistic support for patients and caregivers; guidance in decision-making; and preparation for the future. Patients with symptoms particularly valued prompt attention to their physical concerns, while those without symptoms valued other elements of care. Although three patients were ambivalent about their current need for palliative care, no distress was reported as a consequence of the intervention. CONCLUSION: The elements of care described by participants may be used to develop, support and refine models of early palliative care for patients with cancer.

Early Palliative Care and Its Role in Oncology: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Early integration of palliative care alongside oncology is being increasingly recommended, although the strategies and models for integration remain poorly defined. We solicited the opinions of patients and caregivers who participated in a randomized trial of early palliative care versus standard oncology care, regarding the respective roles of their oncologist (both groups) and palliative care physician (early palliative care group). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed at a comprehensive cancer center. Forty-eight patients (26 intervention, 22 control) and 23 caregivers (14 intervention, 9 control) were recruited purposefully at trial end. One-on-one, semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted and analyzed using grounded theory. RESULTS: The themes resulting from the analysis fell into three categories: the focus of care, the model of care delivery, and the complementarity between teams. The focus of care in oncology was perceived to be disease-centered, with emphasis on controlling disease, directing cancer treatment, and increasing survival; palliative care was perceived to be more holistic and person-focused, with an emphasis on symptom management. Oncology visits were seen as following a structured, physician-led, time-constrained model in contrast to the more fluid, patient-led, flexible model experienced in the palliative care clinic. No differences were found in the descriptions of oncology between participants in the intervention and control groups. Participants in the intervention group explicitly described the roles of their oncologist and their palliative care physician as distinct and complementary. CONCLUSION: Participants perceived the respective roles of their oncologist and palliative care physician as discrete, important, and complementary for the provision of excellent cancer care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Patients and their caregivers who experienced early palliative care described the roles of their oncologists and palliative care physicians as being discrete and complementary, with both specialties contributing to excellent patient care. The findings of the present research support an integrated approach to care for patients with advanced cancer, which involves early collaborative care in the ambulatory setting by experts in both oncology and palliative medicine. This can be achieved by more widespread establishment of ambulatory palliative care clinics, encouragement of timely outpatient referral to palliative care, and education of oncologists in palliative care.

The oncology palliative care clinic at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre: an early intervention model for patients with advanced cancer.

Several recently published randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the benefits of early palliative care involvement for patients with advanced cancer. In the oncology outpatient setting, palliative care clinics are an ideal site for the provision of early, collaborative support, which can be maintained throughout the cancer trajectory. Despite this, access to ambulatory palliative care clinics is limited, even at tertiary cancer centres. Existing programs for outpatient palliative care are variable in scope and are not well described in the literature. We describe the development and expansion of an outpatient palliative care clinic at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada, demonstrating how the clinic functions at a local and regional level. This clinic served as the intervention for a recent large cluster-randomized trial of early palliative care. The model for this service can be adapted by other palliative care programs that aim to provide early, integrated oncology care.

Strategies Used by Outpatient Oncology Nurses to Introduce Early Palliative Care: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Although early palliative care is linked to improved health-related quality of life, satisfaction with care, and symptom management, the clinical strategies that nurses use to actively initiate this care are unknown. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to conceptualize the clinical strategies that outpatient oncology nurses use to introduce early palliative care and to determine how these strategies align with the framework of practice. METHODS: A constructivist-informed grounded theory study was conducted in a tertiary cancer care center in Toronto, Canada. Twenty nurses (6 staff nurses, 10 nurse practitioners, and 4 advanced practice nurses) from multiple outpatient oncology clinics (ie, breast, pancreatic, hematology) completed semistructured interviews. Analysis occurred concurrently with data collection and used constant comparison until theoretical saturation was reached. RESULTS: The overarching core category, pulling it all together, outlines the strategies used by oncology nurses to support timely palliative care referral, drawing on the coordinating, collaborating, relational, and advocacy dimensions of practice. The core category incorporated 3 subcategories: (1) catalyzing and facilitating synergy among disciplines and settings, (2) promoting and considering palliative care within patients' personal narratives, and (3) widening the focus from disease-focused treatment to living well with cancer. CONCLUSION: Outpatient oncology nurses enact unique clinical strategies, which are aligned with the nursing framework and reflected multiple dimensions of practice, to introduce early palliative care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our findings have clinical, educational, and policy implications for fostering the conditions in which nurses are supported to maximize their full potential in the introduction of early palliative care.

Early palliative care and quality of dying and death in patients with advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Early palliative care (EPC) in the outpatient setting improves quality of life for patients with advanced cancer, but its impact on quality of dying and death (QODD) and on quality of life at the end of life (QOL-EOL) has not been examined. Our study investigated the impact of EPC on patients' QODD and QOL-EOL and the moderating role of receiving inpatient or home palliative care. METHOD: Bereaved family caregivers who had provided care for patients participating in a cluster-randomised trial of EPC completed a validated QODD scale and indicated whether patients had received additional home palliative care or care in an inpatient palliative care unit (PCU). We examined the effects of EPC, inpatient or home palliative care, and their interactions on the QODD total score and on QOL-EOL (last 7 days of life). RESULTS: A total of 157 caregivers participated. Receipt of EPC showed no association with QODD total score. However, when additional palliative care was included in the model, intervention patients demonstrated better QOL-EOL than controls (p=0.02). Further, the intervention by PCU interaction was significant (p=0.02): those receiving both EPC and palliative care in a PCU had better QOL-EOL than those receiving only palliative care in a PCU (mean difference=27.10, p=0.002) or only EPC (mean difference=20.59, p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Although there was no association with QODD, EPC was associated with improved QOL-EOL, particularly for those who also received inpatient care in a PCU. This suggests a long-term benefit from early interdisciplinary palliative care on care throughout the illness. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (#NCT01248624).

Palliative Care Physicians' Perceptions of Conditions Required to Provide Early Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Early palliative care (EPC) is widely recommended but its implementation may be challenging. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a qualitative analysis of Canadian palliative care physicians' opinions about conditions necessary to provide EPC. METHODS: A survey assessing attitudes and opinions regarding EPC was distributed to physicians providing primary or specialized palliative care, as identified by the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians. The survey included an optional final section for respondents' general comments; we screened these for relevance to our study aims and conducted a thematic analysis of relevant comments. RESULTS: Of 531 completed surveys, 129 (24%) respondents provided written comments, of whom 104 mentioned conditions they felt to be necessary to provide EPC. Four key themes were identified: 1) Clear delineation of roles of primary and specialized palliative care physicians-all physicians should be empowered to provide primary palliative care, with specialists providing additional support; 2) Shared care with needs-dependent referral-primary and specialized palliative care physicians should work collaboratively, with referral to specialized palliative care based on need rather than on prognosis; 3) Adequate resources to support primary palliative care-education, financial incentives, and collaboration with interdisciplinary team members such as nurses and specialized providers were specifically mentioned; 4) Addressing the misconception that palliative care equals end-of-life care-there was particular emphasis on education of both healthcare providers and the public. CONCLUSION: Changes are necessary at the level of palliative care referral systems, providers, resources, and policy to enable implementation of EPC.

Family physicians' involvement in palliative cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Family physicians' (FPs) long-term relationships with their oncology patients position them ideally to provide primary palliative care, yet their involvement is variable. We examined perceptions of FP involvement among outpatients receiving palliative care at a cancer center and identified factors associated with this involvement. METHODS: Patients with advanced cancer attending an oncology palliative care clinic (OPCC) completed a 25-item survey. Eligible patients had seen an FP within 5 years. Binary multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with (1) having seen an FP for palliative care within 6 months, and (2) having a scheduled/planned FP appointment. RESULTS: Of 258 patients, 35.2% (89/253) had seen an FP for palliative care within the preceding 6 months, and 51.2% (130/254) had a scheduled/planned FP appointment. Shorter travel time to FP (odds ratio [OR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.48-0.93, p = 0.02), the FP having a 24-h support service (OR = 1.96, 95% CI = 1.02-3.76, p = 0.04), and a positive perception of FP's care (OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.01-1.09, p = 0.01) were associated with having seen the FP for palliative care. English as a first language (OR = 2.90, 95% CI = 1.04-8.11, p = 0.04) and greater ease contacting FP after hours (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.08-1.64, p = 0.008) were positively associated, and female sex of patient (OR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.30-0.87, p = 0.01) and travel time to FP (OR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.47-0.93, p = 0.02) negatively associated with having a scheduled/planned FP appointment. Number of OPCC visits was not associated with either outcome. CONCLUSION: Most patients had not seen an FP for palliative care. Accessibility, availability, and equity are important factors to consider when planning interventions to encourage and facilitate access to FPs for palliative care.

Predictors for moderate to severe acute postoperative pain after total hip and knee replacement.

PURPOSE: The ability to identify and focus care to patients at higher risk of moderate to severe postoperative pain should improve analgesia and patient satisfaction, and may affect reimbursement. We undertook this multi-centre cross-sectional study to identify preoperative risk factors for moderate to severe pain after total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement. METHODS: A total of 897 patients were identified from electronic medical records. Preoperative information and anaesthetic technique was gained by retrospective chart review. The primary outcomes were moderate to severe pain (pain score ≥ 4/10) at rest and with activity on postoperative day one. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors for moderate to severe pain. RESULTS: Moderate to severe pain was reported by 20 % at rest and 33 % with activity. Predictors for pain at rest were female gender (OR 1.10 with 95 % CI 1.01-1.20), younger age (0.96, 0.94-0.99), increased BMI (1.02, 1.01-1.03), TKR vs. THR (3.21, 2.73-3.78), increased severity of preoperative pain at the surgical site (1.15, 1.03-1.30), preoperative use of opioids (1.63, 1.32-2.01), and general anaesthesia (8.51, 2.13-33.98). Predictors for pain with activity were TKR vs. THR (1.42, 1.28-1.57), increased severity of preoperative pain at the surgical site (1.11, 1.04-1.19), general anaesthesia (9.02, 3.68-22.07), preoperative use of anti-convulsants (1.78, 1.32-2.40) and anti-depressants (1.50, 1.08-2.80), and prior surgery at the surgical site (1.28, 1.05-1.57). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide clinical guidance for preoperative stratification of patients for more intensive management potentially including education, nursing staffing, and referral to specialised pain management.

Impact of early palliative care according to baseline symptom severity: Secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized controlled trial in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Early palliative care (EPC) improves the quality of life but may not be feasible for all patients with advanced cancer. Symptom screening has been suggested to triage patients for EPC, but scant evidence exists for this practice. METHODS: We conducted a subgroup analysis of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of EPC vs. standard oncology care according to patients' baseline symptom scores (high [>23] vs. low [≤23] Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Distress Score [ESAS SDS]). A linear mixed-effects model was used to account for correlation within clusters, adjusting for the baseline outcome score and all covariates in the original trial. RESULTS: Among the 461 participants, baseline symptom scores were high in 229 patients (127 intervention, 102 control) and low in 232 (101 intervention and 131 control). Among those with high baseline symptoms, there was improved quality of life in the EPC arm compared to controls at 4 months (adjusted difference in primary outcome of FACIT-Sp change score [95% CI], 8.7 [2.8 to 14.5], p = 0.01; adjusted difference in QUAL-E, 4.2 [0.9-7.5], p = 0.02); there was also improved satisfaction with care (6.9 [3.8-9.9], p = 0.001) and clinician-patient interactions (-1.7 [-3.4 to -0.1], p = 0.04), but no significant difference in ESAS SDS (-5.6 [-12.7 to 1.4], p = 0.11). In the low baseline symptom group, there were no significant differences between arms for any outcomes. CONCLUSION: EPC improved quality of life, satisfaction with care, and clinician-patient interactions only in those with high baseline symptoms. Symptom severity may be an appropriate criterion to trigger early referrals to palliative care.

Public interest in medical assistance in dying and palliative care.

OBJECTIVES: Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) is legal in an increasing number of countries, but there are concerns that its availability may compromise access to palliative care. We assessed public interest in MAiD, palliative care, both, or neither, and examined characteristics associated with this interest. METHODS: We surveyed a representative sample of the adult Canadian public, accessed through a panel from May to June 2019. Weighted generalised multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to determine characteristics associated with interest in referral to palliative care, MAiD, or both, in the event of diagnosis with a serious illness. RESULTS: Of 1362 participants who had heard of palliative care, 611 (44.8% weighted (95% CI 42.1% to 47.5%)) would be interested in both MAiD and palliative care, 322 (23.9% (95% CI 21.5% to 26.2%)) palliative care alone, 171 (12.3% (95% CI 10.5% to 14.1%)) MAiD alone and 258 (19.0% (95% CI 16.9% to 21.2%)) neither. In weighted multinomial logistic regression analyses, interest in both MAiD and palliative care (compared with neither) was associated with better knowledge of the definition of palliative care, older age, female gender, higher education and less religiosity; interest in palliative care alone was associated with better knowledge of the definition of palliative care, older age, female gender and being married/common law; interest in MAiD alone was associated with less religiosity (all p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial public interest in potential referral to both MAiD and palliative care. Simultaneous availability of palliative care should be ensured in jurisdictions where MAiD is legal, and education about palliative care should be a public health priority.

Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy Use in Palliative Care Outpatients With Advanced Cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate factors associated with continuation of systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) after palliative care consultation, and SACT administration in the last 30 days of life, in outpatients with cancer referred to palliative care. Timing of referral was of particular interest. METHODS: Patient, disease, and treatment-related factors associated with SACT before and after palliative care, and in the last 30 days of life, were identified using 3-level multinomial logistic regression. Referral to palliative care was categorized by time from death as early (>12 months), intermediate (6-12 months), and late (≤6 months). RESULTS: Of the 337 patients, 240 (71.2%) received SACT for advanced cancer; of these, 126 (52.5%) received SACT only prior to palliative care while 114 (47.5%) also received SACT afterward. Only 35/337 (10.4%) received SACT in the last 30 days of life. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with continuing SACT after palliative care consultation were a cancer diagnosis for <1 year (OR 3.09, p = 0.01), breast primary (OR 11.88, p = 0.0008), and early (OR 28.8, p < 0.001) or intermediate (OR 6.67, p < 0.001) referral timing. No factors were significantly associated with receiving SACT in the last 30 days versus earlier, but the median time from palliative care referral to death in those receiving SACT in the last 30 days versus stopping SACT earlier was 1.78 versus 4.27 months. CONCLUSION: Patients who received SACT following palliative care consultation were more likely to be referred early; however, patients receiving SACT in their last 30 days tended to be referred late.

Outpatient palliative medicine consultations: urgent or routine?

BACKGROUND: Although outpatient palliative care clinics (OPCCs) provide a venue for early, pre-emptive referral to palliative care on a routine basis, some patients will continue to require urgent referrals. The purpose of this study was to characterise these urgent referrals to determine whether they reflect clinical need or convenience. METHODS: We retrospectively compared new patients in an OPCC who were seen urgently versus those seen at routine appointments. Descriptive statistics compared the two groups in terms of clinical characteristics, referring teams, symptoms, performance status and outcomes. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with urgent referral to the OPCC. Overall survival was compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Between January 2016 and December 2017, a total of 113 urgent referrals were reviewed in the OPCC; these were compared with a random sample of 217 routine referrals. Patients seen urgently were more likely to be referred by surgical oncology, and to report worse symptom scores for pain (p=0.0007), tiredness (p=0.02), well-being (p=0.001), constipation (p=0.02) and sleep (p=0.01). More patients seen urgently required direct admission to hospital following the visit (17.7% vs 0.9%, p<0.001). Median survival was shorter for patients seen urgently (4.3 months, 95% CI 3.4 to 7.8) versus routinely (8.1 months, 95% CI 7.2 to 9.5). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with routine referrals, new patients seen urgently in the OPCC had higher symptom burden, shorter median survival and a greater chance of direct admission to hospital. Palliative care clinics should consider how best to accommodate urgent referrals.