Approach to fever assessment in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: a clinical practice guideline.

BACKGROUND: This guideline was prepared by the Fever Assessment Guideline Development Group, a group organized by the Program in Evidence-Based Care at the request of the Cancer Care Ontario Systemic Treatment Program. The mandate was to develop a standardized approach (in terms of definitions, information, and education) for the assessment of fever in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. METHODS: The guideline development methods included a search for existing guidelines, literature searches in medline and embase for systematic reviews and primary studies, internal review by content and methodology experts, and external review by targeted experts and intended users. RESULTS: The search identified eight guidelines that had partial relevance to the topic of the present guideline and thirty-eight primary studies. The studies were mostly noncomparative prospective or retrospective studies. Few studies directly addressed the topic of fever except as one among many symptoms or adverse effects associated with chemotherapy. The recommendations concerning fever definition are supported mainly by other existing guidelines. No evidence was found that directly pertained to the assessment of fever before a diagnosis of febrile neutropenia was made. However, some studies evaluated approaches to symptom management that included fever among the symptoms. Few studies directly addressed information needs and resources for managing fever in cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: Fever in patients with cancer who are receiving systemic therapy is a common and potentially serious symptom that requires prompt assessment, but currently, evidence to inform best practices concerning when, where, and by whom that assessment is done is very limited.

Does routine symptom screening with ESAS decrease ED visits in breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy?

BACKGROUND: In 2007, the provincial cancer agency in Ontario, Canada initiated a wide-scale program to screen for symptoms in the cancer population using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of screening with ESAS on emergency department (ED) visit rates in women with breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used linked administrative health care data from across the province of Ontario, Canada. The cohort included all women aged ≥18 who were diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer between January 2007 and December 2009 and received adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 months of diagnosis. Using an adjusted recurrent event model, we examined the association of screening with ESAS at a clinic visit on the ED visit rate. RESULTS: The relative rate of ED visits was 0.57 when prior ESAS screening occurred compared to when it did not. The relative rate of ED visits was 0.83 when the prior number of ESAS screens was modeled as a continuous variable. Alternatively stated, the rate of ED visits was 43 % lower among patients previously screened with ESAS compared to those not previously screened. For each additional prior ESAS assessment, there was a 17 % decreased rate of ED visits. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that screening with ESAS is associated with decreased ED visits. To our knowledge, this is the first report on the effectiveness of routinely documenting a patient reported outcome on ED visits, in a real-world setting.

Approach to evaluation of fever in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To define the optimal model of care for patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy who experience a fever. Fever is a common symptom in patients receiving chemotherapy, but the approach to evaluation of fever is not standardized. METHODS: We conducted a search for existing guidelines and a systematic review of the primary literature from database inception to November 2015. Full-text reports and conference abstracts were considered for inclusion. The search focused on the following topics: the relationship between temperature and poor outcome; predictors for the development of febrile neutropenia (FN); the timing, location, and personnel involved in fever assessment; and the provision of information to patients receiving chemotherapy. RESULTS: Eight guidelines and 38 studies were included. None of the guidelines were directly relevant to the target population because they dealt primarily with the management of FN after diagnosis. The primary studies tended to include fever as one of many symptoms assessed in the setting of chemotherapy. Temperature level was a weak predictor of poor outcomes. We did not find validated prediction models for identifying patients at risk of FN among patients receiving chemotherapy. Several studies presented approaches to symptom management that included fever among the symptoms, but results were not mature enough to merit widespread adoption. CONCLUSION: Despite the frequency and risks of fever in the setting of chemotherapy, there is limited evidence to define who needs urgent assessment, where the assessment should be performed, and how quickly. Future research in this area is greatly needed to inform new models of care.