Quality indicators for integrating oncology and home palliative care in Japan: modified Delphi study.

CONTEXT: Home palliative care service increases the chance of dying at home, particularly for patients with advanced cancer, but late referrals to home palliative care services still exist. Indicators for evaluating programs that can facilitate the integration of oncology and home palliative care have not been defined. OBJECTIVES: This study developed quality indicators for the integration of oncology and home palliative care in Japan. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review (Databases included CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Emcare) and a modified Delphi study to develop the quality indicators. Panelists rated a potential list of indicators using a 9-point scale over three rounds according to two criteria: appropriateness and feasibility. The criterion for the adoption of candidate indicators was set at a total mean score of 7 or more. Final quality indicators with no disagreement were included. RESULTS: Of the 973 publications in our initial search, 12 studies were included. The preliminary list of quality indicators by systematic literature review comprised 50 items. In total, 37 panelists participated in the modified Delphi study. Ultimately, 18 indicators were identified from the following domains: structure in cancer hospitals, structure in home palliative care services, the process of home palliative care service delivery, less aggressive end-of-life care, patient's psychological comfort, caregiver's psychological comfort, and patient's satisfaction with home palliative care service. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive quality indicators for the integration of oncology and home palliative care were identified. These indicators may facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration between professional healthcare providers in both cancer hospitals and home palliative care services.

Efficacy of supplemental oxygen for dyspnea relief in patients with advanced progressive illness: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Supplemental oxygen is widely used for dyspnea relief; however, its efficacy is yet to be verified. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of supplemental oxygen for dyspnea relief in patients with advanced progressive illness. METHODS: In this systematic review, several databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the topic published up to September 23, 2019. The search criteria included RCTs investigating patients with advanced progressive illness (advanced cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and chronic heart failure). The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42020161838). Separate analyses were pre-planned regarding the presence or absence of resting hypoxemia. RESULTS: RCTs investigating supplemental oxygen for dyspnea relief in participants with and without resting hypoxemia (39 and five, respectively) were included in the study. Heterogeneity of supplemental oxygen for dyspnea in RCTs, including participants without resting hypoxemia was evident; hence, post-hoc analyses in four subgroups (supplemental oxygen during exercise or daily activities, short-burst oxygen, continuous supplemental oxygen, and supplemental oxygen during rehabilitation intervention) were conducted. In the meta-analysis, supplemental oxygen during exercise was found to improve dyspnea in patients without resting hypoxemia compared with that in the control (standardized mean difference = -0.57, 95% confidence interval = -0.77 to -0.38). However, supplemental oxygen for the other subgroups failed to improve patients' dyspnea. CONCLUSION: The results of this systematic review do not support supplemental oxygen therapy for dyspnea relief in patients with advanced progressive illness, except during exercise.