Utilization and quality of palliative care in patients with hematological and solid cancers: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care (PC) contributes to improved end-of-life care for patients with hematologic malignancies (HM) and solid tumors (ST) by addressing physical and psychological symptoms and spiritual needs. Research on PC in HM vs. ST patients is fragmented and suggests less use. METHODS: We analyzed claims data of all deceased members of a large German health insurance provider for the year before death. First, we analyzed the frequency and the beginning of different types of PC and compared patients with HM vs. ST. Second, we analyzed the adjusted impact of PC use on several end-of-life quality outcomes in patients with HM vs. ST. We performed simple and multiple (logistic) regression analysis, adjusted for relevant covariates, and standardized for age and sex. RESULTS: Of the 222,493 deceased cancer patients from 2016 to 2020, we included 209,321 in the first analysis and 165,020 in the second analysis. Patients with HM vs. ST received PC less often (40.4 vs. 55.6%) and later (34 vs. 50 days before death). PC use significantly improved all six quality indicators for good end-of-life care. HM patients had worse rates in five of the six indicators compared with ST patients. Interaction terms revealed that patients with ST derived greater benefit from PC in five of six quality indicators than those with HM. CONCLUSION: The data highlight the need to integrate PC more often, earlier, and more effectively into the care of patients with HM.

Palliative care for patients with hematologic malignancies in Germany: a nationwide survey on everyday practice and influencing factors from the perspective of treating physicians.

Integrating palliative care into the treatment of patients with advanced hematological malignancies (HM) remains challenging. To explore treating physicians' perspectives on current palliative care practice and to evaluate factors influencing integration, we conducted a nationwide online survey. Based on literature and expert review, the survey addressed the importance of palliative care, communication about life-threatening conditions, challenges in establishing goals of care, and factors influencing the integration of palliative care. 207 physicians treating patients with HM in Germany participated. We used standard descriptive statistics to analyze quantitative data and a content structuring approach. Most physicians considered palliative care in HM to be very important (60.6%) and discussed life-threatening conditions with more than half of their patients (52%), especially when goals of care were changed (87.0%) or when patients raised the topic (84.0%). Disease-related factors, different professional perspectives on prognosis, and patient hopes were the main barriers to changing goals of care, but collaboration with colleagues and multidisciplinary teams provided important support. Time constraints were identified as the main barrier to integrating palliative care. The majority worked well with palliative care teams. Referral processes and conditions were perceived as minor barriers. The study highlights the need to address barriers to integrating palliative care into the management of patients with advanced HM. Future research should aim at optimizing palliative care for patients with HM.

Knowledge, feelings, and willingness to use palliative care in cancer patients with hematologic malignancies and solid tumors: a prospective, cross-sectional study in a comprehensive cancer center in Germany.

PURPOSE: Patients with hematologic malignancies (HM) receive palliative care (PC) less often and later than patients with solid tumors (ST). Patients' lack of knowledge about PC and negative feelings about PC are barriers to their willingness to use PC. Is there a difference between patients with HM and ST in their knowledge and willingness to use PC? METHODS: Two hundred ten patients (85 HM, 125 ST) from an oncology day clinic at a university hospital participated in this cross-sectional, questionnaire-based survey. RESULTS: Patients with HM and ST had high knowledge and mainly positive feelings about PC. More than half of the patients answered that they would feel reassured by the use of PC, and one-third would feel anxious or hopeless. The majority of patients (58.3%) were willing to use PC. There are no significant differences between patients with HM and ST. In multiple regression analysis, perceived chance of cure and feelings of reassurance and anxiety are associated with willingness to use PC, but not with the HM/ST disease group. More than half (53.9%) of the participants would like the treating physician to choose the timing of a discussion about PC. CONCLUSION: Our study shows a high level of knowledge and relatively positive feelings of patients about PC, with no differences between patients with HM or ST. They expect their treating physician to initiate communication about PC. Communication should include the patient's feelings about PC and their chances of a cure.

[Patient-reported outcomes and quality of care in specialized palliative home care: a nationwide, prospective longitudinal cohort trial]. / Symptomverlauf, Betreuungsqualität und Zufriedenheit mit der spezialisierten ambulanten Palliativversorgung (SAPV) aus Patient*innenperspektive: eine bundesweite prospektive Längsschnittstudie.

INTRODUCTION: Since 2007, patients receiving palliative care have been entitled to specialised outpatient palliative care (SAPV). Until now, the quality of care of the SAPV was only regionally focussed or in relation to individual SAPV teams. A nationwide analysis of outcome quality is still awaited. The organisation and design of structures and processes vary greatly from region to region, which complicates a comparative assessment of implementation. One way to measure the quality of the heterogeneous structures and processes is to collect patient-reported outcomes. Here, it is possible to use symptom burden, quality of care and patient satisfaction with SAPV care, since patients' quality of life is a central focus of SAPV care. This article is part of the research project SAVOIR, which is funded by the G-BA Innovation Fund. METHODS: For this prospective longitudinal survey of the outcome quality of SAPV, structured data were collected at two measurement points (t1 and t2 [4-10 days after t1]). A nationwide, representative sample of SAPV teams was targeted. These teams performed consecutive recruitment of patients included in SAPV. Two questionnaire instruments were used: the IPOS (Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale) at t1 and t2, and the QUAPS (quality control in specialized palliative home care) questionnaire at t2. Patient-reported outcomes measured improvement in symptom burden, patient satisfaction, and quality of care from the patient perspective. In addition, an exploratory stepwise regression analysis of factors associated with satisfaction was conducted. RESULTS: 42 SAPV teams agreed to participate in the study. They recruited a total of 964 patients at measurement time t1 (t2: 690 patients). The analyses show that the number and intensity of symptoms from the patient perspective decreased significantly during the course of SAPV treatment, especially pain, gastrointestinal symptoms, but also psychological complaints. 74.7 % of the patients reported a high level of satisfaction with SAPV. Also, the quality of care was considered to be high by the patients. Exploratively, five factors were extracted that explain 55 % of the satisfaction with SAPV: respect for the patient's decision, quality of communication, support with practical problems, and referral to care measures as well as symptom relief between the two measurement points. CONCLUSIONS: The SAPV patients recruited from a total of nine KV regions reported a reduced symptom burden and a high level of satisfaction with SAPV and rated the quality of care provided by SAPV as high.