Opioid Monitoring Using Urine Toxicology Screens in Outpatient Oncology Palliative Medicine.

PURPOSE: There is a paucity of real-world data on opioid screening and urine toxicology testing in outpatient oncology palliative medicine. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of adult patients with cancer completing ≥ one outpatient palliative medicine visit and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). Patient demographics, the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain-Short Form (SOAPP-SF), ESAS, medications, and urine toxicology screens (UTSs) were collected at baseline and follow-up visits. The primary end point was the frequency and type(s) of noncompliant UTSs (ie, presence of a nonprescribed substance or absence of a prescribed substance). Secondarily, risk factors for noncompliant UTSs were evaluated using univariate and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 189 evaluable patients (632 clinic visits), 113 underwent ≥one UTSs, 125 SOAPP-SF, and 75 had both. The median age was 56 (range, 26-80) years, 56% were female, 58% were White, 40% were Black, 48% had stage IV disease, the median baseline pain score was 7, and the median SOAPP-SF was 3. Oxycodone was the most prescribed drug (n = 125). Of 113 patients who underwent UTSs, 54% (n = 61) had ≥one noncompliant result. Thirty-nine percent (n = 44) had a total of 128 noncompliant results for the presence of a nonprescribed substance; 29% (n = 33) had a total of 53 noncompliant results for the absence of a prescribed substance. SOAPP-SF Q4 (use of illegal drugs) (odds ratio [OR], 3.61; 95% CI, 1.81 to 7.19; P < .001) and prescription with nonopioid adjuvant medications (OR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.12 to 7.19; P = .029) were associated with increased odds of a noncompliant UTS. CONCLUSION: More than half of the tested population had noncompliant UTS. Screening and evaluating risk factors for nonmedical opioid use is critical in oncology palliative medicine.

Pain or fatigue: which correlates more with suffering in hospitalized cancer patients?

BACKGROUND: The association of pain and suffering seems intuitive, but evidence substantiating this association is lacking. In studies of cancer patients, fatigue, rather than pain, is the most prevalent and debilitating symptom. This study aimed to compare the correlation of pain and fatigue to suffering, and identify other potential sources of suffering in cancer patients treated in a palliative care unit. METHODS: One hundred fifty cancer patients were surveyed. Fifteen variables were measured on a 0- to 10-point scale: suffering, pain, level of acceptable pain, effect of pain on quality of life, fatigue, level of acceptable fatigue, effect of fatigue on quality of life, and specific types of suffering. Univariable associations with suffering were made with Pearson correlation (continuous variables) or t test (binary predictors). Multivariable associations with suffering were assessed with linear regression analysis and bootstrapping. RESULTS: In multivariable analysis, highest pain (parameter estimate 0.38) had a greater impact on suffering than highest fatigue (parameter estimate 0.21). When other variables were assessed, 38% of the variability in suffering was accounted for by pain "now", fatigue in the past 24 hours, and age. CONCLUSION: The most important predictors of greater suffering in hospitalized cancer patients are pain, younger age, and fatigue. Despite their significant effect on suffering, other underlying contributors to suffering have yet to be identified. Designing interventions to reduce fatigue, in addition to pain management, may help in alleviating overall suffering.

Identifying potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in geriatric oncology.

The median number of medications taken by adults aged 65 and older is four, but may be higher in older adults with cancer. A high number of prescribed medications increases risk for adverse drug reactions (ADRs), drug-drug interactions, drug-disease interactions, and overall healthcare utilization, emphasizing the need for frequent review of medications. There are many tools available to help the health care team assess medication appropriateness; however, none of the currently available tools have been validated in the geriatric oncology population. Older adults with cancer are at increased risk for ADRs and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) given the common need for multiple medications to manage cancer and cancer-related symptoms. Frequently used PIM identification tools, such as the American Geriatrics Society's (AGS) Beers criteria, often identify medications as "potentially inappropriate", although many of these medications are considered necessary to provide adequate supportive care in older patients with cancer. There are currently no specific guidelines to help direct application of available tools. This review summarizes literature available on the use of PIM identification tools in geriatric oncology and highlights a theoretical case and proposed medication management strategy, which combines the use of objective review with Beer's criteria and clinical judgement with the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI). This two-pronged approach can serve to identify PIMs while recognizing factors unique to the geriatric oncology population.

"If You Call Them, They Will Come": A Telephone Call Reminder to Decrease the No-Show Rate in an Outpatient Palliative Medicine Clinic.

INTRODUCTION: A high outpatient clinic no-show rate affects clinical outcomes, increases healthcare costs, and reduces both access to care and provider productivity. In an effort to reduce the no-show rate at a busy palliative medicine outpatient clinic, a quality improvement project was launched consisting of a telephone call made by clinic staff prior to appointments. The study aimed to determine the effect of this intervention on the no-show rate, and assess the financial impact of a decreased no-show rate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The outpatient clinic no-show rate was measured from September 1 to December 31, 2015. Data from the first 8 months of the calendar year was removed since these could not be verified. Starting January 1, 2016, patients received a telephone call reminder 24 hours prior to their scheduled outpatient appointment for confirmation. No-show rate was again measured for the calendar year 2016. Opportunity costs were calculated for unfulfilled clinic visits. RESULTS: Of the 1224 completed visits from September 1 to December 31, 2015, 271 were no-shows with an average rate of 11.8%. After the intervention, there were 4368 completed visits and 562 no-shows. The no-show rate for 2016 averaged 6.9% (p < 0.001), down 4.9% from the last 4 months of 2015. Estimated opportunity costs were about 396 no-show visits avoided, equivalent to an annual savings of about $79,200. CONCLUSION: A telephone call reminder to patients 24 hours prior to their appointment decreased the no-show rate in an outpatient palliative medicine clinic. Avoiding unfulfilled visits resulted in substantial opportunity costs.

Prehabilitation for Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgical Patients: Interim Analysis Demonstrates a Protective Effect From Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Improvement in the Frailty Phenotype.

BACKGROUND: Prehabilitation encompasses multidisciplinary interventions to improve health and lessen incidence of surgical deterioration by reducing physiologic stress and functional decline. This study presents an interim analysis to demonstrate prehabilitation for hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgical patients. METHODS: In 2018, a structured prehabilitation pilot program was implemented. Eligibility required HPB malignancy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and residence within hour drive. Patients were enrolled into the 4-month program. The fitness component was composed of timed up and go test and grip strength with exercise recommendations. Nutrition involved evaluation of sarcopenic obesity, glucose management, and smoking and alcohol counseling. Psychological services included psychosocial assessments and advanced care planning, with social work referrals. Component were evaluated monthly by a physician using laboratory results, nutritional data and questionnaires, psychological assessments, and validated fitness tests. Nurse navigators spoke with patients weekly to monitor compliance. RESULTS: At 12 months, nineteen patients were enrolled. Ten completed prehabilitation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and underwent their surgical procedure. There were no differences found after prehabilitation in functional status, physical performance, psychosocial assessments, or nutrition. Frailty, as assessed by Fried frailty criteria, improved significantly after prehabilitation (P < .0001). Symptom severity and laboratory values did not change. Length of stay was 6.5 days and all patients were discharged to home. There was 1 readmission for transient ischemic attack and 90-day mortality rate was 0%. DISCUSSION: Prehabilitation to improve recovery is a promising concept encompassing a wide array of multidisciplinary assessments and interventions. It may demonstrate a protective effect on physiologic decline from chemotherapy and may reverse frailty phenotypes.

Prehabilitation in Frail Surgical Patients: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a customized marker of biological age that helps to gauge an individual's functional physiologic reserve and ability to react to stress and is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. In order to mitigate frailty preoperatively, the concept of prehabilitation has entered the forefront which encompasses multidisciplinary interventions to improve health and lessen the incidence of postoperative decline. The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes in frail, surgical patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed by two independent researchers according to PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were (1) a randomized controlled trial, case-control or observational study; (2) prehabilitation intervention; (3) frailty assessment; and (4) surgical intervention. RESULTS: There were five articles included in the review. Evaluation of these articles demonstrated prehabilitation may improve operative outcomes in frail surgical patients. There were no assessments as to whether prehabilitation was cost-effective although it was feasible. Prehabilitation programs should include elements of exercise, nutrition, and psychosocial counseling. Frailty should be assessed with a validated index in surgical patients who may undergo prehabilitation. CONCLUSION: Prehabilitation in frail surgical patients may be the appropriate process through which providers can lessen operative risk. Currently, however, there is little evidence supporting the use of prehabilitation in this population with only five studies identified in this systematic review. More randomized controlled trials are clearly needed.

Nonconvulsive status epilepticus in a palliative care unit: when delirium is a seizure.

The search for an underlying cause of altered mental status not uncommonly becomes more challenging in the hospice and palliative care setting. Due to multiple coexisting conditions that affect mental status and shifting goals of care, discerning that single cause in this venue can become frustrating and even nonbeneficial at times. We present a case of nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE), which multiple reports have shown to be a rarely contemplated cause of impaired consciousness. A concise review of NCSE follows, with emphasis on conditions that present similarly, precipitating factors, diagnostic and therapeutic considerations, and prognostic implications. Nonconvulsive status epilepticus is a reversible cause of altered consciousness, particularly when recognized promptly. In a palliative care unit, treatment should ultimately be guided by the patient's goals of care.