The influence of ambient environmental factors on breakthrough Cancer pain: insights from remote health home monitoring and a proposed data analytic approach.

BACKGROUND: Breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) is primarily managed at home and can stem from physical exertion and emotional distress triggers. Beyond these triggers, the impact of ambient environment on pain occurrence and intensity has not been investigated. This study explores the impact of environmental factors on the frequency and severity of breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) in the home context from the perspective of patients with advanced cancer and their primary family caregiver. METHODS: A health monitoring system was deployed in the homes of patient and family caregiver dyads to collect self-reported pain events and contextual environmental data (light, temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, ambient noise.) Correlation analysis examined the relationship between environmental factors with: 1) individually reported pain episodes and 2) overall pain trends in a 24-hour time window. Machine learning models were developed to explore how environmental factors may predict BTCP episodes. RESULTS: Variability in correlation strength between environmental variables and pain reports among dyads was found. Light and noise show moderate association (r = 0.50-0.70) in 66% of total deployments. The strongest correlation for individual pain events involved barometric pressure (r = 0.90); for pain trends over 24-hours the strongest correlations involved humidity (r = 0.84) and barometric pressure (r = 0.83). Machine learning achieved 70% BTCP prediction accuracy. CONCLUSION: Our study provides insights into the role of ambient environmental factors in BTCP and offers novel opportunities to inform personalized pain management strategies, remotely support patients and their caregivers in self-symptom management. This research provides preliminary evidence of the impact of ambient environmental factors on BTCP in the home setting. We utilized real-world data and correlation analysis to provide an understanding of the relationship between environmental factors and cancer pain which may be helpful to others engaged in similar work.

Telehealth vs In-Person Early Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Multisite Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Numerous studies show that early palliative care improves quality of life and other key outcomes in patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers, although most lack access to this evidence-based model of care. Objective: To evaluate whether delivering early palliative care via secure video vs in-person visits has an equivalent effect on quality of life in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, multisite, comparative effectiveness trial from June 14, 2018, to May 4, 2023, at 22 US cancer centers among 1250 patients within 12 weeks of diagnosis of advanced NSCLC and 548 caregivers. Intervention: Participants were randomized to meet with a specialty-trained palliative care clinician every 4 weeks either via video visit or in person in the outpatient clinic from the time of enrollment and throughout the course of disease. The video visit group had an initial in-person visit to establish rapport, followed by subsequent virtual visits. Main Outcomes and Measures: Equivalence of the effect of video visit vs in-person early palliative care on quality of life at week 24 per the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire (equivalence margin of ±4 points; score range: 0-136, with higher scores indicating better quality of life). Participants completed study questionnaires at enrollment and at weeks 12, 24, 36, and 48. Results: By 24 weeks, participants (mean age, 65.5 years; 54.0% women; 82.7% White) had a mean of 4.7 (video) and 4.9 (in-person) early palliative care encounters. Patient-reported quality-of-life scores were equivalent between groups (video mean, 99.7 vs in-person mean, 97.7; difference, 2.0 [90% CI, 0.1-3.9]; P = .04 for equivalence). Rate of caregiver participation in visits was lower for video vs in-person early palliative care (36.6% vs 49.7%; P < .001). Study groups did not differ in caregiver quality of life, patient coping, or patient and caregiver satisfaction with care, mood symptoms, or prognostic perceptions. Conclusions and Relevance: The delivery of early palliative care virtually vs in person demonstrated equivalent effects on quality of life in patients with advanced NSCLC, underscoring the considerable potential for improving access to this evidence-based care model through telehealth delivery. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03375489.

Early Palliative Care Reduces End-of-Life Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Use but Not ICU Course in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Early palliative care for advanced cancer patients improves quality of life and survival, but less is known about its effect on intensive care unit (ICU) use at the end of life. This analysis assessed the effect of a comprehensive early palliative care program on ICU use and other outcomes among patients with advanced cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort of patients with advanced cancer enrolled in an early palliative care program (n = 275) was compared with a concurrent control group of patients receiving standard care (n = 195) during the same time period by using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The multidisciplinary outpatient palliative care program used early end-of-life care planning, weekly interdisciplinary meetings to discuss patient status, and patient-reported outcomes assessment integrated within the electronic health record. RESULTS: Patients in the control group had statistically significantly higher likelihood of ICU admission at the end of life (odds ratios [ORs]: last 6 months, 3.07; last month, 3.59; terminal admission, 4.69), higher likelihood of death in the hospital (OR, 4.14) or ICU (OR, 5.57), and lower likelihood of hospice enrollment (OR, 0.13). Use of chemotherapy or radiation did not significantly differ between groups, nor did length of ICU stay, code status, ICU procedures (other than cardiopulmonary resuscitation), disposition location, and outcomes after ICU admission. CONCLUSION: Early palliative care significantly reduced ICU use at the end of life but did not change ICU events. This study supports early initiation of palliative care for advanced cancer patients before hospitalizations and intensive care. The Oncologist 2017;22:318-323 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Palliative care has shown clear benefit in quality of life and survival in advanced cancer patients, but less is known about its effect on intensive care. This retrospective cohort study at a university hospital showed that in the last 6 months of life, palliative care significantly reduced intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital admissions, reduced deaths in the hospital, and increased hospice enrollment. It did not, however, change patients' experiences within the ICU, such as number of procedures, code status, length of stay, or disposition. The findings further support that palliative care exerts its benefit before, rather than during, the ICU setting.

Opioid use among female breast cancer patients using different adjuvant endocrine therapy regimens.

PURPOSE: To explore differences in opioid use across different adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) regimens, factors associated with opioid use, and the impact of opioid use on overall survival in female breast cancer patients treated with AET. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed 2006-2012 SEER-Medicare datasets, following patients for at least two years from the index date, defined as the first date they filled an AET prescription. The study included adult women with incident, primary, hormone-receptor-positive, stage I-III breast cancer. They were also first-time AET users, and fee-for-service Medicare enrollees continuously enrolled in Medicare Parts A, B, and D. The main independent variable was the AET regimen. We measured whether patients used opioids after the initiation of AET. RESULTS: After the adjustment of inverse probability treatment weights and unbalanced covariates, the average treatment effect probabilities of opioid use were similar between those who used aromatase inhibitors (AI) only and those used tamoxifen (TAM) only (56.2 vs. 55.3%, respectively). Opioid use probabilities for those who switched from AI to TAM were higher than those for the TAM-only and AI-only groups. Opioid use was also significantly associated with AET non-adherence. Opioid users had a significantly higher risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.59, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Switching from AI to TAM was associated with a high likelihood of opioid use. Opioid use was significantly associated with AET non-adherence and higher risk of mortality in female Medicare beneficiaries with breast cancer even after adjusting for adherence.

Prospective screening with the validated Opioid Risk Tool demonstrates gynecologic oncology patients are at low risk for opioid misuse.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize risk for opioid misuse among gynecologic oncology patients. METHODS: The Opioid Risk Tool (ORT), a validated screen for opioid misuse risk, was administered to a convenience sample of patients with gynecologic cancer receiving opioid prescriptions in gynecologic oncology or palliative care clinics from January 2012-June 2016. Demographic and clinical information was abstracted on chart review. The primary outcome was ORT risk level (low vs. moderate or high). Chi-square tests were performed for categorical variables. RESULTS: A total of 118 women were screened. Most women were Caucasian (79%) with a median age of 57years. Ovarian cancer patients comprised 46% of the cohort with fewer endometrial (25%), cervical (23%), vulvar (4%), and vaginal (2%) cancer patients. The median ORT score was 1.0 (range, 0-10) out of a possible 26. Overall, 87% of patients were categorized as low-risk for opioid misuse, 7% as moderate-risk, and 6% as high-risk. Patients who were at moderate or high-risk of opioid misuse were significantly younger (47 vs. 58years, p=0.02), more likely to have cervical cancer (p=0.02), be smokers (p=0.01) and be uninsured or on Medicare (p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Most gynecologic oncology patients in our cohort were low-risk for opioid misuse (87%). Cervical cancer patients were more likely to be moderate to high-risk for misuse. Future screening efforts for opioid misuse may have the highest utility in this subset of patients.

Longitudinal patterns of cancer patient reported outcomes in end of life care predict survival.

PURPOSE: Patients with advanced cancer typically demonstrate sharp deterioration in physical function and psychological status during the last months of life. This study evaluates the relationship between survival in patients with advanced cancer and longitudinal assessment of anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain interference, and/or physical function using the US National Institute of Health Patient Reported Outcomes Information System. METHODS: Mixed-effects models were used to evaluate patient-reported outcome trajectories over time among patients with advanced loco-regional or metastatic cancer receiving care in a hospital-based palliative care clinic. Cox regression analysis was used to assess the statistical significance of differences in the probability of survival associated with patient-reported outcome scores. RESULTS: A total of 472 patients completed 1992 assessments during the 18-month study period. Longitudinal scores for fatigue, pain interference, and physical function demonstrated statistically significant non-linear trajectories. Scores for depression, fatigue, pain interference, and physical function were highly statistically significant predictors of survival (p < 0.01). Clinically meaningful differences in the probability of survival were demonstrated between patients with scores at the 25th vs. 75th percentiles, with absolute differences in survival at 6 and 12 months after assessment from 10 to 18 percentage points. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported outcomes can be used to reliably estimate where patients are along the trajectory of deteriorating health status leading toward the end of life, and for identifying patients with declining symptoms in need of referral to palliative care or more aggressive symptom management.

Measuring the impact of clinically relevant interprofessional education on undergraduate medical and nursing student competencies: A longitudinal mixed methods approach.

Interprofessional education (IPE) to improve collaborative competencies is essential for delivering high-quality care. Yet creating clinically relevant IPE and linking it to improvements in behaviours remains challenging, and few objective measurement instruments are available. We developed a process for creating IPE and objective observational tools through collaborative care best practice models (CCBPMs). These models describe the professional and interprofessional behaviours needed for specific patient populations, illnesses, and care settings. Four IPE workshops based on CCBPMs were implemented for all medical and nursing students during their clinical/clerkships years. Students in Cohort 1 completed two IPE workshops: rapid response and end-of-life. For Cohort 2, students completed four IPE workshops, adding chronic paediatric illness and transitions for the cognitively impaired. Valid and reliable collaborative behaviors observational assessment tools (CBOATs) derived from CCBPMs for the rapid response and end-of-life workshops were developed. CBOATs were used in the longitudinal assessment of student learning for both cohorts during two Interprofessional Teamwork Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (ITOSCEs) conducted before and after the students completed the IPE workshops. Over a 2-year period, 457 students completed the IPE simulations and ITOSCEs. Both medical and nursing students demonstrated significant improvement in CBOAT scores. Comparisons between the cohorts showed that participation in four versus two IPE experiences did not significantly improve most CBOAT scores. We conclude that undergraduate IPE simulation experiences based on CCBPMs result in measurable improvements in learner behaviours necessary for effective collaborative and team-based practice in specific care areas.

Screening for substance abuse risk in cancer patients using the Opioid Risk Tool and urine drug screen.

PURPOSE: The use of opioids for management of cancer-related pain has increased significantly and has been associated with a substantial rise in rates of substance abuse and diversion. There is a paucity of data not only on the prevalence of substance abuse in cancer patients, but also for issues of drug use and diversion in family caregivers. This study aimed to evaluate the frequency of risk factors for substance abuse and diversion, and abnormal urine drug screens in cancer patients receiving palliative care. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for patients with cancer who were seen in the University of Virginia Palliative Care Clinic during the month of September 2012. We evaluated Opioid Risk Tool variables and total scores, insurance status, and urine drug screen results. RESULTS: Of the 114 cancer patients seen in September 2012, the mean Opioid Risk Tool score was 3.79, with 43% of patients defined as medium to high risk. Age (16-45 years old, 23%) and a personal history of alcohol (23%) or illicit drugs (21%) were the most common risk factors identified. We obtained a urine drug screen on 40% of patients, noting abnormal findings in 45.65%. CONCLUSIONS: Opioids are an effective treatment for cancer-related pain, yet substantial risk for substance abuse exits in the cancer population. Screening tools, such as the Opioid Risk Tool, should be used as part of a complete patient assessment to balance risk with appropriate relief of suffering.

Describing and visualizing the patient and caregiver experience of cancer pain in the home context using ecological momentary assessments.

Background: Pain continues to be a difficult and pervasive problem for patients with cancer, and those who care for them. Remote health monitoring systems (RHMS), such as the Behavioral and Environmental Sensing and Intervention for Cancer (BESI-C), can utilize Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMAs) to provide a more holistic understanding of the patient and family experience of cancer pain within the home context. Methods: Participants used the BESI-C system for 2-weeks which collected data via EMAs deployed on wearable devices (smartwatches) worn by both patients with cancer and their primary family caregiver. We developed three unique EMA schemas that allowed patients and caregivers to describe patient pain events and perceived impact on quality of life from their own perspective. EMA data were analyzed to provide a descriptive summary of pain events and explore different types of data visualizations. Results: Data were collected from five (n = 5) patient-caregiver dyads (total 10 individual participants, 5 patients, 5 caregivers). A total of 283 user-initiated pain event EMAs were recorded (198 by patients; 85 by caregivers) over all 5 deployments with an average severity score of 5.4/10 for patients and 4.6/10 for caregivers' assessments of patient pain. Average self-reported overall distress and pain interference levels (1 = least distress; 4 = most distress) were higher for caregivers (x¯ 3.02, x¯2.60,respectively) compared to patients (x¯ 2.82, x¯ 2.25, respectively) while perceived burden of partner distress was higher for patients (i.e., patients perceived caregivers to be more distressed, x¯ 3.21, than caregivers perceived patients to be distressed, x¯2.55). Data visualizations were created using time wheels, bubble charts, box plots and line graphs to graphically represent EMA findings. Conclusion: Collecting data via EMAs is a viable RHMS strategy to capture longitudinal cancer pain event data from patients and caregivers that can inform personalized pain management and distress-alleviating interventions.

Clinician Perceptions of Barriers and Facilitators for Delivering Early Integrated Palliative Care via Telehealth.

Early integrated palliative care (EIPC) significantly improves clinical outcomes for patients with advanced cancer. Telehealth may be a useful tool to deliver EIPC sustainably and equitably. Palliative care clinicians completed a survey regarding their perceptions of the barriers, facilitators, and benefits of using telehealth video visits for delivering EIPC for patients with advanced lung cancer. Forty-eight clinicians across 22 cancer centers completed the survey between May and July 2022. Most (91.7%) agreed that telehealth increases access to EIPC and simplifies the process for patients to receive EIPC (79.2%). Clinicians noted that the elderly, those in rural areas, and those with less-resourced backgrounds have greater difficulty using telehealth. Perceived barriers were largely patient-based factors, including technological literacy, internet and device availability, and patient preferences. Clinicians agreed that several organizational factors facilitated telehealth EIPC delivery, including technological infrastructure (85.4%), training (83.3%), and support from study coordinators (81.3%). Other barriers included systems-based factors, such as insurance reimbursement and out-of-state coverage restrictions. Patient-, organization-, and systems-based factors are all important to providing and improving access to telehealth EIPC services. Further research is needed to investigate the efficacy of telehealth EIPC and how policies and interventions may improve access to and dissemination of this care modality.

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and palliative care: where we are, and the road ahead.

Patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) have high symptom burdens, including pain, fatigue, dyspnea, and sialorrhea, and they must make difficult decisions about the use of life-prolonging therapies, such as long-term mechanical ventilation. The impact of ALS is also felt by family caregivers who often struggle to meet the heavy physical, financial, and emotional demands associated with the illness. Expert multidisciplinary care may improve both quality and length of life of patients with ALS. However, although advances have been made in the treatment of some symptoms, others, including pain management, remain poorly studied. Involvement of palliative care specialists as part of the ALS multidisciplinary team is recommended, as we continue to work toward improving the quality of life for patients and their families.

Deploying the Behavioral and Environmental Sensing and Intervention for Cancer Smart Health System to Support Patients and Family Caregivers in Managing Pain: Feasibility and Acceptability Study.

BACKGROUND: Distressing cancer pain remains a serious symptom management issue for patients and family caregivers, particularly within home settings. Technology can support home-based cancer symptom management but must consider the experience of patients and family caregivers, as well as the broader environmental context. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the feasibility and acceptability of a smart health sensing system-Behavioral and Environmental Sensing and Intervention for Cancer (BESI-C)-that was designed to support the monitoring and management of cancer pain in the home setting. METHODS: Dyads of patients with cancer and their primary family caregivers were recruited from an outpatient palliative care clinic at an academic medical center. BESI-C was deployed in each dyad home for approximately 2 weeks. Data were collected via environmental sensors to assess the home context (eg, light and temperature); Bluetooth beacons to help localize dyad positions; and smart watches worn by both patients and caregivers, equipped with heart rate monitors, accelerometers, and a custom app to deliver ecological momentary assessments (EMAs). EMAs enabled dyads to record and characterize pain events from both their own and their partners' perspectives. Sensor data streams were integrated to describe and explore the context of cancer pain events. Feasibility was assessed both technically and procedurally. Acceptability was assessed using postdeployment surveys and structured interviews with participants. RESULTS: Overall, 5 deployments (n=10 participants; 5 patient and family caregiver dyads) were completed, and 283 unique pain events were recorded. Using our "BESI-C Performance Scoring Instrument," the overall technical feasibility score for deployments was 86.4 out of 100. Procedural feasibility challenges included the rurality of dyads, smart watch battery life and EMA reliability, and the length of time required for deployment installation. Postdeployment acceptability Likert surveys (1=strongly disagree; 5=strongly agree) found that dyads disagreed that BESI-C was a burden (1.7 out of 5) or compromised their privacy (1.9 out of 5) and agreed that the system collected helpful information to better manage cancer pain (4.6 out of 5). Participants also expressed an interest in seeing their own individual data (4.4 out of 5) and strongly agreed that it is important that data collected by BESI-C are shared with their respective partners (4.8 out of 5) and health care providers (4.8 out of 5). Qualitative feedback from participants suggested that BESI-C positively improved patient-caregiver communication regarding pain management. Importantly, we demonstrated proof of concept that seriously ill patients with cancer and their caregivers will mark pain events in real time using a smart watch. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to deploy BESI-C, and dyads find the system acceptable. By leveraging human-centered design and the integration of heterogenous environmental, physiological, and behavioral data, the BESI-C system offers an innovative approach to monitor cancer pain, mitigate the escalation of pain and distress, and improve symptom management self-efficacy. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/16178.

Nephrology and Palliative Care Collaboration in the Care of Patients With Advanced Kidney Disease: Results of a Clinician Survey.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Despite calls for integrating palliative care into chronic kidney disease (CKD) care, uptake remains low. The study aim was to describe clinicians' perceptions of the clinical and research priorities in CKD care and the main barriers to collaboration. STUDY DESIGN: This was a descriptive cross-sectional study using an online survey developed by clinicians and researchers as the primary data collection method. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians in nephrology and palliative care departments (N = 195) at an academic health center in Virginia were invited to participate. Of the 48.7% (n = 95) who responded, most were registered nurses (65.3%) in nephrology (80%) with more than 15 years' experience (40%). PREDICTORS: Factors including discipline (nursing, social work, and physician) and practice area (palliative care or nephrology) were assessed. OUTCOMES: Main outcomes of interest included clinicians' perceptions of the role of palliative care, barriers to collaboration, and the top clinical and research priorities for patients with advanced CKD. ANALYTIC APPROACH: Survey data were analyzed using SPSS using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Respondents reported being comfortable caring for patients near the end of life and endorsed advance care planning and collaboration between nephrology and palliative care teams. However, both rarely happen. Fragmentation, or poor coordination of care, was perceived to be the main barrier to collaboration. Perceptions regarding collaboration facilitation differed; nephrology clinicians identified patient/family education as the most important facilitator while palliative care clinicians identified clinician education as most important. Top clinical priorities differed. Palliative care clinicians reported pain/symptom management as taking priority while nephrology clinicians identified caregiver/family support. Developing interventions to support treatment-related decision making was the top research priority. LIMITATIONS: Results reflect perceptions of about half the clinicians at 1 academic health center. CONCLUSIONS: Additional studies to capture patients' and families' perspectives and examine end-of-life care processes are needed. Results may inform future targeted interventions.

Association between Palliative Care Consultation and Advance Palliative Care Rates: A Descriptive Cohort Study in Patients at Various Stages in the Continuum of Chronic Kidney Disease.

Background: Despite evidence that advance care planning (ACP) benefits patients with serious illnesses, there is a dearth of information about "who" is referred for palliative care (PC) consultation, the rate of PC consultation, and the outcomes of referrals in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease/end-stage kidney disease (aCKD/ESKD). Objectives: (1) To describe patient characteristics associated with PC consultations and (2) to determine the frequency and outcome of PC consultation on documented ACP discussions for patients with aCKD/ESKD. Methodology/Design: This is retrospective observational electronic health record cohort review. Settings: University of Virginia (UVA) hospital, clinics, and dialysis units. Participants: Patients were studied along two time intervals. Time period January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2017 included all patients admitted to UVA during that time period with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/minute. Time period January 1, 2018 to March 31, 2019 included two cohorts: patients with eGFR <15 mL/minute who had died during study period excluding those who withdrew from dialysis and those who were dialysis dependent and withdrew from dialysis. Results: Aside from higher rates of PC consultation in patients with heart failure, none of the demographic and comorbidity data studied affected whether or not a patient is referred to PC in patients with aCKD/ESKD. PC consultation rates were low among all patients studied: 14.7% in patients with eGFR <60 mL/minute, 28.9% in dialysis patients withdrawing from dialysis, and 57.1% in terminally ill patients with eGFR <15 mL/minute. In all cohorts, PC consultations were associated with improved ACP. Conclusion: PC consultation is significantly associated with better end-of-life outcomes with more completion of ACP and hospice referral in patients with aCKD/ESKD. PC consultation rates remain low. Even in terminally ill patients with more aCKD, >40% were never seen by PC. Until policies and curricula better prepare nephrologists to independently address ACP, collaboration between nephrologists and PC specialists is recommended.

Recommendations for Preventing Medication Diversion and Misuse in Hospice Care: A Modified Delphi Study.

CONTEXT: Recommendations are needed to help minimize the risks of medication diversion and misuse in the hospice setting. OBJECTIVE: To identify recommendations that could help prevent medication diversion and misuse in hospice care. METHODS: A modified Delphi method was utilized. An interdisciplinary panel of ten experts engaged in three phases of online and in-person voting regarding recommendations. Consensus for recommendations required a minimum of 80% endorsement by the panel experts. After two rounds of voting and several rounds of informal voting, 15 total recommendations were endorsed. RESULTS: Fifteen recommendations achieved at least 80% endorsement during the final round of voting. Each of the following recommendation topics received ≥ 80% endorsement, the need to balance prevention efforts with quality care, screening clinical job candidates, family education and screening, medication monitoring, responding to missing/diverted medications, and medication disposal. Panelists rated the Patient & Family Education recommendation as most important (M = 9.7; SD = 0.7) followed closely by Responding to Medication Diversion or Misuse (M = 9.5; SD = 1.1). CONCLUSION: These recommendations were created by experts in the field to reduce the risk of medication diversion and misuse. Further steps towards implementation may appropriately reduce these risks.

Understanding the Experience of Cancer Pain From the Perspective of Patients and Family Caregivers to Inform Design of an In-Home Smart Health System: Multimethod Approach.

BACKGROUND: Inadequately managed pain is a serious problem for patients with cancer and those who care for them. Smart health systems can help with remote symptom monitoring and management, but they must be designed with meaningful end-user input. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand the experience of managing cancer pain at home from the perspective of both patients and family caregivers to inform design of the Behavioral and Environmental Sensing and Intervention for Cancer (BESI-C) smart health system. METHODS: This was a descriptive pilot study using a multimethod approach. Dyads of patients with cancer and difficult pain and their primary family caregivers were recruited from an outpatient oncology clinic. The participant interviews consisted of (1) open-ended questions to explore the overall experience of cancer pain at home, (2) ranking of variables on a Likert-type scale (0, no impact; 5, most impact) that may influence cancer pain at home, and (3) feedback regarding BESI-C system prototypes. Qualitative data were analyzed using a descriptive approach to identity patterns and key themes. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS; basic descriptive statistics and independent sample t tests were run. RESULTS: Our sample (n=22; 10 patient-caregiver dyads and 2 patients) uniformly described the experience of managing cancer pain at home as stressful and difficult. Key themes included (1) unpredictability of pain episodes; (2) impact of pain on daily life, especially the negative impact on sleep, activity, and social interactions; and (3) concerns regarding medications. Overall, taking pain medication was rated as the category with the highest impact on a patient's pain (=4.79), followed by the categories of wellness (=3.60; sleep quality and quantity, physical activity, mood and oral intake) and interaction (=2.69; busyness of home, social or interpersonal interactions, physical closeness or proximity to others, and emotional closeness and connection to others). The category related to environmental factors (temperature, humidity, noise, and light) was rated with the lowest overall impact (=2.51). Patients and family caregivers expressed receptivity to the concept of BESI-C and reported a preference for using a wearable sensor (smart watch) to capture data related to the abrupt onset of difficult cancer pain. CONCLUSIONS: Smart health systems to support cancer pain management should (1) account for the experience of both the patient and the caregiver, (2) prioritize passive monitoring of physiological and environmental variables to reduce burden, and (3) include functionality that can monitor and track medication intake and efficacy; wellness variables, such as sleep quality and quantity, physical activity, mood, and oral intake; and levels of social interaction and engagement. Systems must consider privacy and data sharing concerns and incorporate feasible strategies to capture and characterize rapid-onset symptoms.

Screening for Opioid Misuse in the Nonhospitalized Seriously Ill Patient.

Background: Responding to an epidemic of opioid-related deaths, guidelines and laws have been implemented to promote safe opioid prescribing practices. Objective: This study evaluates differences in screening practices and knowledge of laws between oncologists and cardiologists who prescribe opiates. Design: Surveys regarding screening practices and knowledge of opioid prescribing laws were distributed in March 2017 to oncology and congestive heart failure (CHF) clinicians at the University of Virginia. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used. Results: Forty-six of 129 (35.6%) oncology providers and 7 of 14 (50%) CHF providers reported prescribing opiates in their clinic with usable survey results. The majority of oncology (65.22%) and cardiology (85.71%) providers report screening for substance abuse "when indicated" (p = 0.053). Only 19.6% of oncologists reported always using the prescription monitoring program (PMP), while 71.43% of cardiologists reported using it always (p = 0.014). Of the oncology providers, 66.67% report never using the urine drug screen (UDS), while 86.7% of cardiologists reported using it "when indicated" (p = 0.0086). Up to 34.78% of the oncologists and 57.14% of the cardiologists reported of never screening the family members for misuse (p = 0.317). Knowledge of laws was similar between groups, with 14.29% of cardiology and 17.39% of oncology providers reporting no knowledge of opioid prescribing laws (p = 0.2869). Conclusions: Routine screening for substance misuse risk was uncommon for both groups, but cardiology providers were more likely to use the PMP or UDS. Knowledge gaps regarding Virginia laws were noted in both groups. Improved education regarding best practices and laws, as well as programs to promote screening, is needed for all providers.

Mental Health Comorbidities and Elevated Risk of Opioid Use in Elderly Breast Cancer Survivors Using Adjuvant Endocrine Treatments.

PURPOSE: Prolonged opioid use is common and associated with lower survival rates in breast cancer survivors. We explored whether opioid use in elderly breast cancer survivors using adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) regimens was affected by the prevalence of mental health comorbidity and, in turn, how this affected survival in this population. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed 2006 to 2012 SEER-Medicare data sets and followed patients for at least 2 years from the index date, defined as the first date they filled an AET prescription. The study included adult women with incident, primary, hormone receptor-positive, stage I to III breast cancer. They were also first-time AET users and fee-for-service Medicare enrollees continuously enrolled in Medicare Parts A, B, and D. We measured whether patients with a clinical diagnosis of a mental health comorbid condition used opioids after the initiation of AET and their survival at the end of the study period. RESULTS: A total of 10,452 breast cancer survivors who began AET treatments were identified, among whom the most commonly diagnosed mental health comorbidities were depression (n = 554) and anxiety (n = 246). Using a propensity score risk adjustment model, we found that opioid use was significantly higher in women with a mental health comorbidity (odds ratio,1.33; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.68). In addition, mental health comorbidity was associated with a significantly increased hazard of mortality in this population (hazard ratio, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.18). CONCLUSION: The presence of mental health comorbidity in breast cancer survivors significantly increases the risk of opioid use and mortality, which highlights the need for better management of comorbid mental health conditions.

STAT RT: a prospective pilot clinical trial of Scan-Plan-QA-Treat stereotactic body radiation therapy for painful osseous metastases.

BACKGROUND: Planning and treatment of bone metastases with palliative radiotherapy often requires 1-3 weeks, resulting in patient inconvenience and delayed palliation. We developed an expedited workflow that delivers palliative stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to painful bone metastases in which CT, planning, quality assurance (QA), and initial treatment are performed one day. This prospective pilot clinical trial evaluates the feasibility, safety, efficacy, and patient satisfaction of this workflow. METHODS: Patients with 1-3 painful bone metastases were prospectively enrolled and treated with 2-5 fractions of 5-10 Gy per fraction. Bone pain, opioid use, patient satisfaction, performance status, and quality of life were evaluated prior to and at 1, 4, 8, 12, 26, and 52 weeks post treatment. Outcomes and treatment-related toxicity were analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were enrolled and 37 metastases treated, receiving an average of 21.6 Gy in 3.1 fractions. Median time from CT simulation to 1st treatment was 6.6 hours. Average worst pain scores were significantly lower at all post-treatment time points with maximal response noted at 3 months. Opioid use was not significantly different from baseline at any follow up. Performance status was significantly increased only at week 12. Bone pain quality of life was significantly increased at all time points except at 52 weeks while general quality of life was significantly increased at only weeks 8 and 26. Ninety-two percent of patients reported being mostly or completely satisfied with the treatment results from week 8 until the end of follow-up. There was no grade 3 or higher toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrate that treating bone metastases with palliative SBRT via a multi-fraction Scan-Plan-QA-Treat patient centric workflow is feasible and safe. Although performance status, general quality of life, and opioid use were not significantly altered, patient satisfaction was high with this same-day treatment workflow.