The Dilemma of Treating Delirium: the Conundrum of Drug Management.

OPINION STATEMENT: Delirium is a common medical complication in people living with cancer, particularly with more advanced disease. Delirium is associated with significant symptom burden which causes distress and impacts quality of life. As recommended by international guidelines, a high degree of suspicion is needed to ensure delirium is detected early. Attention to collateral history can provide clues to changes in cognition and attention. Non-pharmacological approaches that can be considered essential elements of care are effective in reducing the risk of delirium. Delirium screening using a validated measure is recommended as even expert clinicians can underdiagnose or miss delirium. The diagnostic assessment requires consideration of the cancer diagnosis and comorbidities, in the context of potential reversibility, goals of care, and patient preferences. The gold standard approach based on expert consensus is to institute management for delirium precipitants supported by non-pharmacological essential care, with the support of an interdisciplinary team. Medication management should be used sparingly and for a limited period of time wherever possible for severe perceptual disturbance or agitation which has not improved with non-pharmacological approaches. Clinicians should be familiar with the registered indication for medications and seek informed consent for off-label use. All interventions put in place to manage delirium need to consider net clinical benefit, including harms such as sedation and loss of capacity for meaningful interaction. Clear communication and explanation are needed regularly, with the person with delirium as far as possible and with surrogate decision makers. Delirium can herald a poor prognosis and this needs to be considered and be discussed as appropriate in shared decision-making. Recall after delirium has resolved is common, and opportunity to talk about this experience and the related distress should be offered during the period after recovery

Role of Hospice Care at the End of Life for People With Cancer.

Patient-defined factors that are important at the end of life include being physically independent for as long as possible, good symptom control, and spending quality time with friends and family. Hospice care adds to the quality of care and these patient-centered priorities for people with cancer and their families in the last weeks and days of life. Evidence from large observational studies demonstrate that hospice care can improve outcomes directly and support better and more appropriate health care use for people in the last stages of cancer.Team-based community hospice care has measurable benefits for patients, their family caregivers, and health services. In addition to improved symptom control for patients and a greater likelihood of time spent at home, caregiver outcomes are better when hospice care is accessed: informational needs are better met, and caregivers have an improved ability to move on with life after the patient's death compared with people who did not have access to these services.Hospice care continues to evolve as its reach expands and the needs of patients continue to broaden. This is reflected in the transition from hospice being based on excellence in nursing to teams with a broad range of health professionals to meet the complex and changing needs of patients and their families. Additional integration of cancer services with hospice care will help to provide more seamless care for patients and supporting family caregivers during their caregiving and after the death of the patient

Clinician-reported changes in octreotide prescribing for malignant bowel obstruction as a result of an adequately powered phase III study: A transnational, online survey

© The Author(s) 2018. Background: Translating research evidence into clinical practice often has a long lag time. Aim: To determine the impact of a phase III randomised controlled trial on palliative care clinicians’ self-reported practice change. Design: Online survey about use of octreotide in managing inoperable malignant bowel obstruction due to cancer or its treatments distributed in November 2016, 2 years after the first publication of the study in a peer-reviewed journal. Demographic, self-reported practice and the reasons underpinning this were collected. Responses were aggregated to ‘practice modified’ or ‘practice not modified’. A multinomial regression model explored predictors of practice change. Setting: Members of the Australian New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine. Results: Response rate was 20.8% (106/509): 55.6% were aged >50 years, 56.5% were female and 77% had previously prescribed octreotide for this clinical indication. Out of 106 respondents, 52 (49.1%) indicated modified practice (60.9% of those who had previously prescribed octreotide in this setting). In those who reported practice change, most frequently octreotide was now used when other therapies failed; for not changing practice, ‘more confirmatory evidence was needed’ was most often cited. In the regression model, older age (clinician age = 50–59 years; relative risk = 0.147; 95% confidence interval = 0.024–0.918; p = 0.04) and having practices with lower proportions of people treated with octreotide (0%–20%; relative risk = 0.039; 95% confidence interval = 0.002–0.768; p = 0.033) predicted greater self-reported practice change. Conclusion: Clinician-reported change in practice in the survey is seen in the majority of respondents. This suggests that there is a cohort of ‘early adopters’ within palliative care practice as new evidence becomes available

A randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trial of megestrol acetate or dexamethasone in treating symptomatic anorexia in people with advanced cancer

This multi-site, double blind, parallel arm, fixed dose, randomised placebo controlled phase III study compared megestrol acetate 480 mg/day with dexamethasone 4 mg/day for their net effects on appetite in people with cancer anorexia. Patients with advanced cancer and anorexia for ≥ 2 weeks with a score ≤ 4 (0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) 0 = no appetite, 10 = best possible appetite) were recruited. Participants received megestrol 480 mg or dexamethasone 4 mg or placebo daily for up to 4 weeks. Primary outcomes were at day 7. Responders were defined as having a ≥ 25% improvement in NRS over baseline. There were 190 people randomised (megestrol acetate n = 61; dexamethasone n = 67, placebo n = 62). At week 1 (primary endpoint), 79·3% in the megestrol group, 65·5% in the dexamethasone group and 58·5% in the placebo group (p = 0.067) were responders. No differences in performance status or quality of life were reported. Treatment emergent adverse events were frequent (90·4% of participants), and included altered mood and insomnia. Hyperglycemia and deep vein thromboses were more frequent when on dexamethasone than the other two arms. There was no difference in groups between the three arms, with no benefit seen over placebo with anorexia improving in all arms.Trail registration: The trial was registered on 19/08/2008 with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12608000405314)

Management of spontaneous pneumothorax in patients with COVID-19.

ObjectivesThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia may cause cystic features of lung parenchyma which can resolve or progress to larger blebs. Pneumothorax was more likely in patients with neutrophilia, severe lung injury and a prolonged clinical course. The timely diagnosis and management will reduce COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality.MethodsWe present 11 cases of spontaneous pneumothorax managed with chest tube thoracostomy or high-dose oxygen therapy. Isolated spontaneous pneumothorax was detected in all cases.ResultsEight cases were male and 3 cases were female. There were bilateral ground-glass opacities or pulmonary infiltrates in the parenchyma of the 10 cases. We detected neutrophilia, lymphopaenia and increased C-reactive protein, Ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase, D-Dimer, interleukin-6 levels in almost all cases. Chest tube thoracostomy was sufficient to treat pneumothorax in our 9 of case. In 2 cases, pneumothorax healed with high-dose oxygen therapy. Favipiravir and antibiotic treatment were given to different 10 patients. In our institution, all patients with COVID-19 infection were placed on prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation, unless contraindicated. The treatments of patients diagnosed with secondary spontaneous pneumothorax during the pandemic period and those diagnosed with secondary spontaneous pneumothorax in the previous 3 years were compared with the durations of tube thoracostomy performed in both groups.ConclusionsThe increased number of cases of pneumothorax suggests that pneumothorax may be a complication of COVID-19 infection. During medical treatment of COVID-19, pneumothorax may be the only reason for hospitalization. Although tube thoracostomy is a sufficient treatment option in most cases, clinicians should be aware of the difficulties that may arise in diagnosis and treatment

Screening and Audit as Service-Level Strategies to Support Implementation of Australian Guidelines for Cancer Pain Management in Adults: A Feasibility Study

© 2019 Background: Pain in people with cancer is common but often under-recognized and under-treated. Guidelines can improve the quality of pain care, but need targeted strategies to support implementation. Aim: To test the feasibility of two service-level strategies for supporting guideline implementation: a screening system and medical record audit. Design: Multimethods. Setting: One oncology outpatient service, and one palliative care outpatient and inpatient service. Participants: Patients with advanced cancer. Methods: Patients were screened in the waiting room with a modified version of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised either electronically or in paper-based format. Feasibility indicated the percentage of patients successfully screened from the total number attending the services. An audit assessed adherence to key indicators of pain assessment and management. Feasibility thresholds were set at 75% incidence for screening and a median of 30 minutes per patient for audit. Results: Of 452 patient visits, 95% (n = 429)were successfully screened, 34% (n = 155)electronically and 61% (n = 274)paper-based. Electronic pain screening was technically challenging and time-intensive for nurses. Thirty-one patients consented to have their records audited. The median audit time was 37.5 minutes (range 10-120 minutes). Variability arose from the number and type of record (outpatient or inpatient). Adherence to indicators varied from 63% (pain assessment at first presentation)to 94% (regular pain assessment and medication prescribed at regular intervals). Conclusions: This study confirmed the need to implement evidence-based guidelines for cancer pain and generated useful insights into the feasibility of pain screening and audit

Predictors of mortality for delirium in palliative care

© Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2016. Introduction: Delirium has a high mortality rate. Understanding predictors of prognosis in patients with delirium will aid treatment decisions and communication. This study aimed to explore variables associated with death during an established episode of delirium in palliative care when haloperidol treatment had been commenced. Methods: A consecutive cohort of palliative care patients, from 14 centers across four countries, is reported. The outcome of interest was death within 14 days from commencement of haloperidol treatment for delirium. Clinicodemographic variables explored were delirium severity, age, gender, primary life limiting illness, body mass index (BMI), total daily haloperidol dose at baseline (mg), functional status, and comorbidities. Results: One hundred and sixteen palliative care patients where vital status was known were included in the analysis; 45% (n = 52) died within 10 days, and 56% (n = 65) died within 14 days. In multivariate analyses no clinical or demographic variables predicted death, apart from lower BMI in noncancer patients. Conclusion: This study has shown a very high mortality rate within two weeks of commencing haloperidol for delirium in palliative care, with no clear clinical predictors for those with a higher chance of dying. Having a higher BMI offered some benefit in survival, but only in noncancer patients. When delirium occurs in advanced illness, discussion should be initiated about the gravity of the clinical situation

Subcutaneous ketamine infusion in palliative patients for major depressive disorder (SKIPMDD)—Phase II single-arm open-label feasibility study

Background Ketamine at subanaesthetic dosages ( 18-years-old) with advanced life-limiting illnesses referred to four palliative care services in Sydney, Australia, diagnosed with major depressive disorder from any care setting. Participants received weekly subcutaneous ketamine infusion (0.1–0.4mg/kg) over two hours using individual dose-titration design. Outcomes assessed were feasibility, safety, tolerability and antidepressant activity. Results Out of ninety-nine referrals, ten participants received ketamine and were analysed for responses. Accrual rate was 0.54 participants/month across sites with 50% of treated participants achieving > 50% reduction in baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, meeting feasibility criteria set a priori. There were no clinically relevant harms encountered. Conclusions A future definitive trial exploring the effectiveness of subcutaneous infusion of ketamine for major depressive disorder in the palliative care setting may be feasible by addressing identified study barriers. Individual dose-titration of subcutaneous ketamine infusions over two hours from 0.1mg/kg can be well-tolerated and appears to produce transient antidepressant signals over hours to days

Pharmacovigilance in hospice/palliative care: Net effect of gabapentin for neuropathic pain

Objective Hospice/palliative care patients may differ from better studied populations, and data from other populations cannot necessarily be extrapolated into hospice/palliative care clinical practice. Pharmacovigilance studies provide opportunities to understand the harms and benefits of medications in routine practice. Gabapentin, a γ-amino butyric acid analogue antiepileptic drug, is commonly prescribed for neuropathic pain in hospice/palliative care. Most of the evidence however relates to nonmalignant, chronic pain syndromes (diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, central pain syndromes, fibromyalgia). The aim of this study was to quantify the immediate and short-term clinical benefits and harms of gabapentin in routine hospice/palliative care practice. Design Multisite, prospective, consecutive cohort. Population 127 patients, 114 of whom had cancer, who started gabapentin for neuropathic pain as part of routine clinical care. Settings 42 centres from seven countries. Data were collected at three time points-at baseline, at day 7 (and at any time; immediate and shortterm harms) and at day 21 (clinical benefits). Results At day 21, the average dose of gabapentin for those still using it (n=68) was 653mg/24h (range 0-1800mg) and 54 (42%) reported benefits, of whom 7 (6%) experienced complete pain resolution. Harms were reported in 39/127 (30%) patients at day 7, the most frequent of which were cognitive disturbance, somnolence, nausea and dizziness. Ten patients had their medication ceased due to harms. The presence of significant comorbidities, higher dose and increasing age increased the likelihood of harm. Conclusions Overall, 42% of people experienced benefit at a level that resulted in continued use at 21 days