A methodology to systematically analyze the hospital discharge of terminally ill patients

To provide an appropriate method to systematically analyze the hospital discharge of terminally ill patients especially the cooperation between hospital and community nurses and the quality of the discharge handovers. To evaluate the hospital discharge process of terminally ill patients in an academic hospital in the Netherlands using the proposed method. Data were collected from a prospective cohort of all terminally ill patients discharged from the University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands, between June and November 2014. The hospital discharges were assessed using 2 questionnaires: an inventory questionnaire, to determine the required care, and an evaluation questionnaire, to evaluate the care actually organized and the discharge handovers. The inventory questionnaire was completed prior to discharge and the evaluation questionnaire between 3 to 7 days after discharge. Around 130 consecutive patients were included. The discharge took place on the desired date in 86% of cases and the average overall discharge grade on a 10-point scale was 7.4 (range: 3-9.5). In 23% of cases discrepancies between required and provided care were identified and medication queries existed in 29%. This study provides a methodology to analyze the hospital discharge procedure of terminally ill patients that can be utlized in any hospital. Structured analysis of the discharge process is valuable and identifies where improvements can be made. Within the study cohort the home care could be arranged at short notice and was considered sufficient. However, in a significant proportion of patients a discrepancy between required and arranged care and queries about medication were identified

Dexamethasone for the prevention of a pain flare after palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases:a multicenter double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial

Background: Radiotherapy has a good effect in palliation of painful bone metastases, with a pain response rate of more than 60%. However, shortly after treatment, in approximately 40% of patients a temporary pain flare occurs, which is defined as a two-point increase of the worst pain score on an 11-point rating scale compared to baseline, without a decrease in analgesic intake, or a 25% increase in analgesic intake without a decrease in worst pain score, compared to baseline. A pain flare has a negative impact on daily functioning and mood of patients. It is thought to be caused by periostial edema after radiotherapy. Dexamethasone might diminish this edema and thereby reduce the incidence of pain flare. Two non-randomized studies suggest that dexamethasone reduces the incidence of a pain flare by 50%. The aim of this trial is to study the effectiveness of dexamethasone to prevent a pain flare after palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases and to determine the optimal dose schedule. Methods and design: This study is a three-armed, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial. We aim to include 411 patients with uncomplicated painful bone metastases from any type of primary solid tumor who receive short schedule radiotherapy (all conventional treatment schedules from one to six fractions). Arm 1 consists of daily placebo for four days, arm 2 starts with 8 mg dexamethasone before the (first) radiotherapy and three days placebo thereafter. Arm 3 consists of four days 8 mg dexamethasone. The primary endpoint is the occurrence of a pain flare. Secondary endpoints are pain, quality of life and side-effects of dexamethasone versus placebo. Patients complete a questionnaire (Brief Pain Inventory with two added questions about side-effects of medication, the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and QLQ-BM22 for quality of life) at baseline, daily for two weeks and lastly at four weeks. Discussion: This study will show whether dexamethasone is effective in preventing a pain flare after palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases and, if so, to determine the optimal dose

Randomized controlled study of pain education in patients receiving radiotherapy for painful bone metastases

BACKGROUND: Although short-course radiotherapy is an effective treatment for patients with painful bone metastases, pain is not always sufficiently controlled. We therefore investigated the additional effect of a nurse-led pain education program on pain control and quality of life (QoL).PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter study, patients with solid tumor bone metastases and a worst pain intensity of ≥5 on a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) were randomized between care as usual (control-group) and care as usual plus the Pain Education Program (PEP-group). PEP consisted of a structured interview and personalized education with follow-up phone calls. Patients completed the Brief Pain Inventory, EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and BM22 at week 0, 1, 4, 8 and 12. The primary outcome was pain control, defined as the number of patients whose worst pain intensity was &lt;5 on a 0-10 NRS after 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were time to reach control of pain (NRS &lt; 5), mean worst pain and average pain, and QoL at weeks 1, 4, 8 and 12.RESULTS: Of 308 included patients, 182 (92 PEP-group) completed 12 weeks follow-up. At 12 weeks, more patients in the PEP-group (71%) compared to the control-group (52%) reported pain control (P =.008). In the PEP-group, pain control was reached earlier than in the control-group (median 29 days versus 56 days; P =.003). Mean worst and average pain decreased in both groups but decreased more in the PEP-group. QoL did not differ between the groups.CONCLUSION: The addition of PEP to care as usual for patients treated with radiotherapy for painful bone metastases resulted in less pain and faster pain control.</p

How nurses assess breakthrough cancer pain, and the impact of this pain on patients' daily lives - Results of a European survey

<p>Purpose: To increase our knowledge of how nurses assess breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP); and whether they find it difficult to distinguish BTCP from background pain; how they estimate the impact of BTCP on patients' daily lives, and the factors that nurses consider to induce BTCP. Variations in their use of assessment tools and their ability to distinguish between different types of pain were also examined in terms of the number of years of oncology nursing experience and the practice in different countries.</p><p>Methods: In total, 1241 nurses (90% female) who care for patients with cancer, from 12 European countries, completed a survey questionnaire.</p><p>Key results: Half the sample had >9 years of experience in oncology nursing. Although 39% had no pain assessment tool to help them distinguish between types of pain, 95% of those who used a tool found it useful. Furthermore, 37% reported that they had problems distinguishing background pain from BTCP. Movement was identified as the factor that most commonly exacerbated BTCP across all countries. The nurses reported that BTCP greatly interfered with patients' everyday activities, and they rated the patients' enjoyment of life as most strongly affected. The use of tools and the ability to distinguish between different pains varied between European countries and with years of experience in oncology nursing.</p><p>Conclusions: The nurses reported that BTCP greatly interfered with patients' lives, and many nurses had problems distinguishing between background pain and BTCP. Nurses require more knowledge about BTCP management, and guidelines should be developed for clinical use. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</p>