Have we improved pain control in cancer patients? A multicenter study of ambulatory and hospitalized cancer patients

Background: Pain in cancer patients is recognized as a major health problem, yet few studies of both inpatient and outpatient populations have been carried out. Objective: The study objective was to assess the frequency, type, and characteristics of pain in adult cancer patients, including both inpatients and outpatients. Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 1064 adult cancer patients (437 outpatients and 627 inpatients) from 44 hospitals and/or long-term-care centers in Catalonia, Spain. Cancer patients suffering from pain of any etiology for >_2 weeks and/or under analgesic treatment >_2 weeks were enrolled. Demographic and pain data were collected. The Spanish version of the Brief Pain Inventory was used to assess pain. Results: Pain frequency was 55.3%. Pain was less frequent in outpatients than inpatients (41.6% versus 64.7%; p<0.001), although median pain duration was longer in outpatients (20 versus 6 weeks; p<0.001). Pain was assessable in 333 patients, and intensity was similar in both out- and inpatients; however, outpatients reported less improvement, less pain interference with daily life, and less pain related to the cancer per se. In both groups, patients with multiple myeloma (73%), breast (65%), and lung cancer (61%) were most likely to report pain. Conclusions: Pain in cancer patients, both ambulatory and hospitalized, remains a challenge for health care professionals, health administrators, and stakeholders. Our study reveals the high level of pain and distress that cancer patients continue to suffer, a problem that is particularly notable in outpatients due to the intensity and duration of the pain

Proactive and systematic multidimensional needs assessment in patients with advanced cancer approaching palliative care: a study protocol

Introduction: The benefits of palliative care rely on how healthcare professionals assess patients' needs in the initial encounter/s; crucial to the design of a personalised therapeutic plan. However, there is currently no evidence-based guideline to perform this needs assessment. We aim to design and evaluate a proactive and systematic method for the needs assessment using quality guidelines for developing complex interventions. This will involve patients, their relatives and healthcare professionals in all phases of the study and its communication to offer clinical practice a reliable approach to address the palliative needs of patients. Methods and analysis: To design and assess the feasibility of an evidence-based, proactive and systematic Multidimensional needs Assessment in Palliative care (MAP) as a semistructured clinical interview guide for initial palliative care encounter/s in patients with advanced cancer. This is a two-phase multisite project conducted over 36 months between May 2019 and May 2022. Phase I includes a systematic review, discussions with stakeholders and Delphi consensus. The evidence gathered from phase I will be the basis for the initial versions of the MAP, then submitted to Delphi consensus to develop a preliminary guide of the MAP for the training of clinicians in the feasibility phase. Phase II is a mixed-methods multicenter feasibility study that will assess the MAP's acceptability, participation, practicality, adaptation and implementation. A nested qualitative study will purposively sample a subset of participants to add preliminary clues about the benefits and barriers of the MAP. The evidence gathered from phase II will build a MAP user guide and educational programme for use in clinical practice. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval for this study has been granted by the university research ethics committee where the study will be carried out (approval reference MED-2018-10). Dissemination will be informed by the results obtained and communication will occur throughout

Epidemiología de las crisis de disnea en los pacientes con cáncer de pulmón en situación de enfermedad avanzada.

La disnea se ha reconocido recientemente como un síndrome relativamente frecuente, que tiene lugar en varias enfermedades y que conlleva un alto impacto en la calidad de vida de los pacientes. La disnea no es un fenómeno clínico único ni uniforme: se distingue una disnea de carácter continuo que se ha convenido en denominar disnea basal y otra que cursa en accesos. El grado de evidencia sobre la nomenclatura, conceptualización y aspectos clínicos es muy limitada, ya que se basa en pocos estudios (n = 12) y un número restringido de trabajos (n = 2) acumulan la gran mayoría de pacientes (86%). En el ámbito anglosajón el término consensuado para denominar los accesos de disnea en el paciente oncológico es “episodic dyspnea”, aunque no existe dicho consenso en castellano. Los accesos de disnea se definen en general (no exclusivamente en cáncer) como un acceso de ahogo intenso, transitorio y en los que puede o no identificarse un factor desencadenante, y habitualmente asociado a un alto impacto emocional. La información disponible sobre los accesos de disnea en pacientes con cáncer es escasa, dispersa y en ocasiones se debe inferir de información tangencial proporcionada en algunos estudios. Conclusiones El término consensuado para denominar los accesos de disnea es “crisis de disnea”. La crisis de disnea se define como “la aparición o incremento, en un paciente oncológico, de una dificultad respiratoria transitoria y desproporcionada, ocasionada por un desencadenante conocido (esfuerzo, factores emocionales, ambientales o comorbilidades) o desconocido, con la presencia o no de disnea de reposo”. La prevalencia de las crisis de disnea en los pacientes con cáncer de pulmón avanzado es alta, especialmente en aquellos pacientes que presentan disnea basal, precisan oxigenoterapia y tienen antecedentes de afectación ventilatoria y/o de la circulación pulmonar previas

Participatory action research intervention for improving sleep in inpatients with cancer

Aim: To design and implement a plan to improve oncohaematological patients' sleep. Background: The hospital environment can compromise inpatients' sleep, negatively impacting on health outcomes and patient satisfaction. Design and Method: The improvement plan was designed in collaboration with 18 professionals, 3 patients and 3 accompanying relatives. The study designed followed the SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines. Outcome variables were self-reported patient satisfaction regarding sleep, measured using a 30-item, ad hoc questionnaire and a 10-point visual analogue scale, completed by 318 oncohaematological inpatients (pre-intervention n = 120, post-intervention, n = 198) in a comprehensive cancer centre in Spain from 2017 to 2019. Results: Overall, 61.5% (n = 190) of the inpatients reported sleep alterations, and 92.6% reported interruptions in their nightly sleep. Half slept less than 6 h/night, but 58.0% said they felt rested upon waking, despite the interruptions. These outcomes were similar before and after the intervention. The improvement plan identified four domains for work (professionals, care procedures, instruments/environment and patients/relatives), 10 areas for improvement and 35 actions for implementation. However, overall sleep worsened significantly, from 6.73 to 6.06 on the 10-point scale. The intervention significantly improved variables related to professionals' behaviour, including noise during the shift change, conversations at the control desk and the use of corridor lights. Sleep disturbances were mainly caused by pain/discomfort and infuser alarms, and collectively they decreased significantly after the intervention (p =.008). However, overall sleep worsened significantly, from 6.73 to 6.06 on the 10-point scale. Conclusions: Pain, clinical devices and noise made by professionals are the main causes of sleep disturbances. Involving professionals in decision-making to improve patients' sleep have a positive impact on noise levels. Relevance to clinical practice: This study proposes new strategies for improving sleep by increasing staff awareness and changing attitudes towards patients' sleep. Nurses should be involved in addressing sleep disturbances during hospitalization

Proactive and systematic multidimensional needs assessment in patients with advanced cancer approaching palliative care: a study protocol

Introduction The benefits of palliative care rely on how healthcare professionals assess patients’ needs in the initial encounter/s; crucial to the design of a personalised therapeutic plan. However, there is currently no evidence-based guideline to perform this needs assessment. We aim to design and evaluate a proactive and systematic method for the needs assessment using quality guidelines for developing complex interventions. This will involve patients, their relatives and healthcare professionals in all phases of the study and its communication to offer clinical practice a reliable approach to address the palliative needs of patients. Methods and analysis To design and assess the feasibility of an evidence-based, proactive and systematic Multidimensional needs Assessment in Palliative care (MAP) as a semistructured clinical interview guide for initial palliative care encounter/s in patients with advanced cancer. This is a two-phase multisite project conducted over 36 months between May 2019 and May 2022. Phase I includes a systematic review, discussions with stakeholders and Delphi consensus. The evidence gathered from phase I will be the basis for the initial versions of the MAP, then submitted to Delphi consensus to develop a preliminary guide of the MAP for the training of clinicians in the feasibility phase. Phase II is a mixed-methods multicenter feasibility study that will assess the MAP’s acceptability, participation, practicality, adaptation and implementation. A nested qualitative study will purposively sample a subset of participants to add preliminary clues about the benefits and barriers of the MAP. The evidence gathered from phase II will build a MAP user guide and educational programme for use in clinical practice