Rates and Predictors of Professional Interpreting Provision for Patients With Limited English Proficiency in the Emergency Department and Inpatient Ward.

The provision of professional interpreting services in the hospital setting decreases communication errors of clinical significance and improves clinical outcomes. A retrospective audit was conducted at a tertiary referral adult hospital in Brisbane, Australia. Of 20 563 admissions of patients presenting to the hospital emergency department (ED) and admitted to a ward during 2013-2014, 582 (2.8%) were identified as requiring interpreting services. In all, 19.8% of admissions were provided professional interpreting services in the ED, and 26.1% were provided on the ward. Patients were more likely to receive interpreting services in the ED if they were younger, spoke an Asian language, or used sign language. On the wards, using sign language was associated with 3 times odds of being provided an interpreter compared with other languages spoken. Characteristics of patients including their age and type of language spoken influence the clinician's decision to engage a professional interpreter in both the ED and inpatient ward

Systemic corticosteroids for the management of cancer-related breathlessness (dyspnoea) in adults

BACKGROUND: Dyspnoea is a common symptom in advanced cancer, with a prevalence of up to 70% among patients at end of life. The cause of dyspnoea is often multifactorial, and may cause considerable psychological distress and suffering. Dyspnoea is often undertreated and good symptom control is less frequently achieved in people with dyspnoea than in people with other symptoms of advanced cancer, such as pain and nausea. The exact mechanism of action of corticosteroids in managing dyspnoea is unclear, yet corticosteroids are commonly used in palliative care for a variety of non-specific indications, including pain, nausea, anorexia, fatigue and low mood, despite being associated with a wide range of adverse effects. In view of their widespread use, it is important to seek evidence of the effects of corticosteroids for the management of cancer-related dyspnoea. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of systemic corticosteroids for the management of cancer-related breathlessness (dyspnoea) in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Science Citation Index Web of Science, Latin America and Caribbean Health Sciences (LILACS) and clinical trial registries, from inception to 25 January 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that included adults aged 18 years and above. We included participants with cancer-related dyspnoea when randomised to systemic corticosteroids (at any dose) administered for the relief of cancer-related dyspnoea or any other indication, compared to placebo, standard or alternative treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Five review authors independently assessed trial quality and three extracted data. We used means and standard deviations for each outcome to report the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the risk of bias and quality of evidence using GRADE. We extracted primary outcomes of sensory-perceptual experience of dyspnoea (intensity of dyspnoea), affective distress (quality of dyspnoea) and symptom impact (burden of dyspnoea or impact on function) and secondary outcomes of serious adverse events, participant satisfaction with treatment and participant withdrawal from trial. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies met the inclusion criteria, enrolling 157 participants (37 participants in one study and 120 in the other study), of whom 114 were included in the analyses. The studies compared oral dexamethasone to placebo, followed by an open-label phase in one study. One study lasted seven days, and the duration of the other study was 15 days.We were unable to conduct many of our predetermined analyses due to different agents, dosages, comparators and outcome measures, routes of drug delivery, measurement scales and time points. Subgroup analysis according to type of cancer was not possible.Primary outcomesWe included two studies (114 participants) with data at one week in the meta-analysis for change in dyspnoea intensity/dyspnoea relief from baseline. Corticosteroid therapy with dexamethasone resulted in an MD of lower dyspnoea intensity compared to placebo at one week (MD -0.85 lower dyspnoea (scale 0-10; lower score = less breathlessness), 95% CI -1.73 to 0.03; very low-quality evidence), although we were uncertain as to whether corticosteroids had an important effect on dyspnoea as results were imprecise. We downgraded the quality of evidence by three levels from high to very low due to very serious study limitations and imprecision.One study measured affective distress (quality of dyspnoea) and results were similar between groups (29 participants; very low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of the evidence three times for imprecision, inconsistency, and serious study limitations.Both studies assessed symptom impact (burden of dyspnoea or impact on function) (113 participants; very low-quality evidence). In one study, it was unclear whether dexamethasone had an effect on dyspnoea as results were imprecise. The second study showed more improvement for physical well-being scores at days eight and 15 in the dexamethasone group compared with the control group, but there was no evidence of a difference for FACIT social/family, emotional or functional scales. We downgraded the quality of the evidence three times for imprecision, inconsistency, and serious study limitations.Secondary outcomesDue to the lack of homogenous outcome measures and inconsistency in reporting, we could not perform quantitative analysis for any secondary outcomes. In both studies, the frequency of adverse events was similar between groups, and corticosteroids were generally well tolerated. The withdrawal rates for the two studies were 15% and 36%. Reasons for withdrawal included lost to follow-up, participant or carer (or both) refusal, and death due to disease progression. We downgraded the quality of evidence for these secondary outcomes by three levels from high to very low due to serious study limitations, inconsistency and imprecision.Neither study examined participant satisfaction with treatment. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are few studies assessing the effects of systemic corticosteroids on cancer-related dyspnoea in adults with cancer. We judged the evidence to be of very low quality that neither supported nor refuted corticosteroid use in this population. Further high-quality studies are needed to determine if corticosteroids are efficacious in this setting

Interventional options for the management of refractory cancer pain--what is the evidence?

PURPOSE: Pain is the most common symptom in cancer patients. Standard pain treatment according to the WHO three-step analgesic ladder provides effective pain management in approximately 70-90% of cancer patients. Refractory pain is defined as not responding to "standard" treatments. Interventional analgesic techniques can be used in an attempt to control refractory pain in patients in whom conventional analgesic strategies fail to provide effective pain relief or are intolerable due to severe adverse effects. This systematic review aims to provide the latest evidence on interventional refractory pain management in cancer patients. METHODS: Systematic literature search in Cochrane, EMBASE and PubMed including reviews and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled trials in the absence of reviews. RESULTS: Neuraxial analgesia may play a role in refractory cancer pain management. Paravertebral blocks decrease the incidence of persistent post-surgical pain after breast cancer. Coeliac plexus blocks improve pain scores in refractory pancreatic cancer pain for up to 4 weeks after the intervention with fewer burdensome side effects as compared to opioids. Cordotomy has mainly been studied in mesothelioma, and the case series suggest possible benefit for pain at the expense of a relatively high risk of side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, very few RCTs have been conducted on interventional pain techniques. In reality, it is very difficult to undertake large controlled trials for a number of reasons. Therefore, today's best evidence for practice may be from large case series of comparable patients with careful response and toxicity evaluation and follow-up

Integration of oncology and palliative care: setting a benchmark.

BACKGROUND: Integration of oncology and palliative care (PC) should be the standard model of care for patients with advanced cancer. An expert panel developed criteria that constitute integration. This study determined whether the PC service within this Health Service, which is considered to be fully "integrated", could be benchmarked against these criteria. METHODS: A survey was undertaken to determine the perceived level of integration of oncology and palliative care by all health care professionals (HCPs) within our cancer centre. An objective determination of integration was obtained from chart reviews of deceased patients. Integration was defined as >70% of all respondents answered "agree" or "strongly agree" to each indicator and >70% of patient charts supported each criteria. RESULTS: Thirty-four HCPs participated in the survey (response rate 69%). Over 90% were aware of the outpatient PC clinic, interdisciplinary and consultation team, PC senior leadership, and the acceptance of concurrent anticancer therapy. None of the other criteria met the 70% agreement mark but many respondents lacked the necessary knowledge to respond. The chart review included 67 patients, 92% of whom were seen by the PC team prior to death. The median time from referral to death was 103 days (range 0-1347). The level of agreement across all criteria was below our predefined definition of integration. CONCLUSION: The integration criteria relating to service delivery are medically focused and do not lend themselves to interdisciplinary review. The objective criteria can be audited and serve both as a benchmark and a basis for improvement activities

The Impact of Provision of Professional Language Interpretation on Length of Stay and Readmission Rates in an Acute Care Hospital Setting

© 2018, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature. The provision of professional interpreting services (PIS) in the hospital setting can decrease clinically significant communication errors and improve clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in length of stay (LOS) and 30 day readmission rates associated with provision of PIS in the Emergency Department (ED) and inpatient wards. A retrospective audit at a tertiary referral adult hospital in Brisbane, Australia, identified all admissions of patients requiring an interpreter. Patients provided an interpreter in the Emergency Department had a mean (age-adjusted) LOS 22.4 h less than patients not provided an interpreter in ED (95% CI 10.9–33.9). For patients provided with an interpreter on the ward the mean LOS was longer, (IRR 2.2, 1.8–2.3, p < 0.0001). There was no association between interpreter provision in either ED or the inpatient ward and readmission rate. Provision of PIS in the Emergency Department to those patients who require it can significantly reduce hospital LOS

Integration of oncology and palliative care: setting a benchmark

Integration of oncology and palliative care (PC) should be the standard model of care for patients with advanced cancer. An expert panel developed criteria that constitute integration. This study determined whether the PC service within this Health Service, which is considered to be fully "integrated", could be benchmarked against these criteria

Corticosteroids for adult patients with advanced cancer who have nausea and vomiting (not related to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery).

BACKGROUND: Nausea is a common symptom in advanced cancer, with a prevalence of up to 70%. While nausea and vomiting can be related to cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery, a significant number of people with advanced cancer also suffer from nausea unrelated to such therapies. Nausea and vomiting may also cause psychological distress, and have a negative impact on the quality of life of cancer patients; similarly to pain, nausea is often under-treated. The exact mechanism of action of corticosteroids on nausea is unclear, however, they are used to manage a number of cancer-specific complications, including spinal cord compression, raised intracranial pressure, and lymphangitis carcinomatosis. They are also commonly used in palliative care for a wide variety of non-specific indications, such as pain, nausea, anorexia, fatigue, and low mood. However, there is little objective evidence of their efficacy in symptom control, and corticosteroids have a wide range of adverse effects that are dose and time dependent. In view of their widespread use, it is important to seek evidence of their effects on nausea and vomiting not related to cancer treatment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of corticosteroids on nausea and vomiting not related to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery in adult cancer patients. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, CINAHL EBSCO, Science Citation Index Web of Science, Latin America and Caribbean Health Sciences (LILACS), Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science Web of Science, and clinical trial registries, from inception to 23rd August 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Any double-blind randomised or prospective controlled trial that included adults aged 18 years and over with advanced cancer with nausea and vomiting not related to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery were eligible for the review, when using corticosteroids as antiemetic treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used arithmetic means and standard deviations for each outcome to report the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies met the inclusion criteria, enrolling 451 participants. The trial size varied from 51 to 280 participants. Two studies compared dexamethasone to placebo, and the third study compared a number of additional interventions in various combinations, including metoclopramide, chlorpromazine, tropisetron, and dexamethasone. The duration of the studies ranged from seven to 14 days. We included two studies (127 participants) with data at eight days in the meta-analysis for nausea intensity; no data were available that incorporated the same outcome measures for the third study. Corticosteroid therapy with dexamethasone resulted in less nausea (measured on a scale of 0 to 10, with a lower score indicating less nausea) compared to placebo at eight days (MD 0.48 lower nausea, 95% CI 1.53 lower to 0.57 higher; very low-quality evidence), although this result was not statistically significant (P = 0.37). Frequency of adverse events was not significantly different between groups, and the interventions were well tolerated. Factors limiting statistical analysis included the lack of standardised measurements of nausea, and the use of different agents, dosages, and comparisons. Subgroup analysis according to type of cancer was not possible due to insufficient data. The quality of this evidence was downgraded by three levels, from high to very low due to imprecision, likely selection bias, attrition bias, and the small number of participants in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are few studies assessing the effects of corticosteroids on nausea and vomiting not related to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery in adult cancer patients. This review found very low-quality evidence which neither supported nor refuted corticosteroid use in this setting. Further high quality studies are needed to determine if corticosteroids are efficacious in this setting

Advance directives and end-of-life decisions in Switzerland: role of patients, relatives and health professionals.

Little is known in Europe about end-of-life (EOL) decisions and advance directives (AD), particularly in patients with severe advanced disease. Switzerland is a multicultural and multilingual federal country and has the particularity of being divided into four linguistic and cultural regions OBJECTIVE: To understand better in different regions of Switzerland which specific patient's characteristics could have an impact on their decision to complete AD or not. Prospective study conducted in four palliative care units. Patients with an advanced oncological disease, fluent in French, German or Italian and with a Mini-Mental State Examination &gt;20 were included. Demographic data, symptom burden (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, ESAS; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS) and spiritual well-being (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual well-being, FACIT-sp) have been assessed. A structured questionnaire has been completed by patients, their relatives and health professionals. 143 patients were included (mean age 68.3 years; 62 male). 41 completed ADs. No particular features were associated with the completion of ADs. Most patients were satisfied with the medical information received. A third of them were not worrying about their future, especially those living in the German-speaking part. Should they become unable to communicate, 87 expected their relative to transmit their own wishes, but only 38 had spoken recently with them about what they wanted. 23 of the 69 included relatives would like to play a more active role in decision-making. These results illustrate the fact that terminally ill patients wish to be active in decision-making, but only seldom transmit their wishes to their relative or complete a written document. The discussion about ACP should be defined according to the particularity of each region and the role of healthcare professionals' attitudes towards ADs, but we should also be creative and find other ways to promote shared decision-making