: Delirium has been the most frequent neuropsychiatric complication in patients with advanced cancer. This exploratory study aimed to determine the proportion of patients who were able to recall their experience of delirium and the level of distress experienced by patients, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals.: Patients with advanced cancer who had completely recovered from an acute delirium episode, had Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale score <13, and had a family caregiver present during the delirium were studied. Patients were given the Delirium Experience Questionnaire. Patients' and family caregivers' demographics, and the frequency and distress associated with different delirium symptoms were also collected. Bedside nurses and palliative care specialists reported the frequency of recalled delirium symptoms and their distress score.: A total of 99 patient/family caregiver dyads participated in the study. The main identified causes for delirium were opioids, infection, brain metastases, hypercalcemia, and dehydration. There were 73 patients (74%) who remembered the episode of being delirious, with 59 of 73 patients (81%) reporting the experience as distressing (median distress level of 3). The median overall delirium distress score was higher in family caregivers (median, 3; 25%-75% quartile, 2-4) than in patients (median, 2; 25%-75% quartile, 0-3) (P = .0004). Bedside nurses and palliative care specialists expressed low median overall delirium distress scores (median, 0; 25%-75% quartile 0-1).: The majority of patients with advanced cancer recalled their experience of delirium, causing moderate to severe distress in both patients and family caregivers. Appropriate interventions to reduce this distress are needed. Cancer 2009. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.
Pain remains an undertreated complication of cancer, with poor pain control decreasing patients’ quality of life. Traditionally, patients presenting to an emergency department with pain have only had two dispositions available to them: hospitalization or discharge. A third emerging healthcare environment, the emergency department observation unit (EDOU), affords patients access to a hospital’s resources without hospitalization. To define the role of an EDOU in the management of cancer pain, we conducted a retrospective study analyzing patients placed in an EDOU with uncontrolled cancer pain for one year. Patient characteristics were summarized using descriptive statistics and predictors of disposition from the EDOU and were identified with univariate and multivariate analyses. Most patients were discharged home, and discharged patients had low 72-hour revisit and 30-day mortality rates. Significant predictors of hospitalization were initial EDOU pain score (odds ratio (OR) = 1.12; 95% CI 1.06–1.19; p < 0.001) and supportive care (OR = 2.04; 95% CI 1.37–3.04; p < 0.001) or pain service (OR = 2.67; 95% CI 1.63–4.40; p < 0.001) consultations. We concluded that an EDOU appears to be the appropriate venue to care for a subsegment of patients presenting to an emergency department with cancer pain, with patients receiving safe care as well as appropriate consultation and admission when indicated.
8577 Background: There is wide variation in the frequency of reported use of palliative sedation (PS) to control intractable and refractory symptoms. Institutions have established policies for midazolam infusion in cases of PS. The indications and outcomes of this procedure have not been well characterized Methods: Our midazolam policy for PS requires 1:1 nursing for the first 24 hours and documentation of discussions regarding sedation. We reviewed our PCU database for all admissions for the first 11 months of 2005. We used pharmacy records for all patients who received medications used for sedation (chlorpromazine, lorazepam, midazolam). We reviewed all charts of pts who received any of these drugs to establish if the indication had been PS. Results: 148/484 admissions died in the PCU [31%]. 65/484 admissions (13%), and 47/ 148 patients who died (32%) received PS. Median age of patients (pts) was 58, 42 pts were male [65%], and the most frequent primaries observed were lung 24 [37%], hematologic 12 [18%], head and neck 7 [11%], and gastrointestinal 7 [11%]. Results are indicated in the table. * 2 patients had more than one indication for sedation The main causes for PS in our patients were delirium 57 [88%], dyspnea 6 [9%], and bleeding 4 [6%]. 18/65 patients who received PS [35%] were discharged alive, versus 318/419 [76%] who did not receive PS [p< 0.001]. Midazolam was used in 11/65 episodes [17%]. 4/6 pts with PS for dyspnea received midazolam [66%], versus 8/57 with PS for delirium or bleeding [14%], p=0.01]. 18/54 pts who received PS using other drug were discharged alive [33%], versus 0/11 pts who received midazolam [p=0.02]. Conclusions: Palliative sedation was required in 32% of pts who died in the hospital. Reporting midazolam utilization rates for monitoring overall PS outcomes, results in significant under reporting. Midazolam was used more frequently in cases of progressive dyspnea and poor prognosis. Less restrictive policies in the use of midazolam may result in more use for PS. Data accrual continues. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Patients with cancer typically experience multiple symptoms related to cancer and cancer treatment. These symptoms can include physical (e.g., pain, shortness of breath), cognitive (e.g., delirium, memory problems, impaired concentration), and affective (e.g., depression, anxiety) experiences associated with the disease and its treatments (1). Symptoms are the side effects and ''toxicities'' of treatment, as well as the direct product of the disease process itself. Symptoms are what patients report to clinicians as the subjective negative feelings of physical and mental changes produced by both disease and treatment. Symptom severity is related to the extent of disease and the aggressiveness of therapy. Common symptoms of cancer and cancer treatment significantly impair the daily function and quality of life of patients. Symptoms that are unrecognized by treatment teams may also become so severe that emergency room visits or hospitalization are required for management, adding substantially to the cost of treatment and to the disruption of the patients' routines and those of their families. Untreated symptoms may also negatively influence treatment effectiveness by interrupting treatment (2). Multiple and severe symptoms present a significant challenge to the resources of those who care for and managecancer patients. For example, intensive cancer therapies produce severe and sometimes life-threatening side effects, resulting in patients' inability to care for themselves and in total dependence on caregivers (3). Undertreatment of symptoms has become a major health problem in its own right.
Few cancer centers have developed acute palliative care units (APCUs). The purpose of this study is to highlight clinical interventions and financial outcomes during a typical 1-month period on an APCU.We evaluated consecutive patients admitted to our APCU from February 1 to 28, 2009, regarding demographic information, sources of and reasons for admissions, resuscitation status, clinical interventions, disposition, and reimbursement data.Forty-two patients were admitted during a 1-month period. Of these, 30 (71%) were referred from the inpatient palliative care consultation team. In all, 10 (24%) patients had a full code status on admission, and 8 had their status changed to do not resuscitate (DNR) prior to discharge. A total of 11 (26%) patients were discharged home with hospice care, 12 (29%) died on the APCU, and 10 (24%) were discharged home with outpatient follow-up visits. All patients received intravenous medications and the majority received intravenous antibiotics. All patients met acute care criteria for hospitalization, and financial reimbursement was satisfactory and comparable to that of other oncology patients.The APCU model is designed for the care of very complex advanced cancer patients. Palliative interventions are given simultaneously with other medical interventions. The APCU is labor intensive and well reimbursed.
A patient previously irradiated for epiglottic cancer developed an upper esophageal stricture that on biopsy proved to be a moderately differentiated squamous cell carcinoma. Patients receiving prior radiotherapy for a head and neck cancer are at increased risk of developing a second esophageal cancer and must be followed closely.
6125 Background: Cancer is a common presenting condition for emergency departments (EDs); however, there is limited information on outcomes of ED cancer patients subsequently admitted to the hospital. The purpose of this study is to describe outcomes of patients with hematologic malignancies versus those with solid tumors admitted through the ED of a comprehensive cancer center. Methods: We queried the ED database of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center for calendar year 2010 and linked it to our institutional data warehouse, including tumor registry data. We classified all leukemia and related disorders, lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and bone marrow transplant patients as hematologic malignancies, and remaining cancers as solid tumors. Descriptive statistics, including chi-square, and t-tests were used in two-sided comparisons. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 15. Results: 20,732 total ED visits were made by 9,320 unique cancer patients. Of these, 5,364 (58%) were admitted to the hospital at least once (range 1-13 admits). ED admissions constituted 39% of total unique patients admitted (N=13,753). The main admission indications for solid tumor patients were infectious complications (particularly pneumonia), intractable pain, or dehydration. For hematologic malignancies, the main indication was neutropenic fever. 211/1656 (13%) of liquid tumor patients were admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) compared to 484/3708 (13%) of solid tumor patients (P=NS). Of all patients admitted through the ED, 587/5364 (10.9%) died during hospitalization. The hematologic hospital mortality rate was 225/1653 (13.6%) versus 362/3708 (9.8%) for solid tumors (P<0.001). Only 242/8389 (3%) of patients admitted directly from outpatient clinics died during the hospitalization (p<0.001). Conclusions: Patients admitted through the ED, particularly those with hematologic malignancies, have a high hospital mortality rate. ED-based palliative care interventions may be justified to improve quality of life and prevent unnecessary costly interventions and ICU admission. Further research should define predictors of poor outcomes in cancer patients admitted through the ED.
8034 Background: Dying in a hospital, particularly on an intensive care unit (ICU), can be traumatic for patients and families. Palliative care services (PCS) and a palliative care unit (PCU) improve severe physical and psychosocial symptoms, but they are not available in the majority of cancer centers and tertiary hospitals. The purpose of this paper is to review the impact of a PCS/PCU on overall hospital mortality at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. Methods: We reviewed inpatient hospital deaths (including number of deaths, hospital location of death, and medical service), hospital discharges, and medical service information from the years 1999–2003. We determined the number of patients who accessed PCS before death (via consults or PCU admission). The Cochran-Armitage Trend Test was used to test for trends over time. Results: See table below. Conclusions: Establishment of PCS and PCU resulted in no significant increase in hospital mortality or length of stay. Coordinated efforts between PCS, ICU, and an ethics consult service resulted in a decrease in ICU deaths. By 2003, PCS had increased significantly. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
