Abstract A panel of internists and nephrologists developed this practical approach for the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative to guide assessment and care of chronic kidney disease (CKD) by ...primary care clinicians. Chronic kidney disease is defined as a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and/or markers of kidney damage for at least 3 months. In clinical practice the most common tests for CKD include GFR estimated from the serum creatinine concentration (eGFR) and albuminuria from the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio. Assessment of eGFR and albuminuria should be performed for persons with diabetes and/or hypertension but is not recommended for the general population. Management of CKD includes reducing the patient's risk of CKD progression and risk of associated complications, such as acute kidney injury and cardiovascular disease, anemia, and metabolic acidosis, as well as mineral and bone disorder. Prevention of CKD progression requires blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers for patients with albuminuria and hypertension, hemoglobin A1c ≤7% for patients with diabetes, and correction of CKD-associated metabolic acidosis. To reduce patient safety hazards from medications, the level of eGFR should be considered when prescribing, and nephrotoxins should be avoided, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The main reasons to refer to nephrology specialists are eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 , severe albuminuria, and acute kidney injury. The ultimate goal of CKD management is to prevent disease progression, minimize complications, and promote quality of life.
Given the high prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD), primary care physicians (PCPs) frequently manage early stage CKD. Nonetheless, there are challenges in providing optimal CKD care in the ...primary care setting. This study sought to understand PCPs' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to the optimal management of CKD.
Mixed methods study.
Community-based PCPs in four US cities: Baltimore, MD; St. Louis, MO; Raleigh, NC and San Francisco, CA.
We used a self-administered questionnaire and conducted 4 focus groups of PCPs (n = 8 PCPs/focus group) in each city to identify key barriers and facilitators to management of patients with CKD in primary care.
We conducted descriptive analyses of the survey data. Major themes were identified from audio-recorded interviews that were transcribed and coded by the research team.
Of 32 participating PCPs, 31 (97%) had been in practice for >10 years, and 29 (91%) practiced in a non-academic setting. PCPs identified multiple barriers to managing CKD in primary care including at the level of the patient (e.g., low awareness of CKD, poor adherence to treatment recommendations), the provider (e.g., staying current with CKD guidelines), and the health care system (e.g., inflexible electronic medical record, limited time and resources). PCPs desired electronic prompts and lab decision support, concise guidelines, and healthcare financing reform to improve CKD care.
PCPs face substantial but modifiable barriers in providing care to patients with CKD. Interventions that address these barriers and promote facilitative tools may improve PCPs' effectiveness and capacity to care for patients with CKD.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Background.
Oral antineoplastic therapies not only improve survival but also reduce the burden of care for patients. Yet patients and clinicians face new challenges in managing adherence to these ...oral therapies. We conducted a systematic literature review to assess rates and correlates of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies and interventions aimed at improving adherence.
Methods.
Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature search of the Ovid MEDLINE database from January 1, 2003 to June 30, 2015, using relevant terminology for oral antineoplastic agents. We included observational, database, and intervention studies. At least two researchers evaluated each paper to ensure accuracy of results and determine risk of bias.
Results.
We identified 927 records from the search and screened 214 s. After conducting a full‐text review of 167 papers, we included in the final sample 51 papers on rates/correlates of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapy and 12 papers on intervention studies to improve adherence. Rates of adherence varied widely, from 46% to 100%, depending on patient sample, medication type, follow‐up period, assessment measure, and calculation of adherence. Of the intervention studies, only 1 of the randomized trials and 2 of the cohort studies showed benefit regarding adherence, with the majority suffering high risk of bias.
Conclusions.
Although no reliable estimate of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies can be gleaned from the literature, a substantial proportion of patients struggle to adhere to these medications as prescribed. The few intervention studies for adherence have notable methodological concerns, thereby limiting the evidence to guide practice in promoting medication adherence among patients with cancer.
Implications for Practice:
Given the tremendous growth and development of oral antineoplastic therapies in the last decade, significant gaps have emerged in oncology practice with respect to standardized procedures for safe administration, monitoring, and management of these medications. Although rates of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies vary widely depending on population, cancer type, and method of measurement, a substantial proportion of patients struggle to take their oral antineoplastic medications as prescribed. On the basis of current evidence and national recommendations, oncology practices should develop standard procedures for educating patients, reviewing and documenting treatment plans, and routinely monitoring patient adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies.
Although no reliable estimate of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies can be gleaned from the literature, a substantial proportion of patients struggle to adhere to these medications as prescribed. The few intervention studies for adherence have notable methodological concerns, thereby limiting the evidence to guide practice in promoting medication adherence among patients with cancer.
The evidence base demonstrating the benefits of an early focus on palliative care for patients with serious cancers, including advanced lung cancer, is substantial. Early involvement of ...specialty-trained palliative care clinicians in the care of patients with advanced lung cancer improves patient-reported outcomes, such as quality of life, and health care delivery, including hospice utilization. Since the time that many of these palliative care trials were conducted, the paradigm of cancer care for many cancers, including lung cancer, has changed dramatically. The majority of patients with advanced lung cancer are now treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapies, both of which have had a significant impact on patient's experience and outcomes. With this changing landscape of lung cancer therapeutics, patients are facing new and different challenges, including dealing with novel side effect profiles and coping with greater uncertainty regarding their prognosis. Patients who are living longer with their advanced cancer also struggle with how to address survivorship issues, such as sexual health and exercise, and decision making about end-of-life care. Although palliative care clinicians remain well-suited to address these care needs, they may need to learn new skills to support patients treated with novel therapies. Additionally, as the experience of patients with advanced lung cancer is becoming more varied and individualized, palliative care research interventions and clinical programs should also be delivered in a patient-centered manner to best meet patient's needs and improve their outcomes. Tailored and technology-based palliative care interventions are promising strategies for delivering patient-centered palliative care.
Purpose Inpatient palliative care integrated with transplant care improves patients' quality of life (QOL) and symptom burden during hematopoietic stem-cell transplant (HCT). We assessed patients' ...mood, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, and QOL 6 months post-transplant. Methods We randomly assigned 160 patients with hematologic malignancies who underwent autologous or allogeneic HCT to inpatient palliative care integrated with transplant care (n = 81) or transplant care alone (n = 79). At baseline and 6 months post-transplant, we assessed mood, PTSD symptoms, and QOL with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Patient Health Questionnaire, PTSD checklist, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplant. To assess symptom burden during HCT, we used the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. We used analysis of covariance while controlling for baseline values to examine intervention effects and conducted causal mediation analyses to examine whether symptom burden or mood during HCT mediated the effect of the intervention on 6-month outcomes. Results We enrolled 160 (86%) of 186 potentially eligible patients between August 2014 and January 2016. At 6 months post-transplant, intervention participants reported lower depression symptoms on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Patient Health Questionnaire (adjusted mean difference, -1.21 95% CI, -2.26 to -0.16; P = .024 and -1.63 95% CI, -3.08 to -0.19; P = .027, respectively) and lower PTSD symptoms (adjusted mean difference, -4.02; 95% CI, -7.18 to -0.86; P = .013), but no difference in QOL or anxiety. Symptom burden and anxiety during HCT hospitalization partially mediated the effect of the intervention on depression and PTSD at 6 months post-transplant. Conclusion Inpatient palliative care integrated with transplant care leads to improvements in depression and PTSD symptoms at 6 months post-transplant. Reduction in symptom burden and anxiety during HCT partially accounts for the effect of the intervention on these outcomes.
Prior research shows that introducing palliative care soon after diagnosis for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is associated with improvements in quality of life, mood, ...and survival. We sought to investigate whether early palliative care also affects the frequency and timing of chemotherapy use and hospice care for these patients.
This secondary analysis is based on a randomized controlled trial of 151 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic NSCLC presenting to an outpatient clinic at a tertiary cancer center from June 2006 to July 2009. Participants received either early palliative care integrated with standard oncology care or standard oncology care alone. By 18-month follow-up, 133 participants (88.1%) had died. Outcome measures included: first, number and types of chemotherapy regimens, and second, frequency and timing of chemotherapy administration and hospice referral.
The overall number of chemotherapy regimens did not differ significantly by study group. However, compared with those in the standard care group, participants receiving early palliative care had half the odds of receiving chemotherapy within 60 days of death (odds ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.99; P = .05), a longer interval between the last dose of intravenous chemotherapy and death (median, 64.00 days range, 3 to 406 days v 40.50 days range, 6 to 287 days; P = .02), and higher enrollment in hospice care for longer than 1 week (60.0% 36 of 60 patients v 33.3% 21 of 63 patients; P = .004).
Although patients with metastatic NSCLC received similar numbers of chemotherapy regimens in the sample, early palliative care optimized the timing of final chemotherapy administration and transition to hospice services, key measures of quality end-of-life care.
Understanding of prognosis among terminally ill patients impacts medical decision making. The aims of this study were to explore perceptions of prognosis and goals of therapy in patients with ...metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to examine the effect of early palliative care on these views over time.
Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive either early palliative care integrated with standard oncology care or standard oncology care alone. Participants completed baseline and longitudinal assessments of their perceptions of prognosis and the goals of cancer therapy over a 6-month period.
We enrolled 151 participants on the study. Despite having terminal cancer, one third of patients (46 of 145 patients) reported that their cancer was curable at baseline, and a majority (86 of 124 patients) endorsed getting rid of all of the cancer as a goal of therapy. Baseline perceptions of prognosis (ie, curability) and goals of therapy did not differ significantly between study arms. A greater percentage of patients assigned to early palliative care retained or developed an accurate assessment of their prognosis over time (82.5% v 59.6%; P = .02) compared with those receiving standard care. Patients receiving early palliative care who reported an accurate perception of their prognosis were less likely to receive intravenous chemotherapy near the end of life (9.4% v 50%; P = .02).
Many patients with newly diagnosed metastatic NSCLC hold inaccurate perceptions of their prognoses. Early palliative care significantly improves patient understanding of prognosis over time, which may impact decision making about care near the end of life.
Purpose We evaluated the impact of early integrated palliative care (PC) in patients with newly diagnosed lung and GI cancer. Patients and Methods We randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed ...incurable lung or noncolorectal GI cancer to receive either early integrated PC and oncology care (n = 175) or usual care (n = 175) between May 2011 and July 2015. Patients who were assigned to the intervention met with a PC clinician at least once per month until death, whereas those who received usual care consulted a PC clinician upon request. The primary end point was change in quality of life (QOL) from baseline to week 12, per scoring by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scale. Secondary end points included change in QOL from baseline to week 24, change in depression per the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and differences in end-of-life communication. Results Intervention patients ( v usual care) reported greater improvement in QOL from baseline to week 24 (1.59 v -3.40; P = .010) but not week 12 (0.39 v -1.13; P = .339). Intervention patients also reported lower depression at week 24, controlling for baseline scores (adjusted mean difference, -1.17; 95% CI, -2.33 to -0.01; P = .048). Intervention effects varied by cancer type, such that intervention patients with lung cancer reported improvements in QOL and depression at 12 and 24 weeks, whereas usual care patients with lung cancer reported deterioration. Patients with GI cancers in both study groups reported improvements in QOL and mood by week 12. Intervention patients versus usual care patients were more likely to discuss their wishes with their oncologist if they were dying (30.2% v 14.5%; P = .004). Conclusion For patients with newly diagnosed incurable cancers, early integrated PC improved QOL and other salient outcomes, with differential effects by cancer type. Early integrated PC may be most effective if targeted to the specific needs of each patient population.
PDF
