0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The feasibility and effects of a pharmacological treatment algorithm for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea: A multicenter cohort study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          How clinicians treat patients with terminal dyspnea widely varies, which could hamper quality care. We visualized comprehensive pharmacological treatment delivered by palliative care physicians.

          Aim

          To examine adherence to a comprehensive pharmacological treatment algorithm for patients with terminal dyspnea, and to explore its outcomes during 48 h.

          Design

          A multicenter cohort study at five sites (February 2020 to June 2021).

          Setting/Participants

          We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients with advanced cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 3–4, and moderate/severe dyspnea. Participating palliative care physicians initiated algorithm‐based treatment. The primary outcome was the proportion of adherence to the treatment algorithm over 24 h (predefined goal, 70%). We evaluated the adherence, goal achievement, and dyspnea level with a numerical rating scale (NRS), as well as adverse events over 48 h.

          Results

          All 108 patients received algorithm‐based pharmacological treatment. Among 96 and 87 patients who were alive at 24 and 48 h, respectively, 96 (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 96%–100%) and 82 (94%; 95%CI = 87%–98%) continued to receive the algorithm treatment, respectively, and 66 (69%; 95%CI = 59%–77%) and 64 (74%; 95%CI = 63%–82%) achieved the treatment goals, respectively. Using a complete case analysis with paired t‐tests, mean dyspnea NRS scores significantly reduced from 7.3 (standard error, 0.2) at the baseline to 4.9 (0.3) at 24 h ( n = 72; p < 0.001), and 7.2 (0.3) at the baseline to 4.6 (0.4) at 48 h ( n = 55; p < 0.001). Most adverse events were mild to moderate.

          Conclusions

          The comprehensive pharmacological treatment algorithm was feasible, and the study data supports its preliminary efficacy and safety. The use of this algorithm may help clinicians improve care for patients with terminal dyspnea.

          Abstract

          We visualized a comprehensive pharmacological treatment algorithm that includes various treatment options for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea. This multicenter cohort study showed that the treatment algorithm was highly feasible, and correlated with a significant improvement in dyspnea with rare adverse events.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in adult intensive care unit patients.

          Sedative medications are widely used in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Structured assessment of sedation and agitation is useful to titrate sedative medications and to evaluate agitated behavior, yet existing sedation scales have limitations. We measured inter-rater reliability and validity of a new 10-level (+4 "combative" to -5 "unarousable") scale, the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), in two phases. In phase 1, we demonstrated excellent (r = 0.956, lower 90% confidence limit = 0.948; kappa = 0.73, 95% confidence interval = 0.71, 0.75) inter-rater reliability among five investigators (two physicians, two nurses, and one pharmacist) in adult ICU patient encounters (n = 192). Robust inter-rater reliability (r = 0.922-0.983) (kappa = 0.64-0.82) was demonstrated for patients from medical, surgical, cardiac surgery, coronary, and neuroscience ICUs, patients with and without mechanical ventilation, and patients with and without sedative medications. In validity testing, RASS correlated highly (r = 0.93) with a visual analog scale anchored by "combative" and "unresponsive," including all patient subgroups (r = 0.84-0.98). In the second phase, after implementation of RASS in our medical ICU, inter-rater reliability between a nurse educator and 27 RASS-trained bedside nurses in 101 patient encounters was high (r = 0.964, lower 90% confidence limit = 0.950; kappa = 0.80, 95% confidence interval = 0.69, 0.90) and very good for all subgroups (r = 0.773-0.970, kappa = 0.66-0.89). Correlations between RASS and the Ramsay sedation scale (r = -0.78) and the Sedation Agitation Scale (r = 0.78) confirmed validity. Our nurses described RASS as logical, easy to administer, and readily recalled. RASS has high reliability and validity in medical and surgical, ventilated and nonventilated, and sedated and nonsedated adult ICU patients.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The clinical global impressions scale: applying a research tool in clinical practice.

            This paper reviews the potential value in daily clinical practice of an easily applied research tool, the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Scale, for the nonresearcher clinician to quantify and track patient progress and treatment response over time. The instrument is described and sample patient scenarios are provided with scoring rationales and a practical charting system. The CGI severity and improvement scales offer a readily understood, practical measurement tool that can easily be administered by a clinician in a busy clinical practice setting.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The validity of the CGI severity and improvement scales as measures of clinical effectiveness suitable for routine clinical use.

              The Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) is established as a core metric in psychiatric research. This study aims to test the validity of CGI as a clinical outcome measure suitable for routine use in a private inpatient setting. The CGI was added to a standard battery of routine outcome measures in a private psychiatric hospital. Data were collected on consecutive admissions over a period of 24 months, which included clinical diagnosis, demographics, service utilization and four routine measures (CGI, HoNOS, MHQ-14 and DASS-21) at both admission and discharge. Descriptive and comparative data analyses were performed. Of 786 admissions in total, there were 624 and 614 CGI-S ratings completed at the point of admission and discharge, respectively, and 610 completed CGI-I ratings. The admission and discharge CGI-S scores were correlated (r = 0.40), and the indirect improvement measures obtained from their differences were highly correlated with the direct CGI-I scores (r = 0.71). The CGI results reflected similar trends seen in the other three outcome measures. The CGI is a valid clinical outcome measure suitable for routine use in an inpatient setting. It offers a number of advantages, including its established utility in psychiatric research, sensitivity to change, quick and simple administration, utility across diagnostic groupings, and reliability in the hands of skilled clinicians.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                masanori.mori@sis.seirei.or.jp
                Journal
                Cancer Med
                Cancer Med
                10.1002/(ISSN)2045-7634
                CAM4
                Cancer Medicine
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2045-7634
                19 October 2022
                March 2023
                : 12
                : 5 ( doiID: 10.1002/cam4.v12.5 )
                : 5397-5408
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital Hamamatsu Japan
                [ 2 ] Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine Kobe Japan
                [ 3 ] Tokyo Metropolitan Komagome Hospital Bunkyo‐ku Japan
                [ 4 ] National Hospital Organization Kinki‐Chuo Chest Medical Center Sakai Japan
                [ 5 ] Konan Medical Center Kobe Japan
                [ 6 ] Komaki City Hospital Komaki Japan
                [ 7 ] Tohoku University School of Medicine Sendai Japan
                [ 8 ] Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research Tokyo Japan
                [ 9 ] Seirei Hospice, Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital Hamamatsu Japan
                [ 10 ] National Cancer Center Hospital Tokyo Japan
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Masanori Mori, Palliative and Supportive Care Division, Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital, 3453 Mikatahara‐cho, Kita‐ku, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka 433‐8558, Japan.

                Email: masanori.mori@ 123456sis.seirei.or.jp

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5489-9395
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3060-0245
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1959-772X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5092-9377
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7110-3264
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2220-2247
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3441-5768
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3112-4818
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0863-1184
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9955-1667
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2745-3088
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7257-7429
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1516-2849
                Article
                CAM45362 CAM4-2022-07-2862.R2
                10.1002/cam4.5362
                10028104
                36259645
                57398a65-1e34-4f5a-9c44-e857063d9d68
                © 2022 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 29 September 2022
                : 06 July 2022
                : 05 October 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 4, Pages: 12, Words: 5810
                Funding
                Funded by: Japan Hospice Palliative Care Foundation
                Funded by: Health, Labour, and Welfare Sciences Research Grant
                Award ID: 19EA1011
                Award ID: 22EA1004
                Funded by: JSPS KAKENHI Grant
                Award ID: 20K20618
                Categories
                Research Article
                RESEARCH ARTICLES
                Clinical Cancer Research
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                March 2023
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.2.6 mode:remove_FC converted:21.03.2023

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                algorithm,cancer,dyspnea,feasibility,palliative care
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                algorithm, cancer, dyspnea, feasibility, palliative care

                Comments

                Comment on this article