Annals of palliative medicine最新文献

Because of improved survival of cancer patients, more patients irradiated for brain metastases develop intracerebral recurrences requiring subsequent courses of radiotherapy. Five studies focused on reirradiation with whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) after initial WBRT for brain metastases. Following the second WBRT course, improvement of clinical symptoms was found in 31-68% of patients. Rates of neurotoxicity, such as encephalopathy or cognitive decline, were reported in two studies (1.4% and 32%). In another study, severe or unexpected adverse events were not observed. Survival following the second WBRT course was generally poor, with median survival times of 2.9-4.1 months. The survival prognosis of patients receiving two courses of WBRT can be estimated by a scoring tool considering five prognostic factors. Three studies investigated reirradiation with single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SF-SRS) following primary WBRT. One-year local control rates were 74-91%, and median survival times ranged between 7.8 and 14 months. Rates of radiation necrosis (RN) after reirradiation were 0-6%. Seven studies were considered that investigated re-treatment with SF-SRS or fractionated stereotactic radiation therapy (FSRT) following initial SF-SRS or FSRT. One-year local control rates were 60-88%, and the median survival times ranged between 8.3 and 25 months. During follow-up after reirradiation, rates of overall (asymptomatic or symptomatic) RN ranged between 12.5% and 30.4%. Symptomatic RN occurred in 4.3% to 23.9% of cases (patients or lesions). The risk of RN associated with symptoms and/or requiring surgery or corticosteroids appears lower after reirradiation with FSRT when compared to SF-SRS. Other potential risk factors of RN include the volume of overlap of normal tissue receiving 12 Gy at the first course and 18 Gy at the second course of SF-SRS, maximum doses ≥40 Gy of the first or the second SF-SRS courses, V12 Gy >9 cm3 of the second course, initial treatment with SF-SRS, volume of normal brain receiving 5 Gy during reirradiation with FSRT, and systemic treatment. Cumulative EQD2 ≤100-120 Gy2 to brain, <100 Gy2 to brainstem, and <75 Gy2 to chiasm and optic nerves may be considered safe. Since most studies were retrospective in nature, prospective trials are required to better define safety and efficacy of reirradiation for recurrent or progressive brain metastases.

With improving rates of survival among patients with metastatic malignancies, the request for palliative re-irradiation and re-re-irradiation continues to grow despite an absence of standardized guidelines. With only limited data regarding extra-cranial third-course palliative radiation, many radiation oncologists may feel uncomfortable proceeding with third-course irradiation of the same site. The review explores the available modern data regarding re-re-irradiation. A literature review identified four modern peer-reviewed studies investigating palliative, extra-cranial third-course irradiation with external beam radiation. These studies were retrospective, small, and heterogenous. While they reported comparable rates of pain palliation to first course irradiation and low rates of acute toxicity, interpretation is complicated by heterogeneous treatment parameters and insufficient reporting of cumulative dose equivalents and time intervals. With limited data available, it is critical to prioritize patient safety and quality of life in palliative radiotherapy. Patient selection should be meticulous, considering factors such as initial treatment response and predicted life expectancy. Conformal radiation techniques, strict immobilization, and daily image guidance should be employed to minimize toxicity to organs at risk (OARs). Long-term follow-up is essential for identifying and managing late toxicities effectively. Despite the scarcity of data, retrospective series suggest that extra-cranial third course irradiation can provide effective pain palliation comparable to first-course irradiation with tolerable rates of toxicity. However, careful consideration of patient prognosis and adherence to established principles of palliative radiotherapy are essential in decision-making. Further research and long-term follow-up are needed to refine treatment strategies and ensure safe and efficacious care delivery in this complex clinical scenario.

Background: Palliative care (PC) is oriented to improving the quality of life of patients and their families who are facing problems associated with life-threatening illness. It is a continuously changing and evolving field. Although it is a universal right, there are many barriers to addressing the unmet need for PC, affecting both patient and family as well as health care professionals (HCP). Many studies have highlighted the unmet needs of patients and caregivers, but it is also necessary to understand the needs of HCP in order to better develop PC. It is therefore necessary to identify all those barriers and unmet needs in order to develop and guarantee universal quality PC.

Methods: Bibliography search in relevant databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Trip Database) of documents published between 2018 and 2022, both included, written in English or Spanish. Key words-MeSH terms: Palliative Care, Palliative Medicine, Health Personnel, Continuing Education, Health Care Providers; and free text: healthcare professionals, continuous learning, training needs, gap, unmet needs, nursing. Articles about children or teenagers were excluded, as those related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Results: A grand total of 1,150 documents were located and 20 were found through other sources. Additionally, 3 documents were found and kept despite not being included in the timeline previously discussed due to its relevance. Only 20 were finally included in this review. The identified unmet needs throughout the PC continuum have been categorized in three groups: diagnosis/recognition of the patient entering the PC continuum; end-of-life (EoL); and bereavement. Facilitators in PC have been identified in each category.

Conclusions: Given the challenging nature of PC and the lack of knowledge throughout the continuum, addressing the challenges identified may result in meaningful and long-lasting results for both HCP and the patient-family unit. Training would be the answer to most of the unmet needs detected.

Hematologic oncologic emergencies with an urgent indication for radiation are a relatively routine occurrence for the radiation oncologist. As patients are living longer and have multiple treatment options for their relapsed or refractory diseases, it is important that palliative treatments avoid precluding patients from or delaying next-line potentially curative treatments wherever possible. We highlight the following experiences from our clinical practice: newly diagnosed plasma cell disease causing cord compression; life threatening cutaneous lymphoma with tumors covering the majority of the body surface area; and relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) requiring bridging radiation to a mass impinging on the brachial plexus combined with chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy. In each case, urgent palliative radiation was utilized, but the approaches were nuanced, with careful consideration of subsequent potential therapies and how the current course of radiation should be tailored for the best interplay with the overall treatment course and trajectory of the disease. With the rapid development of new therapies, it can be difficult to stay up to date on the most recent practice guidelines. Drawing on hematologic-specific guidelines, such as those provided by the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group, and disease site experts can aid in ensuring patients are appropriately palliated and eligible for future therapies.

Background and objective: Malignant ascites (MA) is common in patients with advanced cancer, and about 60% of patients with MA experience distressing symptoms. In addition, MA has been identified as a poor prognostic factor, therefore, making the management of MA an important issue. We aimed to review literature describing MA provide a narrative synthesis of relevant studies.

Methods: A literature search of articles published between 1971 and May 2023 was performed in PubMed, and Cochrane library using the words "ascites/malignant ascites" and the theme of each section. Authors independently selected the articles used and summarized. Finally, this manuscript was obtained consensus through discussed among all authors.

Key content and findings: The pathophysiological mechanism of ascites formation involves increased vascular permeability and impaired fluid drainage through the lymphatic system, which explain the occurrence of peritoneal carcinomatosis, portal hypertension due to liver tumors, liver cirrhosis in the background of hepatocellular carcinoma, and Budd-Chiari syndrome caused by tumor occlusion of the hepatic vein. The efficacy and safety of various treatments and procedures have been investigated previously; however, no treatment guidelines have been established yet. Diuretics and paracentesis are often selected as the first lines of treatment. Intraperitoneal drug administration (catumaxomab, bevacizumab, aflibercept, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, triamcinolone), indwelling peritoneal catheters, peritoneovenous shunting, and cell-free and concentrated ascites reinfusion therapy are commonly used to manage refractory ascites. A new device for this purpose is alfapump, which transfers ascites fluid from the peritoneum into the urinary bladder. In addition, thoracic epidural analgesia may be effective for managing ascites-related symptoms.

Conclusions: Despite these options, no standard treatment for MA has been established yet because few trials have been conducted in this area. There are many issues to be investigated, and future research and treatment development are expected.

With a growing geriatric population in the United States, there is an increased need for healthcare resources and collaborative care for serious illnesses. Patients with chronic illnesses including chronic kidney disease (CKD) often experience severe symptoms and face complex decisions, many of which develop or occur in the outpatient setting. Though many of these symptoms overlap between different chronic illnesses, the CKD population remains largely untapped in terms of access to said resources; until recently, the focus in palliative care has been largely in the oncologic population. Older patients with CKD may benefit from additional tools and resources provided from collaborative care models specifically involving palliative care, especially as this population is high risk for experiencing lack of support. In this review, we use case vignettes to discuss the key concepts and roles of outpatient palliative care and how they can be integrated into the nephrology care of older patients with advanced kidney disease. These highlighted concepts include shared decision-making, selective deprescribing and symptom management, psychosocial support, and advance care planning. We also review different outpatient models for integrative palliative care, and the roles and resources of the palliative multidisciplinary team within these models and how these models can potentially be implemented in the care of CKD patients.

Palliative care (PC) is a health care specialty that is focused on the holistic care of individuals with serious illness. It requires interprofessional collaboration and expertise to meet the physical, psychosocial, social, cultural, and spiritual needs of patients experiencing serious illness and their families. The interprofessional team (IPT) is most often composed of Advanced Practice Providers (APPs) [including Nurse Practitioners (NPs), Clinical Nurse Specialists (CNSs), and Physician Associates/Assistants (PAs)], Chaplains, Registered Nurses (RNs), Doctors of Medicine and Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine (MDs/DOs), Registered Pharmacists (RPhs), Social Workers (SWs) and other professions depending on site of care, the age of the patient, and the illness. The United States has specialty palliative care (SPC) IPT members who have completed advanced education and training and obtained specialty certification. However, there is currently no interprofessional consensus education and training resulting in interprofessional variability of definitions of education and requirements for academic preparation into the specialty. This article offers the results of an online review and survey of the current availability of SPC education in the United States which includes certificate programs, residencies, fellowships, and immersion programs available to each profession. The purpose of this review is to unify the available information regarding SPC programs, providing a succinct, yet thorough, overview of the SPC educational landscape. It emphasizes the length of time, cost, and delivery method for IPT members in choosing programs.

Background: The global need for palliative care (PC) is increasing, especially as the population ages. The diagnosis of a life-threatening illness triggers numerous decisions by healthcare professionals (HCPs). How these professionals understand and deal with PC influences the quantity and quality of care provided to patients. This systematic review aimed to compare perceptions of PC among HCPs around the world.

Methods: The databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and EBSCO) were searched systematically. Articles reporting on the perception of HCPs, published between January 2012 and December 2022, were included. Texts that reported the perceptions of family members and patients were excluded to avoid the risk of bias. Those included were organized by country/region and continent for later analysis.

Results: Of the 2,063 articles initially retrieved 32 were included and provided relevant information from four continents (America, Asia, Europe, and Oceania). Most of this was done through interviews and questionnaires. All HCPs consulted in the studies recognized the importance of PC. The perception of these professionals was influenced by cultural factors (such as religion), difficulties perceived in each country/region (such as inadequate knowledge, conceptual confusion, etc.), diseases, and the age range of patients served. The acceptance and preparation of professionals to deal with this topic in their routine also influenced their perceptions of HCPs. The limitation of this research is the lack of eligible studies from Africa and the small number of participants in some studies.

Conclusions: It can be concluded that HCPs' perceptions of PC are similar, regardless of their country of origin.

Background: Compassionate communities aim to empower people to deal with death, dying, and bereavement. They also intend to facilitate access to care and support at the end of life. However, there is a need for systematic knowledge on how to achieve the desired outcomes for citizens and for insights regarding the development, implementation, and evaluation. The aim of this study was to assess the views of members of a German Compassionate City, the "Caring Community Cologne" (CCC), and to report on its practical implementation.

Methods: The CCC consists of a citywide Round Table, a Steering Group, a Coordination Office and four Working Groups in areas where activities are already in place. We conducted two qualitative focus groups with nine members of three Working Groups. The transcripts were analysed with qualitative content analysis, using MAXQDA version 2022, and results were transferred into the logic model "Throughput Model".

Results: At the time of evaluation, participants felt that the structures of the CCC were adequate, but criticised the cooperation and transparency between them. A key aspect of this was the requirement for a coordinating body. They stressed the support of federal institutions as a key factor, while at the same time describing insufficient citizen involvement. The transfer of the results into the Throughput Model highlighted four areas that the CCC should address: (I) neighbourhood networks need to be established to strengthen civic support; (II) people need to be made aware of the issues by making them accessible in their everyday lives; (III) the many existing support initiatives need to be better linked and made more accessible; (IV) adequate healthcare service structures have to be guaranteed.

Conclusions: The top-down approach described, supported by the city's engagement and involving existing initiatives can facilitate the development of a bottom-up civic engagement model in a large city. However, active citizen involvement appeared to be a challenge. The Throughput Model was a suitable basis for mapping work processes and developing evaluation plans.