Search

Background: Accurate estimation of the specialized pediatric palliative care (PPC) burden and the definition of the extent and quality of PPC service in Italy represent urgent needs to enable the proper allocation of PPC resources and the definition of prevention and educational plans. The PalliPed project aimed to provide the first comprehensive assessment of the characteristics of Italian patients requiring PPC, the quality and extent of regional PPC networks/facilities, and the number of dedicated resources. In this paper, we present the results of the second part of the project, regarding the implementation and quality of PPC services in Italy. Methods: The PalliPed study had an observational cross-sectional design. All Italian specialized PPC centers/facilities were invited to participate in the project and complete a survey on the characteristics of PPC centers/facilities in different care settings, reporting data as of 24 October 2022. Data were collected online. Results: 19 PPC specialized centers/facilities from 12 Italian regions and two autonomous provinces responded to the survey. Among them, 11 are regional referral centers. Seven Italian regions out of 20 reported no PPC centers/facilities, mainly in central-southern Italy. Less than half (45%) of the regional referral centers cover the entire regional territory, and three offer 24/7 service. Ten centers have a dedicated team. Half of the eight non-referral centers offer 24/7 service and have a dedicated team. A total of 1,092 patients were reported by 18 centers as of 24 October 2022. Over the years, an increasing number of patients has been reported, rising from 1,202 (2019) to 1,544 (2021). The dedicated staff is inadequate, and most healthcare providers are not recognized at an institutional level. A shortage of 'young' staff and a lack of specific training was reported, particularly among nurses (77% had no training in PPC). Conclusions: The results obtained show how training, information, and research interventions are still necessary for the reorganization of the available resources and definition of proper strategies to respond dynamically to the new emerging needs of these populations. At the same time, our study represents a first step in defining a national registry of PPC models, useful for monitoring evolutions, and critical issues and planning any new or corrective strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Italy, there is a network of centres headed by the Italian Association of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology (AIEOP) for the diagnosis and treatment of paediatric cancers on almost the entire national territory. Nevertheless, migration of patients in a hospital located in a region different from that of residence is a widespread habit, sometimes motivated by several reasons. The aim of this paper is to assess the impact of migration of children with cancer to AIEOP centres in order to verify their optimal distribution throughout the national territory. Methods: To this purpose, we used information on 41,205 registered cancer cases in the database of Mod.1.01 Registry from AIEOP centres, with age of less than 20 years old at diagnosis, diagnosed from 1988 to 2017. Patients' characteristics were analysed and compared using the X2 or Fisher's exact test or Mann–Whitney test, when appropriate. Survival distributions were estimated using the method of Kaplan and Meier, and the log-rank test was used to examine differences among subgroups. Results: Extra-regional migration involved overall 19.5% of cases, ranging from 23.3% (1988–1997) to 16.4% (2008–2017) (p < 0.001). In leukaemias and lymphomas we observed a mean migration of 8.8% overall, lower in the North (1.2%) and Centre (7.8%) compared to the South & Isles (32.3%). In the case of solid tumours, overall migration was 25.7%, with 4.2% in the North, 17.2% in the Centre and 59.6% in the South & Isles. For regions with overall levels of migration higher than the national average, most migration cases opted for AIEOP centres of close or even neighbouring regions. Overall survival at 10 years from diagnosis results 69.9% in migrants vs 78.3% in no migrants (p < 0.001). Conclusions: There is still a certain amount of domestic migration, the causes of which can be easily identified: migration motivated by a search for high specialization, migration due to lack of local facilities, or regions in which no AIEOP centres are present, which makes migration obligatory. Better coordination between AIEOP centres could help to reduce so-called avoidable migration, but technical and political choices will have to be considered, with the active participation of sector technicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]