Search

Background. Cancer palliative care is recommended by guidelines for patients with early stage of cancer. Unlike the Western countries, in mainland China, cancer patients receive specialist-led cancer palliative care. Nurse-led cancer palliative care (NUC) is not well established yet. Objectives. To compare the clinical outcome measures, quality of life and symptom distress in patients suffering from cancer who received NUC with the same results in patient who received consulting oncologist-led cancer palliative care (ONC). Materials and methods. The study was a chart review of a database of patients suffering from cancer. Data regarding clinical outcome measures, quality of life and symptom distress of patients suffering from cancer who were receiving chemotherapy and NUC (NUC cohort, n = 185) or ONC (ONC cohort, n = 170) were collected and analyzed. One oncologist or 1 nurse was involved in treating 1 patient during the patient's hospital visit. Each visit took 30 min. The Chinese version of the Symptom Distress Scale was used for the evaluation of the degree of symptom distress. The simplified Chinese version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment Quality of Life Questionnaire (the EORTC QLQ-C30) v. 3.0 was used for evaluation of the quality of life. Results. Female patients preferred NUC (p < 0.0001). The pain intensity (4.13 ±1.71 compared to 3.35 ±1.01, p < 0.0001), dyspnea (3.89 ±1.48 compared to 2.82 ±0.97, p < 0.0001), constipation (3.56 ±1.78 compared to 3.06 ±1.89, p = 0.0107), and degree of symptom distress (38.09 ±7.26 compared to 35.05 ±7.92, p = 0.0002) were reported higher among patients from the ONC cohort than among those from the NUC cohort. Patients from the NUC cohort reported a better quality of life than those from the ONC cohort (70.41 ±13.62 compared to 45.63 ±7.94, p < 0.0001). Conclusions. The NUC results in better clinical outcome measures and higher quality of life than ONC for patients receiving chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Oncologist is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: We aimed at studying information needs of patients and their families, and their attitude towards the counterparts' information needs. Factors influencing psychological status of patients were investigated.Methods: Self-designed questionnaires for information needs and attitude were delivered to participants. Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale were used to evaluate psychological status of patients.Results: 183 eligible pairs of patients and families were involved. Except for the patients' expected life span, most patients and families needed information for all other subscales of disease-related information. Most patients wished families know more information; however, caregivers tended to prevent this. The occurrence of patients' psychiatric disorders was related to their needs for expected life span (OR 3.06 95%CI 1.36-6.93), as well as the attitude of caregivers about whether to provide more information about treatment outcomes (OR 0.24 95% CI 0.10-0.63).Conclusions: Information discordance between cancer patients and their families tended to happen when it came to patients' prognostic information. The psychological status of cancer patients was found in association with their information needs and families' attitude towards it.Practice Implications: To guide oncology professionals and cancer patients' families for information provision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Integrative oncology has developed for about 20 years in some countries; however, integrative oncology is still a relative new term for most China's oncologists. Thus, it is essential to summarize the experience and expertise, share details of differing existing models and discuss future perspectives to help define and guide practice in integrative oncology in China. This study presents a summary of the basic characteristics, status, and challenges of integrative oncology in China, and also reports on China's integrative physicians' service delivery, clinical practice and research patterns of integrative oncology by an online national survey, including 405 oncologists. It is easy for cancer patients to access to integrative therapies in China. Public funding is sufficient for integrative oncology in China, and services are often provided through general hospitals and academic hospitals. Most (95.3%) of oncologists showed a positive attitude toward the development of integrative oncology. More than half (55.6%) of the oncologists worried about the influence on integrative oncology of COVID-19, especially for routine treatment, follow-up and holding seminars. We found that integrative oncology in China has swiftly developed in recent years. However, we suggest that standard diagnosis and treatment patterns and national professional guidelines should be set up as soon as possible.

This survey was conducted to determine the head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment strategies followed by oncologists in Chinese hospitals. It was a questionnaire-based survey, conducted from October 2017 to January 2018 in 100 random tertiary hospitals in 21 cities of China to elicit information from oncologists on the management practices for treating HNC in China. A validated, structured questionnaire was used for formal investigation with oncologists. The questions regarding HNC types, treatment strategies used for locally advanced head and neck cancer (LA HNC) and recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer (r/m HNC), diagnosis and prognostic factors were included. The results were presented as percentages. Among the 272 oncologists, 93.4% were from tertiary care hospitals, with 35.3% and 36.4% patients from radiotherapy (RT) and oncology department, respectively. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma was the most commonly treated type of HNC according to 65.1% oncologists. Patients aged >75 years have worse prognosis and 65% oncologists corroborated that age of the patients influences treatment decision. Most of the oncologists (77.6%) preferred chemotherapy (CT) + anti-epidermal growth factor receptor targeted therapy as the first-line therapy for r/m HNC. Approximately 95% of oncologists considered induction chemotherapy (ICT) to retain organ functions and tumor shrinkage and 43.4% preferred ICT followed by chemoradiotherapy or ICT combined with RT followed by targeted therapy for LA HNC. For the management of HNC, Chinese oncologists recommended ICT with RT and targeted therapy for LA HNC and CT regimen combined with targeted therapy for r/m HNC.

Purpose: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has been widely used by cancer patients but rarely discussed by oncologists. This study was designed to evaluate the communication gap between China's oncologists and cancer patients on CAM., Methods: Two parallel cross-sectional studies assessed 83 oncologists and 402 cancer patients on CAM communication between patients and oncologists, and attitudes toward CAM use and clinical decisions about CAM., Results: A majority (75.1%) of the cancer patients (302/402) were identified as CAM users within the most recent three months while 77.6% of the cancer patients (312/402) were identified as CAM users since diagnosis of cancer. Oncologists and patients responded differently ( P < .001) on CAM communications. Both oncologists and patients expected that CAM could improve the immune system. They both agreed that oncologists usually discouraged their patients from using CAM. Regarding the effectiveness of CAM, cancer patients were more likely to believe that CAM was effective while oncologists had more concerns about adverse effects of CAM use. CAM use by patients was predicted by disease duration (≥9 months) in the multivariable logistic regression model., Conclusion: China's oncologists and cancer patients may hold discrepant views on CAM. China's oncologists are encouraged to improve their knowledge on CAM and to initiate more discussions with their patients regarding effective and the safe use of CAM.