Search

Background In oncology, Health Care Professionals often experience conducting Advance Care Planning (ACP) conversations as difficult and are hesitant to start them. A structured approach could help to overcome this. In the ACTION trial, a Phase III multi-center cluster-randomized clinical trial in six European countries (Belgium, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, United Kingdom), patients with advanced lung or colorectal cancer are invited to have one or two structured ACP conversations with a trained facilitator. It is unclear how trained facilitators experience conducting structured ACP conversations. This study aims to understand how facilitators experience delivering the ACTION Respecting Choices (RC) ACP conversation. Methods A qualitative study involving focus groups with RC facilitators. Focus group interviews were recorded, transcribed, anonymized, translated into English, and thematically analysed, supported by NVivo 11. The international research team was involved in data analysis from initial coding and discussion towards final themes. Results Seven focus groups were conducted, involving 28 of in total 39 trained facilitators, with different professional backgrounds from all participating countries. Alongside some cultural differences, six themes were identified. These reflect that most facilitators welcomed the opportunity to participate in the ACTION trial, seeing it as a means of learning new skills in an important area. The RC script was seen as supportive to ask questions, including those perceived as difficult to ask, but was also experienced as a barrier to a spontaneous conversation. Facilitators noticed that most patients were positive about their ACTION RC ACP conversation, which had prompted them to become aware of their wishes and to share these with others. The facilitators observed that it took patients substantial effort to have these conversations. In response, facilitators took responsibility for enabling patients to experience a conversation from which they could benefit. Facilitators emphasized the need for training, support and advanced communication skills to be able to work with the script. Conclusions Facilitators experienced benefits and challenges in conducting scripted ACP conversations. They mentioned the importance of being skilled and experienced in carrying out ACP conversations in order to be able to explore the patients’ preferences while staying attuned to patients’ needs. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry 63110516 (ISRCTN63110516) per 10/3/2014.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Defining margins around the Gross Tumour Volume (GTV) to create a Clinical Target Volume (CTV) for head and neck cancer radiotherapy has traditionally been based on presumed knowledge of anatomical routes of spread. However, using a concentric geometric expansion around the GTV may be more reproducible. The purpose of this study was to analyse the inter-observer consistency of geometric CTV delineation with adaptation for anatomical boundaries versus anatomically defined CTVs.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Radiation oncologists at four Danish cancer centres delineated high, intermediate and elective dose CTVs (CTV1, CTV2 and CTV3, respectively) in a patient-case template (stage IV squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx), first using mainly anatomical margins (original standard) and then using concentric geometric expansion (new standard). Each centre made a dummy-run radiotherapy plan based on the delineated CTVs. The difference between the CTV contours and the radiotherapy plans was evaluated across the centres.RESULTS: Anatomy-based contours were significantly more heterogenous and showed larger volume differences between centres than geometric margins. Dice similarity coefficient increased by 0.29 and mean surface distance decreased by 4mm for CTV1. Use of consistent CTV volumes resulted in more consistent irradiated volumes between centres.CONCLUSION: Introduction of geometric margins resulted in more uniform CTV1 and CTV2 delineation. Geometric CTV expansion was easier, left less room for misinterpretation, and resulted in more uniform treatment plans with similar irradiated high and intermediate dose volumes across all centres.

Udgivelsesdato: Sep-15 BACKGROUND: Patients' self-assessment of symptoms is central in drug treatment trials of functional dyspepsia. The validity of such ratings is important. AIM: To validate a diary for monitoring severity and duration of dyspepsia. METHOD: We compared the diary-cards with two clinicians' ratings of the patient's open-ended responses to the same questions administered by interview. Agreements were evaluated by estimation of the overall agreement and weighted kappa values (Kw). RESULTS: Forty-six patients were evaluated. The Kw between the two clinicians rating severity and duration of symptoms were 0.59 and 0.86, respectively. Overall agreement between patients' diary rating and clinicians' consensus rating of severity were 52%, and a moderate agreement with Kw of 0.49 was found. For duration of symptoms the overall agreement and Kw were 67% and 0.59, respectively. Qualitative data revealed useful insight in the possible causes of suboptimal agreement between patients and clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: We found a moderate to good agreement between patient and observer ratings, indicating that patients to a reasonable extent interpret severity and duration of dyspeptic symptoms in the same way as do investigators. A ceiling effect of the duration scale indicates suboptimal response categories, which should be adjusted before further use.

Palliative care (PC) is an approach, which improves the quality of life (QoL) of patients and their families facing problems associated with life-threatening illness. Hospital-based specialised PC alongside cancer treatment shows better symptom management, QoL, satisfaction with care, and less psychological distress. Strong recommendations have been given to integrate PC and cancer care. Systematic screening of symptoms and needs, use of standardised care pathways, better competencies in PC at all levels, more research and palliative medicine as a new speciality in Denmark are future perspectives.

This prospective, cross-sectional study aimed to assess cancer pain and its management in an inpatient setting at a comprehensive cancer centre in Denmark.One hundred and eighty-eight inpatients with cancer were invited to participate (May/June 2011). Demographics, diagnoses, World Health Organization performance status, health-related quality of life, pain and data regarding analgesic treatment were registered.One hundred and thirty-four (71.3%) patients agreed to participate in the study. Most frequent diagnoses were leukaemia (27.6%) and lung cancer (14.2%). A high prevalence of pain was observed, 65.7%. Thirty-two per cent reported moderate to severe pain when it was at its worst, 96% reported no or mild pain when it was at its least. Nearly 22% reported moderate to severe pain when the pain was categorised as average. Breakthrough pain episodes were reported by 30.5%. Adjuvant medication was sparsely used and not always correctly indicated. Out of 88 patients with pain, 62.5% were left untreated according to the Electronic Medication System. Higher health-related quality of life was associated with lower pain intensity. The use of opioids with or without adjuvants was associated with higher pain intensity and higher number of breakthrough pain episodes.Approximately two thirds of inpatients reported pain and one third had breakthrough pain. A substantial number of patients with pain were left untreated. Opioid-treated patients reported highest pain intensity and number of breakthrough episodes; however, analgesic medication seemed to be underused. Measures to improve pain assessment and management are highly required.