Search

AIM: This study aims to assess the quality of life and quality of care as experienced by patients with advanced cancer and their relatives while taking their interdependency into account.METHODS: A prospective multicentre observational study (eQuiPe study) was conducted. Quality of life scores (EORTC QLQ-C30) was compared to a matched normative population and logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the relation between high emotional functioning (EF, measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30) and experienced quality of care (IN-PATSAT32, CQ-index PC).RESULTS: In total, 1103 (65%) patients and 831 (71%) relatives completed the baseline questionnaire, including 699 unique patient-relative couples. Patients experienced lower EF than the normative population (78 versus 87, p < .001). Compared to patients, relatives reported clinically relevantly lower EF (69 versus 78, p < .001). Being more satisfied with care in general (p < .05) and clarity about the key health-care provider (p < .05) was positively associated with high EF in patients. For relatives, experienced continuity of care (p < .01) and information for the patient (p < .05) were positively associated with high EF. The EF of patients (p < .001) and relatives (p < .001) were positively associated with each other and continuity of care as perceived by relatives was positively associated with high EF in patients (p < .01).CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced cancer reported low levels of EF but their relatives reported even lower levels of EF. Experienced integrated organisation and satisfaction with care were positively related to EF. The interdependent relation between patients' and relatives' EF and their care experiences suggests that a family-centred approach can optimise palliative cancer care.TRIAL REGISTRATION: The eQuiPe study is registered as NTR6584 in the Netherlands Trial Register.

Purpose Patients with a rare cancer face difficulties during their disease trajectory, such as delayed diagnosis and lack of expert care. However, little is known about their perceived Quality of Care (QoC) and Quality of Life (QoL) in the advanced disease stage. We aimed to assess the QoC and QoL as experienced by patients with advanced rare cancers compared to patients with advanced common cancers. Methods In this cross-sectional study, baseline data of patients with advanced cancer from the multicentre, longitudinal, observational eQuipe study were analysed. Multivariable linear regression analyses were conducted to assess differences in experienced QoC (continuity of care, continuity of information, and satisfaction with care) and QoL (functioning, symptoms, overall QoL, and social wellbeing) between advanced rare and common cancer patients. Results Of the 1,087 included patients, 106 (9.8%) had a rare cancer type. In comparison to patients with advanced common cancers, patients with advanced rare cancers experienced significantly lower continuity of care (77.8 vs. 71.1 respectively, p=0.011) and social functioning (78.8 vs. 72.6 respectively, p=0.012). No differences were found regarding continuity of information, satisfaction with care, overall QoL, and social wellbeing. Conclusions Patients with advanced rare cancers experience less continuity of care and the impact of the disease on social and family life seems higher compared to patients with advanced common cancers. Implications for Cancer Survivors To enhance the QoC and QoL of patients with advanced rare cancers, supportive care should mainly focus on improving continuity of care and patients’ social functioning.

Aim: To explore (1) experiences of primary care physicians (PCPs) and oncological medical specialists about providing care to patients living longer with incurable cancer, and (2) their preferences concerning different care approaches (palliative support, psychological/survivorship care support). Background: At present, oncological medical specialists as well as PCPs are exploring how to improve and better tailor care to patients living longer with incurable cancer. Our previous study at the in-patient oncology unit showed that patients living longer with incurable cancer experience problems in how to deal with a prognosis that is insecure and fluctuating. To date, it could be argued that treating these patients can be done with a ‘palliative care’ or a ‘survivorship/psychosocial care’ approach. It is unknown what happens in actual medical practice. Methods: We performed multidisciplinary group meetings: 6 focus groups (3 homogenous groups with PCPs (n = 15) and 3 multidisciplinary groups (n = 17 PCPs and n = 6 medical specialists) across different parts of the Netherlands. Qualitative data were analysed with thematic analysis. Findings and conclusions: In the near future, PCPs will have an increasing number of patients living longer with incurable cancer. However, in a single PCP practice, the experience with incurable cancer patients remains low, partly because patients often prefer to stay in contact with their medical specialist. PCPs as well as medical specialists show concerns in how they can address this disease phase with the right care approach, including the appropriate label (e.g. palliative, chronic, etc.). They all preferred to be in contact early in the disease process, to be able to discuss and take care for the patients’ physical and psychological well-being. Medical specialists can have an important role by timely referring their patients to their PCPs. Moreover, the disease label ‘chronic’ can possibly assist patients to live their life in the best possible way.

Objective: The objectives of this study were to explore the experiences and perspectives of general and occupational health care professionals regarding work resumption and work retention of patients with advanced cancer, and to identify barriers and facilitators these professionals may encounter. Methods: A qualitative design was applied, and individual semistructured interviews were conducted. General and occupational health care professionals were eligible to participate if they were involved in the work participation guidance of patients with advanced cancer, and were recruited through the network of the research team. Interview data were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically via ATLAS.ti 9. Results: Interviewees (N = 17) had various occupational backgrounds, for example, occupational physician, reintegration consultant, and general practitioner. Four main themes emerged from the data: (1) Assumptions and hesitations, (2) Patient initiates stakeholder communication, (3) Role dispersion: who is in charge of what? and (4) Experience with legislation creates opportunities. Conclusion: Whereas most interviewees had positive experiences with, and/or optimistic expectations of, the work resumption and work retention of patients with advanced cancer, several barriers to the work participation guidance of these patients were identified. Suggestions for improvement include creating widespread awareness of the possibility of work participation of patients with advanced cancer and developing reintegration guidelines for advanced cancer.

Objectives Many aspects of palliative care, such as managing (complicated) symptoms, conducting goals-of-care conversations, and repeated exposure to loss, can be stressful to clinicians. Previous research on the emotional impact of providing palliative care was mainly done in specialist settings. However, the majority of palliative care is provided by clinicians who are not specialized in palliative care, and can be supported by palliative care specialists only when needed. Therefore, this study aimed to gain insight into the emotional impact of providing palliative care on clinicians, both palliative care generalists and specialists. Methods A qualitative interview study among 21 clinicians (11 doctors and 10 nurses) working in hospitals, home care, or nursing homes in the Netherlands was conducted. Between February and June 2019, 13 palliative care generalists and 8 specialists were interviewed. Interviews were thematically analyzed by two researchers. Results All clinicians considered the emotional impact of providing palliative care to be substantial and experienced both positive and negative aspects of providing palliative care. Several aspects of providing palliative care can support or undermine emotional stability. These so-called facilitators and barriers, such as practicing self-care and complexity of palliative care, were found at three different levels: individual, team, and organization. Significance of results Although clinicians experience providing palliative care as meaningful and valuable, the emotional impact is considerable. Negative and positive aspects often co-exist. Further insight into the dynamics and magnitude of the emotional impact of providing palliative care is needed in order to create a healthy working environment and develop adequate interventions.

Objective: The aim of this study is to explore the essential aspects of health care according to patients with advanced cancer and their informal caregivers by using a dyadic approach. Methods: Seven focus groups and 7 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted. Patients with advanced cancer and informal caregivers were recruited between January 2017 and June 2017 in 6 Dutch hospitals. All interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and open coded using a thematic analysis approach. For this analysis Atlas.ti was used. Results: There was congruence between the aspects mentioned by patients and their informal caregiver. Two essential aspects of quality of care arose: “relation” and “organization of care.” Regarding relation, patients and informal caregivers found it essential that health care professionals were personally engaged and provided support and compassion. Regarding organization of care, patients and informal caregivers expressed the importance of supportive care being offered multiple times during the disease trajectory, continuity of care, and well-organized logistics tailored to their needs. Conclusion: This study generates awareness among health care professionals that patients with advanced cancer and their relatives have similar perspectives on essential aspects of care and may increase anticipation to meet health care preferences to optimize care.

Being able to work improves the quality of life of patients with cancer. Much is known about the return to work process of cancer survivors. Yet, studies focusing on the experiences of patients with advanced cancer who want to return to work or stay employed are scarce. Therefore, we aimed to explore the perceptions of patients with advanced cancer regarding work resumption and work retention and the barriers and facilitators they may experience.Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Patients were included if they: (1) were diagnosed with advanced cancer, (2) worked in paid employment at time of diagnosis, and (3) were currently back in paid employment or had the intention to return to paid employment. Participants were recruited through clinicians and patient organizations. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed using ATLAS.ti.Fifteen patients (87% female, mean age 52 (SD 4; range 41-64)) were individually interviewed. Four main themes emerged from the data: (1) holding on to normalcy, (2) high understanding and divergent expectations, (3) social discomfort calls for patient-initiated alignment, and (4) laws and regulations require patient empowerment.Paid employment can contribute to the quality of life of patients with advanced cancer. The findings of this study might correct erroneous preconceptions about the work ability and work intention of patients with advanced cancer. Tools already developed for employers to support reintegration of patients with cancer should be further explored and translated to patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with a rare cancer often face delays in their diagnostic and treatment trajectory, which may affect their work. In this study, we explored experiences and needs of: 1) patients with a rare cancer regarding return to work (RTW) and work retention, and 2) (health care) professionals (HCPs) regarding work-related support of patients with a rare cancer, throughout their disease trajectory.METHODS: Semi-structured, in-depth interviews with working-age patients with a rare cancer (n = 16), and HCPs (n = 9) were conducted. During the interviews, a predefined topic list was used. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed by means of thematic analysis.RESULTS: In total, three themes emerged from the interviews: 1) Awareness in patients and HCPs as a first step towards work, 2) Being/becoming an expert is a tough job, and 3) Enhancing employability through early personalized guidance.CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a rare cancer are confronted with uncertainties regarding work, due to an overall lack of knowledge and experience with these types of cancer. Raising awareness among patients, HCPs and employers about rare cancer and its implications, and providing timely individualized, supportive occupational care are required to improve rare cancer patients' ability to work.Implications for rehabilitationRecognizing and paying attention to the work-related consequences of a rare cancer diagnosis and its treatment is essential to facilitate rare cancer patients' occupational rehabilitation process.Multidisciplinary collaboration and involvement of HCPs specialized in rare cancer are required to provide suitable work-related support.A personalized approach is necessary to adequately address rare cancer patients' RTW and work retention needs.

Background Specialist palliative care teams (SPCTs) in hospitals improve quality of life and satisfaction with care for patients with advanced disease. However, referrals to SPCTs are often limited. To identify areas for improvement of SPCTs’ service penetration, we explored the characteristics and level of integration of palliative care programmes and SPCTs in Dutch hospitals and we assessed the relation between these characteristics and specialist palliative care referral rates. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of a national cross-sectional survey conducted among hospitals in the Netherlands from March through May 2018. For this survey, a previously developed online questionnaire, containing 6 consensus-based integration indicators, was sent to palliative care programme leaders in all 78 hospitals. For referral rate we calculated the number of annual inpatient referrals to the SPCT as a percentage of the number of total annual hospital admissions. Referral rate was dichotomized into high (≥ third quartile) and low (< third quartile). Characteristics of SPCTs with high and low referral rate were compared using univariate analyses. P-values Results In total, 63 hospitals (81%) participated in the survey, of which 62 had an operational SPCT. The palliative care programmes of these hospitals consisted of inpatient consultation services (94%), interdisciplinary staffing (61%), outpatient clinics (45%), dedicated acute care beds (21%) and community-based palliative care (27%). The median referral rate was 0.56% (IQR 0.23–1.0%), ranging from 0 to 3.7%. Comparing SPCTs with high referral rate (≥1%, n = 17) and low referral rate (n = 45) showed significant differences for SPCTs’ years of existence, staffing, their level of education, participation in other departments’ team meetings, provision of education and conducting research. With regard to integration, significant differences were found for the presence of outpatient clinics and timing of referrals. Conclusion In the Netherlands, palliative care programmes and specialist palliative care teams in hospitals vary in their level of integration and development, with more mature teams showing higher referral rates. Appropriate staffing, dedicated outpatient clinics, education and research appear means to improve service penetration and timing of referral for patients with advanced diseases.

The probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent according to the hospital of diagnosis has been shown to vary considerately for esophagogastric cancer. Little is known about which factors attribute to practice variation. The aim of this study is to investigate the possible differences in treatment decision-making (TDM) after the Multi-Disciplinary Team Meeting (MDTM) advice. Methods To gain in-depth understanding of TDM quantitative data was gathered by the Netherlands Cancer Registry (i.e., proposed treatment and received treatment) and clinician’s and patient’s perspectives were assessed. In eight hospitals, 26 outpatient clinic consults were observed, 30 in-depth interviews with clinicians were conducted, and 3 focus groups with patients were conducted. In addition, focus groups with clinicians were held to enrich and further explore the gathered data. Thematic content analysis approach was used. Results Surgery with curative intent was proposed during the MDTM in 63%,65% and 72% in patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer in a hospital with respectively low, middle, or a high probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent, respectively. For gastric cancer this was 75%, 82%, 82%, respectively. Changes in the MDTM proposal and received treatment occurred rarely. Clinicians held similar opinions regarding TDM, however its implementation into practice varied. Differences consisted of discussing all treatment options versus only the most fitting treatment option, and the thoroughness of discussing the benefits and harms. Most patients wished to undergo treatment with curative intent. Conclusion Differences in the believes and personalities of the attending clinicians might attribute to variation in TDM. Variation in practice according to the hospital of diagnosis was mainly observed in the MDTM proposal as hospitals with a high probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent proposed surgery more often. Changes in the MDTM proposal and received treatment occurred rarely.

Purpose Relatives are often involved in caregiving for patients with advanced cancer and carry a heavy burden. Self-care and resilience might be beneficial to enhance their wellbeing and burden-bearing capacity. This study assessed the engagement in self-care and resilience in relatives of patients with advanced cancer and its association with their caregiver burden. Methods This study analyzed baseline data of the eQuiPe study, a prospective longitudinal, multicenter, observational study on quality of care and life of patients with advanced cancer and their relatives in which self-care (Self-care Practices Scale), resilience (Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale), and caregiver burden (Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI)) of relatives were included. Their scores were compared with a gender- and age-matched normative population. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association between self-care and resilience with caregiver burden. Results Most of the 746 relatives were the patient’s partner (78%) and 54% reported to be an informal caregiver of the patient. The median hours of caregiving a week for all relatives was 15 and 11% experienced high caregiver burden (ZBI > 20). Relatives who reported a high caregiver burden engaged less often in self-care (OR = .87) and were less resilient (OR = .76) compared to relatives with low/medium caregiver burden. Relatives with high caregiver burden were younger (OR = .96), highly educated (OR = 2.08), often reported to be an informal caregiver of the patient (OR = 2.24), and were less well informed about the importance of self-care (OR = .39). Conclusion A significant number of relatives of patients with advanced cancer experienced high caregiver burden. As more self-care and resilience were associated with lower experienced caregiver burden, creating awareness of the beneficial potential of self-care is important. Future studies should illuminate the causal relation. Trial registration number NTR6584 (date of registration: 30 June 2017)

Context. Providing palliative care can lead to work-related stress and ultimately to burnout. The need for palliative care will further increase due to population aging and people living longer with life-threatening diseases. Therefore, a healthy palliative care workforce is vital. Objectives. This study aims to get insight into the experienced work-related stress among healthcare professionals providing palliative care in the Netherlands and their strategies and needs in relation to maintaining a healthy work-life balance. Methods. A cross-sectional online survey among members of the Dutch Association for Palliative Care Professionals was conducted between February and March 2020. Burnout was assessed by the validated Burnout Assessment Tool. Self-constructed questions assessed strategies and needs of healthcare professionals providing palliative care regarding workrelated stress. Results. In total 179 eligible respondents responded (response rate 54%). Respondents were mostly female (79%) and older than 50 years (66%). Most respondents were nurses (47%) and physicians (39%). Two-thirds of respondents (69%) experienced a median level of burnout and 2% a (very) high level. Furthermore, 7% had been on sick leave due to burnout. Although healthcare professionals engage on average in 3.7 coping activities, a quarter (23%) felt that these activities were not sufficient to maintain balanced. Respondents feel a need for activities aimed at the team and organisation level such as feeling emotionally safe within their team. Conclusion. Symptoms of burnout are quite prevalent among healthcare professionals providing palliative care in the Netherlands. Healthcare professionals have a need for team and organisation approaches to maintain a healthy work-life balance. J Pain Symptom Manage 2021;62:e38-e45. (c) 2021 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Background: In recent years there has been increasing attention for the prevalence and prevention of burnout among healthcare professionals. There is unclarity about prevalence of burnout in healthcare professionals providing palliative care and little is known about effective interventions in this area. Aim: To investigate the prevalence of (symptoms of) burnout in healthcare professionals providing palliative care and what interventions may reduce symptoms of burnout in this population. Design: A systematic literature review based on criteria of the PRISMA statement was performed on prevalence of burnout in healthcare professionals providing palliative care and interventions aimed at preventing burnout. Data sources: PubMed, PsycInfo and Cinahl were searched for studies published from 2008 to 2020. Quality of the studies was assessed using the method of Hawkers for systematically reviewing research. Results: In total 59 studies were included. Burnout among healthcare professionals providing palliative care ranged from 3% to 66%. No major differences in prevalence were found between nurses and physicians. Healthcare professionals providing palliative care in general settings experience more symptoms of burnout than those in specialised palliative care settings. Ten studies reported on the effects of interventions aimed at preventing burnout. Reduction of one or more symptoms of burnout after the intervention was reported in six studies which were aimed at learning meditation, improving communication skills, peer-coaching and art-therapy based supervision. Conclusion: The range of burnout among healthcare professionals providing palliative care varies widely. Interventions based on meditation, communication training, peer-coaching and art-therapy based supervision have positive effects but long-term outcomes are not known yet.

INTRODUCTION: Patients faced with incurable cancer may experience a lack of support from their physician throughout and after treatment. Studies on the needs and experiences of these patients are scarce. In this study, we explored the needs and experiences of patients diagnosed with incurable cancer regarding the conversation, in which they were told that their cancer was incurable, the care received after this conversation, and their preferences regarding end-of-life conversations.METHODS: Data were cross-sectionally collected through a national online survey in the Netherlands (September 2018). Descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients were reported and subgroups were compared.RESULTS: Six hundred fifty-four patients (mean age 60 years; 58% women) completed the survey. Patients were primarily diagnosed with breast cancer (22%) or a hematological malignancy (21%). Patients reported a strong need for emotional support during the conversation, in which they were told their cancer was incurable (mean score 8.3; scale 1-10). Their experienced satisfaction with received emotional support was mediocre (mean score 6.4; scale 1-10). Of those patients who felt like they did not receive any additional care (37%) after the diagnosis, the majority expressed a clear need for this kind of care (59%). Mostly, support pertained to psychosocial issues. Regarding conversations about the end of life, most patients (62%) expressed a need to discuss this topic, and preferred their healthcare provider to initiate this conversation.CONCLUSION: Care for patients with incurable cancer can be further improved by tailoring conversations to specific needs and timely providing appropriate supportive care services.

Purpose: Most people are familiar with the expression ‘laughter is the best medicine’. By enhancing cognitive flexibility and strengthening relationships, laughter can be considered a holistic care-approach. Yet, in medical oncology, especially the palliative phase, using humour can be considered inappropriate or taboo. We aimed to explore the acceptability and functions of humour and laughter in patients with prolonged incurable cancer. Methods: This study was performed in a Dutch Comprehensive Cancer Centre. We included four short conversations with patients, eighteen in-depth patient-interviews and eleven observational fieldnotes in which humour was a major topic of the conversation. We further administered an online questionnaire to thirty-three oncology clinicians about their experiences with humour. Qualitative data were thematically analysed. We specifically distinguished between humour and laughter. Results: Nearly all specialists reported using humour (97%), and all reported sometimes laughing during consultations; 83% experienced a positive effect of laughter. These results were in line with patients’ experiences: Patients noted that humour always stayed alive despite medical difficulties. Apart from this human aspect, patients also used humour to broach difficult topics and downplay challenges. Patients and specialists acknowledged that using humour is sometimes inappropriate, partly because they did not always share the same humour. Laughter, in contrast, was regarded as ‘lighter’ than humour, and could, accordingly, more easily be implemented. Specialists cautioned against patients using laughter to avoid broaching difficult topics. Conclusion: Many conversations were full of laughter. Hierarchy as usually experienced between healthcare professionals and patients/relatives seemed to disappear when using laughter. If applied appropriately, adding shared laughter may help optimize shared decision-making.

Objective To examine the regional variation in hospital care utilization in the last 6 months of life of Dutch patients with lung cancer and to test whether higher degrees of hospital utilization coincide with less general practitioner (GP) and long-term care use. Design Cross-sectional claims data study. Setting The Netherlands. Participants Patients deceased in 2013–2015 with lung cancer (N = 25 553). Main Outcome Measures We calculated regional medical practice variation scores, adjusted for age, gender and socioeconomic status, for radiotherapy, chemotherapy, CT-scans, emergency room contacts and hospital admission days during the last 6 months of life; Spearman Rank correlation coefficients measured the association between the adjusted regional medical practice variation scores for hospital admissions and ER contacts and GP and long-term care utilization. Results The utilization of hospital services in high-using regions is 2.3–3.6 times higher than in low-using regions. The variation was highest in 2015 and lowest in 2013. For all 3 years, hospital care was not significantly correlated with out-of-hospital care at a regional level. Conclusions Hospital care utilization during the last 6 months of life of patients with lung cancer shows regional medical practice variation over the course of multiple years and seems to increase. Higher healthcare utilization in hospitals does not seem to be associated with less intensive GP and long-term care. In-depth research is needed to explore the causes of the variation and its relation to quality of care provided at the level of daily practice.

3 Background: Previous studies on experienced quality of care and quality of life have not addressed the reciprocal relation between patients and their relatives. For the first time we were able to include almost 700 couples (patient – relative) in a palliative oncological care context. This study aims to assess the experienced quality of care and emotional functioning (EF) of patients with advanced cancer and their relatives, including their reciprocal relation by using a dyadic approach. Methods: A prospective multicentre observational study among patients with advanced cancer and their relatives, recruited from 40 hospitals in the Netherlands or self-enrolled between November 2017 and January 2020 (eQuiPe study). Patients with metastatic cancer and their relatives were eligible to participate. Respondents completed a questionnaire and clinical data of the patient were obtained by linking the information to the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Logistic regression analyses were performed on baseline data of 1,103 patients and 831 relatives to assess the association between experienced quality of care and EF of patients and relatives separately and across dyads. Results: In total, 1,103 (65%) patients and 831 (71%) relatives completed the baseline questionnaire, including 699 unique patient-relative couples. Patients experienced lower levels of quality of life, including EF, and more symptoms compared to the normative population ( p

Contains fulltext : 208428.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Understanding the overuse and underuse of health-care services in the end-of-life (EoL) phase for patients with lung cancer (LC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) is important, but knowledge is limited. To help identify inappropriate care, we present the health-care utilization profiles for hospital care at the EoL of patients with LC (N = 25 553) and CRC (N = 14 911) in the Netherlands between 2013 and 2015. An administrative database containing all in-hospital health-care activities was analyzed to investigate the association between the number of days patients spent in the emergency department (ED) or intensive care unit (ICU) and their exposure to chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Fewer patients received hospital care as death neared, but their intensity of care increased. In the last month of life, the average numbers of hospital bed days, ICU days, and ER contacts were 9.0, 5.5, and 1.2 for patients with CRC, and 8.9, 6.2 and 1.2 for patients with LC in 2015. On the other hand, the occurrence of palliative consultations ranged from 1% to 4%. Patients receiving chemotherapy 6 months before death spent fewer days in ICU than those who did not receive this treatment (odds ratios: CRC = 0.6 [95% confidence interval: 0.4-0.8] and LC = 0.7 [0.5-0.9]), while those receiving chemotherapy 1 month before death had more ED visits (odds ratios: CRC = 17.2 [11.8-25.0] and LC = 15.8 [12.0-20.9]). Our results showed that patients who were still receiving hospital care when death was near had a high intensity of care, yet palliative consultations were low. Receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy in the final month of life was significantly associated with more ED and ICU contacts in patients with LC.

Purpose The study aims to describe mechanisms that contribute to the tendency towards continuing chemotherapy in patients with advanced cancer. Methods The study conducted qualitative observations of outpatient clinic visits of 28 patients with advanced cancer (glioblastoma and metastatic colorectal cancer). Results We uncovered four mechanisms in daily oncology practice that can contribute to the tendency towards continuing chemotherapy in patients with advanced cancer: (1) “presenting the full therapy sets the standard”—patients seemed to base their justification for continuing chemotherapy on the “standard” therapy with the maximum number of cycles as presented by the physician at the start of the treatment; (2) “focus on standard evaluation moments hampers evaluation of care goals”—whether or not to continue the treatment was mostly only considered at standard evaluation moments; (3) “opening question guides towards focus on symptoms”—most patients gave an update of their physical symptoms in answer to the opening question of “How are you doing?” Physicians consequently discussed how to deal with this at length, which often took up most of the visit; (4) “treatment is perceived as the only option”—patients mostly wanted to continue with chemotherapy because they felt that they had to try every available option the physician offered. Physicians also often seemed to focus on treatment as the only option. Conclusion Discussing care goals more regularly with the patient, facilitated for instance by implementing early palliative care, might help counter the mechanisms and enable a more well-considered decision. This could be either stopping or continuing chemotherapy.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to describe and compare the relation between treatment aims, hospitalizations, and hospital mortality for Dutch patients who died from lung, colorectal, breast, prostate, or pancreatic cancer. Methods: A mortality follow-back study was conducted within a sentinel network of Dutch general practitioners (GPs), who recorded the end-of-life care of 691 patients who died from one of the abovementioned cancer types between 2009 and 2015. Differences in care by type of cancer were analyzed using multilevel analyses to control for clustering within general practices. Results: Among all cancer types, patients with prostate cancer most often and patients with pancreatic cancer least often had a palliative treatment aim a month before death (95% resp. 84%). Prostate cancer patients were also least often admitted to hospital in the last month of life (18.5%) and least often died there (3.1%), whereas lung cancer patients were at the other end of the spectrum with 41.8% of them being admitted to hospital and 22.6% dying in hospital. Having a palliative treatment aim and being older were significantly associated with less hospital admissions, and having a palliative treatment aim, having prostate cancer, and dying in a more recent year were significantly associated with less hospital deaths. Conclusion: There is large variation between patients with different cancer types with regard to treatment aims, hospital admissions, and hospital deaths. The results highlight the need for early initiation of GP palliative care to support patients from all cancer types to stay at the place they prefer as long as possible.

Het afgelopen jaar deed het Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland (IKNL) – in nauwe samenwerking met zorgprofessionals – een eerste aanzet voor de ontwikkeling van een gesprekslijst om communicatie over anti-tumorgerichte behandeling bij niet meer te genezen kankerpatienten te bevorderen. In dit artikel zetten wij de uitdagingen van het gebruik van deze gesprekslijst uiteen aan de hand van persoonlijke ervaringen en ideeen van artsen en verpleegkundigen, geillustreerd met citaten van de focusgroep.

Background Patients' preferences and expectations should be taken into account in treatment decision making in the last phase of life. Shared decision making (SDM) is regarded as a way to give the patient a central role in decision making. Little is known about how SDM is used in clinical practice in advanced cancer care. Objective To examine whether and how the steps of SDM can be recognized in decision making about second- and third-line chemotherapy. Methods Fourteen advanced cancer patients were followed over time using face-to-face in-depth interviews and observations of the patients' out-clinic visits. Interviews and outpatient clinic visits in which treatment options were discussed or decisions made were transcribed verbatim and analysed using open coding. Results Patients were satisfied with the decision-making process, but the steps of SDM were barely seen in daily practice. The creation of awareness about available treatment options by physicians was limited and not discussed in an equal way. Patients' wishes and concerns were not explicitly assessed, which led to different expectations about improved survival from subsequent lines of chemotherapy. Conclusion To reach SDM in daily practice, physicians should create awareness of all treatment options, including forgoing treatment, and communicate the risk of benefit and harm. Open and honest communication is needed in which patients' expectations and concerns are discussed. Through this, the difficult process of decision making in the last phase of life can be facilitated and the focus on the best care for the specific patient is strengthened.

43 Background: Most people are familiar with the expression "laughter is the best medicine". By triggering endorphin release and strengthening relationships, it can be considered a perfect holistic care-approach. We explored the occurrence, acceptability, and functions of humor and laughter in patients with incurable cancer. Methods: We performed 16 in-depth interviews with patients with incurable cancer at the day-care unit of a Dutch comprehensive cancer hospital. We further performed and online questionnaire-study among 33 oncologists (41% of 81 approached) about experiences with humour and laughter in breast, lung, head and neck, or urological cancer. Results: Nearly all oncologists reported using humour (97%), and all reported to sometimes laugh during consultations; 83% reported experiencing a positive effect of laughter. These results were in line with patients’ experiences: Patients noted that humor always stayed alive, despite having incurable cancer. Apart from this human aspect, patients also used humor to broach difficult topics and to downplay challenges. Some patients explicated that the appreciation of humor was dependent on the type of humor, since humor is rather personal. Patients and oncologists acknowledged that using humor is delicate, and sometimes inappropriate, partly because they did not always share the same type of humor. Laughter, in contrast, was regarded as ‘lighter’ than humor, and could, accordingly, more easily be implemented. However, both patients and specialists cautioned against patients using laughter to avoid uncertainty or broach difficult topics. Conclusions: Our results suggest that patients and healthcare professionals can benefit from humour or laughter. Many conversations were joyful, even in the midst of medical challenges. Although humor is personal, laughter can be applied more easily. Healthcare professionals therefore need to have a basic comprehension of the impact of laughter to facilitate discussions, improve the doctor-patient relationship, and identify underlying wishes. If applied appropriately, shared laughter will possibly add to optimise shared medicine.

Background. In cancer care, difficult decisions concerning advanced treatment need to be made, weighing possible life prolongation against harmful side effects. Treatment is frequently started, showing the need to explore how decisions are made. Little is known about the perspectives of physicians on sharing decision making with patients. This qualitative study aimed to describe the perspectives of medical specialists on the decision-making process with patients with glioblastoma concerning starting new treatment. Methods. Qualitative interviews were held with medical specialists. One focus group was organized with medical professionals. Their opinions about elements of shared decision making and the applicability in the context of patients with glioblastoma were assessed. The topic list for the focus group was based on the analysis of the interviews. Qualitative analysis of the transcripts was performed by three researchers independently. Results. Medical specialists considered shared decision making to be important; however, they did not adhere to its elements. Stopping treatment was not considered equal to continuing treatment. Exploration of the patients’ wishes was done implicitly, and shared responsibility for the decision was not highly recognized. The main barriers to shared decision making were preferences of both patients and specialists for starting or continuing treatment and assumptions of physicians about knowing what patients want. Conclusion. Medical specialists recognized the importance of patient involvement but experienced difficulty in sharing decision making in practice. Elements of shared decision making are partly followed but do not guide decision making. To improve cancer care, education of medical specialists and adjustment to the elements are needed to involve patients. Implications for Practice: This study assessed medical specialists’ perspectives on sharing decision making with patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Medical specialists experienced difficulty with shared decision making in this setting. The main barriers to shared decision making related to the preferences of both patients and specialists for starting or continuing treatment and the assumptions of physicians about knowing what patients want. The findings stress the need for training specialists in how to offer alternatives, communicate uncertain benefits, and establish patients’ preferences explicitly. The elements of shared decision making require adaptations to adequately involve vulnerable patients with glioblastoma in treatment decisions at the end of life.

Background Patients are increasingly expected and asked to be involved in health care decisions. In this decision-making process, preferences for participation are important. In this systematic review we aim to provide an overview the literature related to the congruence between patients’ preferences and their perceived participation in medical decision-making. We also explore the direction of mismatched and outline factors associated with congruence. Methods A systematic review was performed on patient participation in medical decision-making. Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases up to September 2012, were searched and all studies were rigorously critically appraised. In total 44 papers were included, they sampled contained 52 different patient samples. Results Mean of congruence between preference for and perceived participation in decision-making was 60% (49 and 70 representing 25th and 75th percentiles). If no congruence was found, of 36 patient samples most patients preferred more involvement and of 9 patient samples most patients preferred less involvement. Factors associated with preferences the most investigated were age and educational level. Younger patients preferred more often an active or shared role as did higher educated patients. Conclusion This review suggests that a similar approach to all patients is not likely to meet patients’ wishes, since preferences for participation vary among patients. Health care professionals should be sensitive to patients individual preferences and communicate about patients’ participation wishes on a regular basis during their illness trajectory.

PURPOSE: Patients are often encouraged to participate in treatment decision-making. Most studies on this subject focus on choosing between different curative treatment types. In the last phase of life treatment decisions differ as they often put more emphasis on weighing quantity against quality of life, such as whether or not to start treatment aimed at life prolongation but with the possibility of side effects. This study aimed to obtain insight into cancer patients' preferences and the reasons for patients' preferred role in treatment decision-making at the end of life. METHODS: 28 advanced cancer patients were included at the start of their first line treatment. In-depth interviews were held prior to upcoming treatment decisions whether or not to start a life prolonging treatment. The Control Preference Scale was used to start discussing the extent and type of influence patients wanted to have concerning upcoming treatment decision-making. Interviews were audio taped and transcribed. RESULTS: All patients wanted their physician to participate in the treatment decision-making process. The extent to which patients themselves preferred to participate seemed to depend on how patients saw their own role or assessed their own capabilities for participating in treatment decision-making. Patients foresaw a shift in the preferred level of participation to a more active role depending in the later phase of illness when life prolongation would become more limited and quality of life would become more important. CONCLUSION: Patients vary in how much involvement they would like to have in upcoming treatment decision-making. Individual patients' preferences may change in the course of the illness, with a shift to more active participation in the later phases. Communication about patients' expectations, wishes and preferences for participation in upcoming treatment decisions is of great importance. An approach in which these topics are openly discussed would be beneficial.