Jeffrey Stephenson1, Andrew Davies. 1. St. Luke's Hospice, Stamford Road, Turnchapel, Plymouth, PL9 9XA, UK. jeff.stephenson@stlukes-hospice.org.uk
Abstract
STUDY AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of aetiology-based guidelines for the management of nausea and vomiting (N&V) in patients with advanced cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study of 121 patients admitted to a hospice. Patients with N&V underwent assessments at presentation, 48 h and 1 week, to determine the aetiology of N&V and the response to treatment. Antiemetics were prescribed according to aetiology-based guidelines. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients (50%) had N&V during their admission: 21 (17%) had isolated nausea, 2 (2%) had isolated vomiting and 38 (31%) had combined N&V. During the assessment period, physicians altered their opinion about the primary cause of N&V in 26% of cases and finally expressed confidence about the aetiology in 75% of patients. The most common cause of N&V was impaired gastric emptying (contributing in 44% of patients), followed by chemical causes (33%) and bowel obstruction (19%). At 1 week, nausea was controlled in 56% of patients, and vomiting in 89% of patients, and residual symptoms were generally mild. CONCLUSIONS: An approach using aetiology-based guidelines in the management of N&V is moderately effective, although there are some patients with N&V refractory to standard antiemetic regimens.
STUDY AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of aetiology-based guidelines for the management of nausea and vomiting (N&V) in patients with advanced cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study of 121 patients admitted to a hospice. Patients with N&V underwent assessments at presentation, 48 h and 1 week, to determine the aetiology of N&V and the response to treatment. Antiemetics were prescribed according to aetiology-based guidelines. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients (50%) had N&V during their admission: 21 (17%) had isolated nausea, 2 (2%) had isolated vomiting and 38 (31%) had combined N&V. During the assessment period, physicians altered their opinion about the primary cause of N&V in 26% of cases and finally expressed confidence about the aetiology in 75% of patients. The most common cause of N&V was impaired gastric emptying (contributing in 44% of patients), followed by chemical causes (33%) and bowel obstruction (19%). At 1 week, nausea was controlled in 56% of patients, and vomiting in 89% of patients, and residual symptoms were generally mild. CONCLUSIONS: An approach using aetiology-based guidelines in the management of N&V is moderately effective, although there are some patients with N&V refractory to standard antiemetic regimens.
Authors: N Cherny; C Ripamonti; J Pereira; C Davis; M Fallon; H McQuay; S Mercadante; G Pasternak; V Ventafridda Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Paul Glare; Glenn Pereira; Linda J Kristjanson; Martin Stockler; Martin Tattersall Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2004-04-24 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: C L Loprinzi; J C Michalak; D J Schaid; J A Mailliard; L M Athmann; R M Goldberg; L K Tschetter; A K Hatfield; R F Morton Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1993-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hanno Riess; Cihan Ay; Rupert Bauersachs; Cecilia Becattini; Jan Beyer-Westendorf; Francis Cajfinger; Ian Chau; Alexander T Cohen; Alok A Khorana; Anthony Maraveyas; Marcos Renni; Annie M Young Journal: Oncologist Date: 2018-04-12
Authors: Declan Walsh; Mellar Davis; Carla Ripamonti; Eduardo Bruera; Andrew Davies; Alex Molassiotis Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-08-17 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Wadih Rhondali; Sriram Yennurajalingam; Gary Chisholm; Jeanette Ferrer; Sun Hyun Kim; Jung Hun Kang; Marilene Filbet; Eduardo Bruera Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-04-16 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Rachel B Issaka; David M Shapiro; Neehar D Parikh; Mary F Mulcahy; Srinadh Komanduri; John A Martin; Rajesh N Keswani Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-12-24 Impact factor: 4.584