Deepti Behl1, Aminah Jatoi. 1. Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.
Abstract
AIM: This study elicited oncologists' insights into published statistics that 20% of cancer patients receive chemotherapy within 2 weeks of death and that the median survival between chemotherapy administration and death is 37 days. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A semiqualitative survey was developed to enable respondents to provide anonymous, write-in comments on the statistics above. This survey was sent electronically on two separate occasions to oncologists in the upper midwestern United States. Qualitative methods were used to analyze data. RESULTS: A total of 422 oncology health-care providers were sent the survey, and 61 responded. Nine themes emerged: 1) these decisions are strongly patient-driven; 2) newer agents are driving the decision to continue with cancer treatment; 3) financial incentives on the part of the medical community explain these high rates; 4) health-care reform is necessary; 5) even a small chance of patient benefit justifies this practice; 6) this practice is detrimental to patients because it precludes the initiation of hospice services; 7) others may be prescribing in this manner, but "not us"; 8) these issues are complicated, revolve around society values, and the oncologist alone cannot claim responsibility for such high rates of chemotherapy administration; and 9) there exist barriers to end-of-life discussions. CONCLUSION: Many oncologists are in fact reluctant to prescribe chemotherapy at the end of life, and the complexity of this topic underscores the potential for oncologists and palliative care providers to collaborate in an effort to provide cancer patients the best care at the very end of life.
AIM: This study elicited oncologists' insights into published statistics that 20% of cancerpatients receive chemotherapy within 2 weeks of death and that the median survival between chemotherapy administration and death is 37 days. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A semiqualitative survey was developed to enable respondents to provide anonymous, write-in comments on the statistics above. This survey was sent electronically on two separate occasions to oncologists in the upper midwestern United States. Qualitative methods were used to analyze data. RESULTS: A total of 422 oncology health-care providers were sent the survey, and 61 responded. Nine themes emerged: 1) these decisions are strongly patient-driven; 2) newer agents are driving the decision to continue with cancer treatment; 3) financial incentives on the part of the medical community explain these high rates; 4) health-care reform is necessary; 5) even a small chance of patient benefit justifies this practice; 6) this practice is detrimental to patients because it precludes the initiation of hospice services; 7) others may be prescribing in this manner, but "not us"; 8) these issues are complicated, revolve around society values, and the oncologist alone cannot claim responsibility for such high rates of chemotherapy administration; and 9) there exist barriers to end-of-life discussions. CONCLUSION: Many oncologists are in fact reluctant to prescribe chemotherapy at the end of life, and the complexity of this topic underscores the potential for oncologists and palliative care providers to collaborate in an effort to provide cancerpatients the best care at the very end of life.
Authors: Hsien Seow; Claire F Snyder; Lisa R Shugarman; Richard A Mularski; Jean S Kutner; Karl A Lorenz; Albert W Wu; Sydney M Dy Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-09-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Craig C Earle; Bridget A Neville; Mary Beth Landrum; John Z Ayanian; Susan D Block; Jane C Weeks Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-01-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Craig C Earle; Mary Beth Landrum; Jeffrey M Souza; Bridget A Neville; Jane C Weeks; John Z Ayanian Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-08-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nicole J Look Hong; Frances C Wright; Anna R Gagliardi; Patrick Brown; Mark J Dobrow Journal: J Interprof Care Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 2.338
Authors: Soko Setoguchi; Craig C Earle; Robert Glynn; Margaret Stedman; Jennifer M Polinski; Colleen P Corcoran; Jennifer S Haas Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-11-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M Frigeri; S De Dosso; O Castillo-Fernandez; K Feuerlein; H Neuenschwander; P Saletti Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-06-01 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Leslie J Blackhall; Paul Read; George Stukenborg; Patrick Dillon; Joshua Barclay; Andrew Romano; James Harrison Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Franzisca Domeisen Benedetti; Christoph Ostgathe; Jean Clark; Massimo Costantini; Maria Laura Daud; Barbara Grossenbacher-Gschwend; Richard Latten; Olav Lindqvist; Andreja Peternelj; Stefanie Schuler; Kali Tal; Agnes van der Heide; Steffen Eychmüller Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-12-15 Impact factor: 3.603