Literature DB >> 29683377

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Best Supportive Care Checklist among Clinicians.

Nathan A Boucher1, Jonathan Nicolla2, Adeboye Ogunseitan3, Elizabeth R Kessler4, Christine S Ritchie5, Yousuf Y Zafar6.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Best supportive care (BSC) is often not standardized across sites, consistent with best evidence, or sufficiently described. We developed a consensus-based checklist to document BSC delivery, including symptom management, decision making, and care planning. We hypothesized that BSC can be feasibly documented with this checklist consistent with consolidated standards of reporting trials.
OBJECTIVE: To determine feasibility/acceptability of a BSC checklist among clinicians.
METHODS: To test feasibility of a BSC checklist in standard care, we enrolled a sample of clinicians treating patients with advanced cancer at four centers. Clinicians were asked to complete the checklist at eligible patient encounters. We surveyed enrollees regarding checklist use generating descriptive statistics and frequencies.
RESULTS: We surveyed 15 clinicians and 9 advanced practice providers. Mean age was 41 (SD = 7.9). Mean years since fellowship for physicians was 7.2 (SD = 4.5). Represented specialties are medical oncology (n = 8), gynecologic oncology (n = 4), palliative care (n = 2), and other (n = 1). For "overall impact on your delivery of supportive/palliative care," 40% noted improved impact with using BSC. For "overall impact on your documentation of supportive/palliative care," 46% noted improvement. Impact on "frequency of comprehensive symptom assessment" was noted to be "increased" by 33% of providers. None noted decreased frequency or worsening impact on any measure with use of BSC. Regarding feasibility of integrating the checklist into workflow, 73% agreed/strongly agreed that checklists could be easily integrated, 73% saw value in integration, and 80% found it easy to use.
CONCLUSION: Clinicians viewed the BSC checklist favorably illustrating proof of concept, minor workflow impact, and potential of benefit to patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  communication; quality improvement; symptom management

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29683377      PMCID: PMC6486661          DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2017.0605

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Palliat Med        ISSN: 1557-7740            Impact factor:   2.947


  12 in total

Review 1.  Consensus-based standards for best supportive care in clinical trials in advanced cancer.

Authors:  S Yousuf Zafar; David C Currow; Nathan Cherny; Florian Strasser; Robin Fowler; Amy P Abernethy
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 41.316

2.  CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials.

Authors:  Kenneth F Schulz; Douglas G Altman; David Moher
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-03-24       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 3.  Improving the methodologic and ethical validity of best supportive care studies in oncology: lessons from a systematic review.

Authors:  Nathan I Cherny; Amy P Abernethy; Florian Strasser; Rama Sapir; David Currow; S Yousuf Zafar
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-06-29       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Defining best supportive care.

Authors:  S Yousuf Zafar; David Currow; Amy P Abernethy
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Improving quality improvement using achievable benchmarks for physician feedback: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  C I Kiefe; J J Allison; O D Williams; S D Person; M T Weaver; N W Weissman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-06-13       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 6.  Concepts and definitions for "supportive care," "best supportive care," "palliative care," and "hospice care" in the published literature, dictionaries, and textbooks.

Authors:  David Hui; Maxine De La Cruz; Masanori Mori; Henrique A Parsons; Jung Hye Kwon; Isabel Torres-Vigil; Sun Hyun Kim; Rony Dev; Ronald Hutchins; Christiana Liem; Duck-Hee Kang; Eduardo Bruera
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2012-08-31       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 7.  Supportive care for patients with gastrointestinal cancer.

Authors:  N Ahmed; S Ahmedzai; V Vora; S Hillam; S Paz
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2004

8.  The need for a re-evaluation of best supportive care studies reported to date.

Authors:  D C Currow; K Foley; S Y Zafar; J L Wheeler; A P Abernethy
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 9.  Best supportive care in clinical trials: review of the inconsistency in control arm design.

Authors:  R D Nipp; D C Currow; N I Cherny; F Strasser; A P Abernethy; S Y Zafar
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  A quality improvement approach to cognitive assessment on hospice admission: could we use the 4AT or Short CAM?

Authors:  Lucy Baird; Juliet Anne Spiller
Journal:  BMJ Open Qual       Date:  2017-08-31
View more
  1 in total

1.  Basic social resource needs screening in the gynecologic oncology clinic: a quality improvement initiative.

Authors:  Anna Louise Beavis; Awa Sanneh; Rebecca L Stone; Margaret Vitale; Kimberly Levinson; Anne F Rositch; Amanda Nickles Fader; Kristin Topel; Ashley Abing; Stephanie L Wethington
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-05-17       Impact factor: 8.661

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.