Mali K Schneiter1, Mohana B Karlekar2, Marta A Crispens1, Lauren S Prescott1, Alaina J Brown3. 1. Department of Obstetrics/Gynecology, Gynecologic Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 Medical Center Dr. MCN B1100, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 2. Department of Medicine and Biomedical Informatics, Palliative Care, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. 3. Department of Obstetrics/Gynecology, Gynecologic Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 Medical Center Dr. MCN B1100, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. a.j.brown@vanderbilt.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of specialty palliative care consultation (PCC) on end of life care outcomes among terminally ill gynecologic oncology patients. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of currently deceased gynecologic oncology patients seen at a single, academic institution between October 2006 and October 2016. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were examined using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. RESULTS: Two hundred and four patients were eligible. Forty-one percent underwent at least one marker of aggressive care at the end of life. Most (53%) had a PCC prior to death, and of these most were inpatient (89%). Patients with a PCC had higher odds of hospice enrollment before death (OR 2.55, p = 0.016) and higher odds of advance care planning documentation before death (OR 6.79, p = < 0.001). Among patients with an inpatient PCC, 44% underwent a marker of aggressive medical care at the end of life and 82% enrolled in hospice before death. Among patients with an outpatient PCC, 25% underwent a marker of aggressive medical care at the end of life and 92% enrolled in hospice before death. Patients with outpatient PCC were engaged in palliative care longer than patients with inpatient PCC (median 106 days vs. 33 days prior to death). CONCLUSIONS: PCC increased hospice enrollment and advance care planning documentation. Patients with outpatient PCC had lower rates of aggressive medical care and higher rates of hospice enrollment when compared to inpatient PCC. Location of initial PCC plays an important role in end of life care outcomes.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of specialty palliative care consultation (PCC) on end of life care outcomes among terminally ill gynecologic oncology patients. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of currently deceased gynecologic oncology patients seen at a single, academic institution between October 2006 and October 2016. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were examined using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. RESULTS: Two hundred and four patients were eligible. Forty-one percent underwent at least one marker of aggressive care at the end of life. Most (53%) had a PCC prior to death, and of these most were inpatient (89%). Patients with a PCC had higher odds of hospice enrollment before death (OR 2.55, p = 0.016) and higher odds of advance care planning documentation before death (OR 6.79, p = < 0.001). Among patients with an inpatient PCC, 44% underwent a marker of aggressive medical care at the end of life and 82% enrolled in hospice before death. Among patients with an outpatient PCC, 25% underwent a marker of aggressive medical care at the end of life and 92% enrolled in hospice before death. Patients with outpatient PCC were engaged in palliative care longer than patients with inpatient PCC (median 106 days vs. 33 days prior to death). CONCLUSIONS: PCC increased hospice enrollment and advance care planning documentation. Patients with outpatient PCC had lower rates of aggressive medical care and higher rates of hospice enrollment when compared to inpatient PCC. Location of initial PCC plays an important role in end of life care outcomes.
Entities:
Keywords:
Gynecologic cancer; Palliative care; Quality of life
Authors: Jennifer S Temel; Joseph A Greer; Alona Muzikansky; Emily R Gallagher; Sonal Admane; Vicki A Jackson; Constance M Dahlin; Craig D Blinderman; Juliet Jacobsen; William F Pirl; J Andrew Billings; Thomas J Lynch Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-08-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Dana Lustbader; Renee Pekmezaris; Michael Frankenthaler; Rajni Walia; Frederick Smith; Erfan Hussain; Barbara Napolitano; Martin Lesser Journal: Palliat Support Care Date: 2011-12
Authors: Erin A Keyser; Beverly G Reed; William J Lowery; Michael J Sundborg; William E Winter; John A Ward; Charles A Leath Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2010-06-12 Impact factor: 5.482
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: Kristy T Duggan; Sara Hildebrand Duffus; Ralph B D'Agostino; William J Petty; Nathan P Streer; Richard C Stephenson Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2016-08-25 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Micael Lopez-Acevedo; Laura J Havrilesky; Gloria Broadwater; Arif H Kamal; Amy P Abernethy; Andrew Berchuck; Angeles Alvarez Secord; James A Tulsky; Fidel Valea; Paula S Lee Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2013-04-13 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Marie Bakitas; Kathleen Doyle Lyons; Mark T Hegel; Stefan Balan; Frances C Brokaw; Janette Seville; Jay G Hull; Zhongze Li; Tor D Tosteson; Ira R Byock; Tim A Ahles Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-08-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Thomas J Smith; Sarah Temin; Erin R Alesi; Amy P Abernethy; Tracy A Balboni; Ethan M Basch; Betty R Ferrell; Matt Loscalzo; Diane E Meier; Judith A Paice; Jeffrey M Peppercorn; Mark Somerfield; Ellen Stovall; Jamie H Von Roenn Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-02-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mellar P Davis; Erin A Vanenkevort; Alexander Elder; Amanda Young; Irina D Correa Ordonez; Mark J Wojtowicz; Halle Ellison; Carlos Fernandez; Zankhana Mehta; Bertrand Behm; Glen Digwood; Rajiv Panikkar Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Catherine N Zivanov; Anne Coogan; Robin R Lane; Sara G Lin; Sarah C Reed; Marc A Robinson; Mohana Karlekar; Lauren S Prescott; Alaina J Brown Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2022-08-24 Impact factor: 1.771