Sara L Douglas1, Barbara J Daly2, Amy R Lipson3, Eric Blackstone3. 1. RN Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Frances Payne Bolton School of Nursing, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44104, USA. SLD4@case.edu. 2. RN Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Frances Payne Bolton School of Nursing, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44104, USA. 3. Frances Payne Bolton School of Nursing, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44014, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The ability of oncologists to understand patients' goals of care is recognized as a key component of quality care. The purpose of this study is to examine the influence of patient-oncologist agreement regarding goals of care upon aggressive care at end of life (EOL) for patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Patients with advanced cancer and their oncologists were interviewed at study enrollment and every 3 months thereafter until patient death or end of the study period (15 months). A 100-point visual analogue scale was used to represent goals of care, with quality of life (scored as 0) and survival (scored as 100) as anchors. Strong goal of care agreement for survival was defined as oncologist and patient dyadic goal of care scores that fell between 70 and 100 (100 = highest goal for survival) and for comfort, dyadic goal of care values that fell between 0 and 30 (0 = high goal for comfort). RESULTS: Two hundred and six patients and eleven oncologists provided data. At the last interview prior to death, 23.3% of dyads had strong goal of care agreement for either survival (8.3%) or comfort (15%) and 76.7% had no strong agreement. There was a significant association between aggressive care use and categories of dyadic agreement regarding goals of care (p = 0.024, Cramer's V = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: A large percentage of oncologists did not understand their patients' EOL goals of care. While aggressive care aligned with categories of dyadic agreement for goals of care, high rates of aggressive care were reported.
INTRODUCTION: The ability of oncologists to understand patients' goals of care is recognized as a key component of quality care. The purpose of this study is to examine the influence of patient-oncologist agreement regarding goals of care upon aggressive care at end of life (EOL) for patients with advanced cancer. METHODS:Patients with advanced cancer and their oncologists were interviewed at study enrollment and every 3 months thereafter until patientdeath or end of the study period (15 months). A 100-point visual analogue scale was used to represent goals of care, with quality of life (scored as 0) and survival (scored as 100) as anchors. Strong goal of care agreement for survival was defined as oncologist and patient dyadic goal of care scores that fell between 70 and 100 (100 = highest goal for survival) and for comfort, dyadic goal of care values that fell between 0 and 30 (0 = high goal for comfort). RESULTS: Two hundred and six patients and eleven oncologists provided data. At the last interview prior to death, 23.3% of dyads had strong goal of care agreement for either survival (8.3%) or comfort (15%) and 76.7% had no strong agreement. There was a significant association between aggressive care use and categories of dyadic agreement regarding goals of care (p = 0.024, Cramer's V = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: A large percentage of oncologists did not understand their patients' EOL goals of care. While aggressive care aligned with categories of dyadic agreement for goals of care, high rates of aggressive care were reported.
Entities:
Keywords:
Advanced cancer; Aggressive care; End-of-life care; Goals of care
Authors: Craig C Earle; Elyse R Park; Bonnie Lai; Jane C Weeks; John Z Ayanian; Susan Block Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Craig C Earle; Bridget A Neville; Mary Beth Landrum; Jeffrey M Souza; Jane C Weeks; Susan D Block; Eva Grunfeld; John Z Ayanian Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2005-06-28 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Alexi A Wright; Nancy L Keating; John Z Ayanian; Elizabeth A Chrischilles; Katherine L Kahn; Christine S Ritchie; Jane C Weeks; Craig C Earle; Mary B Landrum Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jane C Weeks; Paul J Catalano; Angel Cronin; Matthew D Finkelman; Jennifer W Mack; Nancy L Keating; Deborah Schrag Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-10-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Neal J Meropol; Brian L Egleston; Joanne S Buzaglo; Al B Benson; Donald J Cegala; Michael A Diefenbach; Linda Fleisher; Suzanne M Miller; Daniel P Sulmasy; Kevin P Weinfurt Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-12-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Karen O Moss; Sara L Douglas; Amy R Lipson; Eric Blackstone; Dionne Williams; Siobhan Aaron; Celia E Wills Journal: West J Nurs Res Date: 2020-10-16 Impact factor: 1.774