PURPOSE: Goals of care (GoC) designations are an important part of advanced care planning (ACP) for patients with incurable cancers. Studies of outpatient oncology records show that most patients do not have GoC documented. We performed a retrospective analysis of changes in GoC designations in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer in Northern Alberta, Canada, during a system-wide ACP quality improvement initiative. METHODS: Four hundred seventy-one patients with newly diagnosis of advanced, non-neuroendocrine pancreatic cancer between 2010 and 2015 in Northern Alberta, Canada, were included. The ACP initiation launched April 2014, and included educational materials for patients and families, and a coded system of GoC designations describing care philosophies and preferences for resuscitation and medical interventions. Data sources included the Alberta Cancer Registry and oncology-specific electronic medical records. RESULTS: 25.5% of patients had a documented GoC, which increased over the study period (Mantel-Haenszel test-of-trend P < .001; increased from 7.8% in 2010 to 50.0% in 2015). GoC designations occurred later in patients who received palliative chemotherapy versus those who did not (median 130 days from diagnosis [95% CI, 76.019 to 183.981] v 36 days [95% CI, 28.107 to 43.893]; P < .001), and coincided with the end of treatment (median 4.5 days from last treatment). 64.8% of GoC designations were documented by palliative care physicians, but the proportion documented by medical oncologists increased with time (Mantel-Haenszel test-of-trend P = .020; increased from 0% in 2010 to 52.1% in 2015). CONCLUSION: GoC documentation increased in the outpatient records of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer during the system-wide, multifactorial ACP initiative. GoC documentation by medical oncologists also increased. These data provide real-world evidence supporting the impact of a specific ACP initiative to improve rates of GoC designation in patients with advanced cancer.
683 Background: Discussion of goals of care (GoC) is a key part of quality care for patients with palliative cancer. Numerous studies have shown that documentation of GoC in this population remains low. In 2014, Alberta Health Services launched a health-system wide initiative to provide patients with physical copies of their GoC designation intended to be available at all health-system interactions. Here we describe rates of GoC documentation in the period surrounding this initiative. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort analysis of 240 patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with palliative chemotherapy from 2012-2015 in Alberta, Canada. Data were obtained from outpatient electronic medical record documentation and the provincial cancer registry. Results: 63.8% (153/240) of patients had a documented GoC discussion, with 60.4% (145/240) receiving a specific GoC designation. 59.6% (143/240) of patients were referred to palliative care, with 32.5% (78/240) seen by palliative care physician. Of 334 individual GoC discussions documented, 38.6% (129/334) were by medical oncologists, 2.3% (10/334) were by radiation oncologists, 27.2% (91/334) were by palliative care, and 19.2% (64/334) were by other inpatient physicians during hospital admissions. At least 9.6% (32/334) referenced discussions that occurred prior to initial consultation with an oncology physician. Conclusions: The majority of pancreatic cancer patients undergoing palliative chemotherapy had a documented GoC designation during the study period. Providing patients with physical copies of their GoC designation may therefore represent a simple but effective means of increasing GoC documentation in the outpatient oncology setting.
16 Background: Social media channels, such as Twitter, represent relatively new technology platforms for scientific users to disseminate research findings and communicate their views and interpretations to colleagues and followers. To date, the associations between the use of Twitter and the scientific impact of its users are unclear. Methods: All Canadian oncologists who are full members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology were identified from the online membership directory. Users of Twitter were defined as those with an active Twitter account, as of June 2019, and posted at least one tweet within the past year. Data regarding the number of tweets, likes, and followers were collected by an online search of Twitter. Scientific impact of each individual was assessed based on a user’s h-index and number of citations from Google Scholar as well as score from Research Gate. Associations were examined with summary statistics and correlation coefficients. Results: We identified 676 eligible oncologists of whom 80 (12%) and 596 (88%) currently use and do not use Twitter. Among the users, the median number (IQR) of tweets, likes, and followers were 196 (45-865), 325 (86-1,246), and 198 (89-449), respectively. The scientific impact of Twitter users versus non-users was statistically similar (see Table). Likewise, within the group of users, there was no correlation between the number of tweets, likes, and followers and the scientific impact of individuals (correlation coefficients 0.38, 0.34, and 0.41, respectively, all p > 0.05). Conclusions: Only 1 in 10 oncologists use Twitter, but those who use Twitter leveraged this technology platform frequently. There was no association between the use of Twitter and the scientific impact of its users. Views from a minority of oncologists are represented on Twitter. Such bias underscores the need to exercise caution when using social media for scientific knowledge exchange. Regular evaluations of new technologies are warranted to ensure the quality and rigor of their scientific content. [Table: see text]
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.