Mr R was a 70-year-old man, legally blind from retinitis pigmentosa, who was diagnosed as having pancreatic cancer in January 2002. He underwent a Whipple procedure at an urban academic medical center and then received radiation therapy and chemotherapy with fluorouracil and gemcitabine. To alleviate intermittent bowel obstructions, he had a ventilating gastrostomy tube placed for decompression of his abdomen. Over the next 9 months, he was admitted to the hospital several times for infections at the site of his gastrostomy tube, diarrhea, vomiting, and dehydration.He lived at home with his wife, Mrs R, who was also his partner in the marketing firm he had founded. He had one daughter, Ms L, a psychologist who lived locally, and a son, a history professor, who lived far away but visited every few weeks. Both children were active caregivers over the course of their father's illness. Despite Mrs R's own severe rheumatoid arthritis and other health issues, she was determined to care for her husband at home with the assistance of a home care nurse, Ms P, and a housekeeper to aid with daily chores.As Mr R's health deteriorated, a close friend of Ms L's advised her about a local in-hospital palliative care unit. In November 2002, when Mr R's pain and nausea became so severe that they could not be managed at home, he was admitted to the palliative care unit. At admission, Mr R was alert and oriented but bed bound due to weakness. He and his family hoped his symptoms could be quickly controlled so that he could return home. He received intravenous hydromorphone and dexamethasone for pain and intravenous haloperidol and frequent gastrostomy tube flushings for his nausea. His symptoms initially improved and discussions ensued about his transition home. Although scheduled to go home with hospice care, his condition then declined rapidly to a point where his family did not think they could care for him at home, even with in-Even for patients receiving complex, intensive medical care for serious and life-threatening illness, family caregiving is typically at the core of what sustains patients at the end of life. The amorphous relationship between physicians and the families of patients at the end of life presents both challenges and opportunities for which physicians may be unprepared. Families play important roles in the practical and emotional aspects of patient care and in decision making at the end of life. At the same time, family members may carry significant burdens as a result of their work. Through the perspectives of the wife, daughter, and home care nurse of a patient who died from pancreatic cancer, we illustrate the range of family caregiver experiences and suggest potentially helpful physician interventions. We describe 5 burdens of family caregiving (time and logistics, physical tasks, financial costs, emotional burdens and mental health risks, and physical health risks) and review the responsibilities of physicians to family caregivers. Based on available evidence, we identify 5 areas of opportunity for physic...

In recent years, the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Adult Cancer Pain have undergone substantial revisions focusing on the appropriate and safe prescription of opioid analgesics, optimization of nonopioid analgesics and adjuvant medications, and integration of nonpharmacologic methods of cancer pain management. This selection highlights some of these changes, covering topics on management of adult cancer pain including pharmacologic interventions, nonpharmacologic interventions, and treatment of specific cancer pain syndromes. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Adult Cancer Pain addresses additional aspects of this topic, including pathophysiologic classification of cancer pain syndromes, comprehensive pain assessment, management of pain crisis, ongoing care for cancer pain, pain in cancer survivors, and specialty consultations.

No abstract

Improving provision of palliative care in oncology will likely require efforts beyond increasing service availability. Raising awareness of ways in which subspecialty palliative care complements standard oncology care and developing ways for oncologists and palliative care physicians to collaborate and integrate their respective skills may help.

Background Patients with hematologic malignancies are less likely to receive specialist palliative care services than patients with solid tumors. Reasons for this difference are poorly understood. Methods This was a multisite, mixed-methods study to understand and contrast perceptions of palliative care among hematologic and solid tumor oncologists, using surveys assessing referral practices, and in-depth semi-structured interviews exploring views of palliative care. We compared referral patterns using standard statistical methods. We analyzed qualitative interview data using constant comparative methods, to explore reasons for observed differences. Results Among 66 interviewees, 23 oncologists cared exclusively for patients with hematologic malignancies; 43 treated only patients with solid tumors. Seven of 23 hematologic oncologists (30%) reported never referring to palliative care; all solid tumor oncologists had previously referred. In qualitative analyses, most hematologic oncologists viewed palliative care as end-of-life care, while most solid tumor oncologists viewed palliative care as a subspecialty that could assist with complex cases. Solid tumor oncologists emphasized practical barriers to palliative care referral, such as appointment availability and reimbursement issues. Hematologic oncologists emphasized philosophical concerns about palliative care referrals, including different treatment goals, responsiveness to chemotherapy, and a preference to control even palliative aspects of patient care. Conclusions Most hematologic oncologists view palliative care as end-of-life care, while solid tumor oncologists more often view palliative care as a subspecialty for co-managing complex patients. Efforts to integrate palliative care into hematologic malignancy practices will require solutions that address unique barriers to palliative care referral experienced by hematologic malignancy specialists.

Early palliative care is associated with less intensive medical care, improved quality outcomes, and cost savings at the end of life for patients with cancer. Despite recommendations that early palliative care be offered to all patients with metastatic cancer, palliative care services remain underutilized.

Consultation by a palliative medicine team led to improved patient outcomes in dyspnea, anxiety, and spiritual well-being, but failed to improve pain or depression. Palliative care for seriously ill outpatients can be effective, but barriers to implementation must be explored.

The available evidence supports the ongoing expansion of innovative outpatient palliative care service models throughout the care continuum to all patients with serious illness.