Context: Taste and smell abnormalities (TSA) occur throughout the cancer trajectory regardless of cancer primary site and contribute to cancer-associated malnutrition. TSA etiology is poorly understood. Tumor-related inflammation is a possible cause. Objective: This study examined the prevalence, characteristics, and severity of TSA in advanced cancer and explored the relationship between TSA and nutritional status. No previous study combined subjective and objective measures for both taste and smell assessment in this population. Method: Consecutive advanced cancer hospice patients were recruited. A modified version of the “Taste and Smell Survey” assessed subjective TSA. Validated taste strips and “Sniffin’ Sticks” were the objective measures. The abridged patient-generated subjective global assessment evaluated nutritional status. Results: A 93% prevalence of TSA in 30 patients with advanced cancer was identified. When subjective and objective evaluations were combined, 28 had taste abnormalities, 24 smell abnormalities, and 24 both. Taste changes included “persistent bad taste” (n = 18) and changes in how basic tastes were perceived. Half reported smell was not “as strong” as prediagnosis, while more than half (n = 16) had an objective smell abnormality. Most (97%) were at risk of malnutrition. Fatigue, dry mouth, early satiety, and anorexia were common nutrition-impact symptoms. No statistically significant relationship was found between TSA and malnutrition scores. Conclusions: TSA were highly prevalent. Subjective taste and smell changes did not always accord with objective TSA, suggesting both assessments are valuable. TSA characteristics varied, and particular foods tasted and smelled different and were not enjoyed as before. TSA are common, high-impact problems in advanced cancer.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Cancer is now often a chronic disease with 14.1 million new cases worldwide in 2012 (Torre et al., 2015). Cancer-related malnutrition is common and associated with greater treatment toxicity, lower quality of life and shorter survival. Yet, it is under-assessed and under-recognised (Aktas et al., 2017). Up to 85% of those with certain cancers, for example pancreas, lose weight during treatment (Argiles, 2005), and an estimated 20% die from malnutrition, not the malignancy (Capra, Ferguson, & Ried, 2001). Despite this, cancer patients are not routinely referred to dietetic services, and often only after significant weight loss (Platek, Johnson, Woolf, Makarem, & Ompad, 2015). Early nutrition interventions can improve outcomes (Paccagnella et al., 2010). Regular malnutrition screening of all cancer patients with timely referral to dietetic services appears wise (Arends et al., 2017). The specific nutrition needs in cancer vary by cancer type and phase, antitumour treatments and co-morbid illnesses. For example, metabolic syndrome, obesity and weight gain during treatment have been associated with disease progression and recurrence in breast

Objective: To determine the level of agreement between emergency physicians (EPs) and psychiatrists regarding the need for acute psychiatric hospitalization and treatment for patients presenting with alleged psychiatric complaints. Methods: A prospective, cross‐sectional assessment of concordance between EPs and psychiatrists in psychiatric admission decisions was performed at an urban county, teaching hospital ED. The participants had been brought to the ED for psychiatric evaluation. The patients were interviewed by an attending EP or a senior‐level resident, and a tentative impression and disposition were determined pfior to an independent examination and final disposition by a psychiatrist. Strength of physician group agrement was determined using the k statistic. Results: The patient mean age was 37.5 ± 15 years; 51% were men. The most common reasons for evaluation were disruptive behavior (28%), overdose (24%), and danger to self (23%). Of the 156 patients, 47 (28.7%) were sent home without treatment, 10 (6.3%) were determined to need only medical treatment, and 6 (3.7%) were released with outpatient psychiatric treatment. There were 84 (55.7%) patients admitted for psychiatric treatment. The EPs and psychiatrists had only moderate agreement regarding danger to self (k = 0.44), danger to others (k = 0.40). substance abuse as the primary problem (k = 0.50), and need for psychiatric hospitalization (k = 0.54). Conclusion: Moderate agreement between EPs and psychiatrists in key impressions and admission decisions suggests that shared training in psychiatric decision making, especially during residency training, is desired in this setting.

No abstract

PURPOSE: Credible evidence-based diet and nutrition advice is essential for patients with cancer. This study aimed to explore what advice patients with cancer obtained before a formal dietetic visit. METHODS: A multicenter, observational study was conducted in seven hospital-based oncology services. Consecutive patients were recruited at first dietetic assessment. In addition to routine dietetic assessment, participants completed a four-item questionnaire describing diet and nutrition advice obtained since diagnosis. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients participated. More than 80% had multiple nutrition-impact symptoms. In total, 53 (69%) obtained advice from professional and nonprofessional sources before dietetic visit. Family and friends were the most common sources of advice. More than one third got advice from (nondietetic) healthcare professionals. Most advice related to “foods to include” (61%) and “foods to avoid” (54%) in the diet. Many of the “foods to avoid” were important sources of micro- and macronutrients. Advice about dietary supplements (31%) and specific diets (28%) was common, rarely evidence-based, and frequently contradictory. Participants found it difficult to discern what advice was trustworthy and reliable. Despite this, most followed the advice. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients received diet and nutrition advice before first dietetic visit. Most of this came from nonprofessional sources. Any advice from nondietetic healthcare professionals was inconsistent or vague. This was mainly related to the avoidance and/or inclusion of particular foods and was often contradictory. Nevertheless, patients usually followed such advice fully. To help manage their frequent nutrition-impact symptoms and resolve the contradictory advice they had received, many expressed the need for earlier professional dietetic consultation.