No abstract

These novel findings will inform the development of valid and reliable tools to assess pain in older cancer patients with delirium.

No abstract

Background Early palliative care (EPC) improves the quality of life but may not be feasible for all patients with advanced cancer. Symptom screening has been suggested to triage patients for EPC, but scant evidence exists for this practice. Methods We conducted a subgroup analysis of a cluster‐randomized controlled trial of EPC vs. standard oncology care according to patients' baseline symptom scores (high [>23] vs. low [≤23] Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Distress Score [ESAS SDS]). A linear mixed‐effects model was used to account for correlation within clusters, adjusting for the baseline outcome score and all covariates in the original trial. Results Among the 461 participants, baseline symptom scores were high in 229 patients (127 intervention, 102 control) and low in 232 (101 intervention and 131 control). Among those with high baseline symptoms, there was improved quality of life in the EPC arm compared to controls at 4 months (adjusted difference in primary outcome of FACIT‐Sp change score [95% CI], 8.7 [2.8 to 14.5], p = 0.01; adjusted difference in QUAL‐E, 4.2 [0.9–7.5], p = 0.02); there was also improved satisfaction with care (6.9 [3.8–9.9], p = 0.001) and clinician‐patient interactions (−1.7 [−3.4 to −0.1], p = 0.04), but no significant difference in ESAS SDS (−5.6 [−12.7 to 1.4], p = 0.11). In the low baseline symptom group, there were no significant differences between arms for any outcomes. Conclusion EPC improved quality of life, satisfaction with care, and clinician‐patient interactions only in those with high baseline symptoms. Symptom severity may be an appropriate criterion to trigger early referrals to palliative care.

Delirium complicates pain assessment and management in advanced cancer. This retrospective cohort study compared health-care workers' (HCWs) cancer pain judgments between older patients with advanced cancer with and without a diagnosis of delirium. We reviewed HCWs' daily chart notations about pain presence and good pain control in 149 inpatients with advanced cancer, ≥65 years of age, admitted to a palliative care inpatient unit. Any day with 1 or more notations of pain presence was counted as 1 day with pain; days with notation(s) indicating good pain control were similarly counted. Proportions of days that HCWs judged inpatients to have pain and good pain control were calculated. Patients with and without a delirium diagnosis were compared on both pain outcomes. The moderating effect of highest analgesic class administered was examined. Although most patients received opioid analgesics, mean proportions of days with judged pain were high (39%-60%) and mean proportions of days with judged good pain control were low (<25%) across groups. Among patients receiving either opioid or nonopioid medication, patients with delirium demonstrated lower proportions of days with judged good pain control than patients without delirium ( P ≤ .001), even though groups did not differ in proportions of days with judged pain ( P = .62). Cancer pain is difficult to manage in advanced cancer, especially when delirium is present; however, misinterpretation of delirium symptoms as pain cues may inflate pain judgments. Findings require replication but suggest the need for better pain assessment in older patients with advanced cancer and delirium.

The present study suggests that the combined physical and interpersonal assaults experienced during captivity have adverse effects on combatants and on attachment security, even three decades later. More important, in ex-POWs the relationship between these domains appears to be interactive and mutual, with one reinforcing the other, and vice versa.

No abstract

Despite enormous changes in medicine over the last 50 years, the oral presentation of newly admitted patients remains a core activity in academic teaching hospitals. With increased pace and complexity of care, it is time to refresh this tradition, as its efficiency and utility in contemporary practice are open to question. In this paper, we suggest a revised structure to help presenters organize their thoughts before the oral presentation and provide an online tool for doing so. We then offer tips on how to present the facts and inferences to the team in a compelling and memorable fashion; how to tell a story. Organizing information and oral presentation are advanced skills that require repeated practice to learn.