University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute; University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; Institute for Health Policy Studies; Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA; and Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.
J Oncol Pract. 2014 Mar;10(2):e37-44. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2013.001130. Epub 2013 Dec 3.
Recent research and professional guidelines support expanded use of outpatient subspecialty palliative care in oncology, but provider referral practices vary widely. We sought to explore oncologist factors that influence referrals to outpatient palliative care.
Multisite, qualitative interview study at three academic cancer centers in the United States with well-established palliative care clinics. Seventy-four medical oncologists participated in semistructured interviews between February and October 2012. The interview guide asked about experiences and decision making regarding outpatient palliative care use. A multidisciplinary team analyzed interview transcripts using constant comparative methods to inductively develop and refine themes related to palliative care referral decisions.
We identified three main oncologist barriers to subspecialty palliative care referrals at sites with comprehensive palliative care clinics: persistent conceptions of palliative care as an alternative philosophy of care incompatible with cancer therapy, a predominant belief that providing palliative care is an integral part of the oncologist's role, and a lack of knowledge about locally available services. Participants described their views of subspecialty palliative care as evolving in response to increasing availability of services and positive referral experiences, but emphasized that views of palliative care as valuable in addition to standard oncology care were not universally shared by oncologists.
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.
最近的研究和专业指南支持在肿瘤学中扩大使用门诊专科姑息治疗,但提供者的转诊实践差异很大。我们旨在探讨影响姑息治疗门诊转诊的肿瘤学家因素。
在美国三个学术癌症中心进行的多地点、定性访谈研究,这些中心都有成熟的姑息治疗诊所。74 名肿瘤内科医生于 2012 年 2 月至 10 月期间参加了半结构化访谈。访谈指南询问了关于姑息治疗门诊使用的经验和决策。一个多学科团队使用恒定性比较方法分析访谈记录,以归纳和完善与姑息治疗转诊决策相关的主题。
我们确定了在有综合姑息治疗诊所的地点,肿瘤学家转诊到专科姑息治疗的三个主要障碍:持续认为姑息治疗是一种与癌症治疗不相容的替代治疗理念;主要认为提供姑息治疗是肿瘤学家角色的一个组成部分;以及对当地可用服务缺乏了解。参与者描述了他们对专科姑息治疗的看法,认为随着服务的日益普及和转诊经验的增加,他们的看法正在不断演变,但强调姑息治疗除了标准肿瘤治疗之外的价值,并不是所有肿瘤学家都普遍认同的。
要改善肿瘤学中的姑息治疗提供,可能需要在增加服务提供之外做出努力。提高对专科姑息治疗如何补充标准肿瘤治疗的认识,并发展肿瘤学家和姑息治疗医生合作以及整合各自技能的方法,可能会有所帮助。