Bryant Ashley Leak, Deal Allison M, Walton AnnMarie, Wood William A, Muss Hyman, Mayer Deborah K
School of Nursing, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States.
Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center Biostatistics Core, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States.
Leuk Res. 2015 Apr;39(4):406-10. doi: 10.1016/j.leukres.2015.01.006. Epub 2015 Feb 11.
Previous studies have documented use of health care services by oncology patients in the Emergency Department (ED), but little is known about the utilization of health services of patients with acute leukemia after induction therapy. The aim of this study was to examine chief reasons for ED and hospital use by patients newly diagnosed with acute leukemia patients after induction therapy up to one year after discharge. A retrospective, longitudinal study of all visits to the ED or unplanned hospital admissions at a single institution for patients with acute leukemia was conducted. Inclusion criteria were patients ≥18 years of age at time of diagnosis, a confirmed diagnosis of AML or ALL, and received and discharged from induction treatment between 2007 and 2010. Donabedian's structure-process-outcome framework guided this study examining health services utilization and assessing patient outcomes. 80 patients met the inclusion criteria; 52 had AML and 28 had ALL; median age was 48 (range: 18-76) and 29% (n=23) were non-Caucasian. 70% (n=56) were discharged from induction in remission. 81% (n=65) had at least 1 ED or hospitalization event, and 44% (n=35) had 2 or more events. Of 137 events in 65 patients, the most common reason was neutropenic fever/infection (55%), bleeding (12%), and GI problems (11%). Mean number of events for ALL was 2.43 compared to 1.33 for AML patients (p=0.02), and 2.23 for <50 years of age compared to 1.20 for those older (p=0.002). 20 patients died within one year of diagnosis. Findings from this study can help inform health services delivery and utilization among patients with acute leukemia after induction therapy. Oncology providers can anticipate discharge needs and enhance follow-up care for those at higher risk for problems needing hospitalization.
既往研究记录了肿瘤患者在急诊科(ED)使用医疗服务的情况,但对于诱导治疗后急性白血病患者的健康服务利用情况知之甚少。本研究的目的是调查诱导治疗后新诊断的急性白血病患者在出院后长达一年的时间里前往急诊室和住院的主要原因。对一家机构中急性白血病患者的所有急诊就诊或非计划住院情况进行了一项回顾性纵向研究。纳入标准为诊断时年龄≥18岁、确诊为急性髓系白血病(AML)或急性淋巴细胞白血病(ALL)且在2007年至2010年期间接受诱导治疗并出院的患者。Donabedian的结构-过程-结果框架指导了本研究,该研究考察了健康服务利用情况并评估了患者结局。80名患者符合纳入标准;52例为AML,28例为ALL;中位年龄为48岁(范围:18 - 76岁),29%(n = 23)为非白种人。70%(n = 56)诱导治疗后缓解出院。81%(n = 65)至少有1次急诊就诊或住院事件,44%(n = 35)有2次或更多次事件。在65例患者的137次事件中,最常见的原因是中性粒细胞减少性发热/感染(55%)、出血(12%)和胃肠道问题(11%)。ALL患者的平均事件数为2.43,而AML患者为1.33(p = 0.02),年龄<50岁者为2.23,而年龄较大者为1.20(p = 0.002)。20例患者在诊断后一年内死亡。本研究的结果有助于为诱导治疗后急性白血病患者的健康服务提供和利用提供信息。肿瘤学医护人员可以预测出院需求,并加强对那些有较高住院问题风险患者的随访护理。