Suppr超能文献

肿瘤医生、老年患者及其照护者之间基于老年综合评估的药物治疗讨论。

Geriatric assessment-driven polypharmacy discussions between oncologists, older patients, and their caregivers.

机构信息

James Wilmot Cancer Center, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, United States.

James Wilmot Cancer Center, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, United States.

出版信息

J Geriatr Oncol. 2018 Sep;9(5):534-539. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2018.02.007. Epub 2018 Mar 9.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Polypharmacy (PP) and potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are common in older adults with cancer, increasing the risk of adverse outcomes. Approaches to identifying and addressing PP/PIM are needed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients ≥70 years with advanced cancer were enrolled in this cluster-randomized study. All underwent geriatric assessment (GA), and oncologists randomized to the intervention arm received GA-driven recommendations; no information was provided to oncologists at usual care sites. For patients with PP (≥5 medications or ≥1 high-risk medication), clinic visits with treating oncologists were audiorecorded and transcribed, and discussions regarding PP/PIM identified. Quality of provider response was coded as dismissed, mentioned, acknowledged, or addressed.

RESULTS

Forty patient transcripts were analyzed (20 per arm). More discussions occurred in the intervention group (n = 81) versus the usual care group (n = 51). More concerns per patient were brought up in the intervention group (4.1 vs. 2.6, p = 0.07). Physician-initiated discussions were higher in the intervention group (73% vs. 49%, p = 0.006). More PP concerns were "addressed" in the intervention group (59% vs. 45%, p = 0.1). Oncology supportive care medication concerns were more often addressed in the usual care group (58% vs. 18%, p = 0.008), but medication management concerns were addressed more commonly in the intervention group (38% vs. 79%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

In this secondary analysis, a GA-driven intervention increased PP discussions, particularly about total number of medications and medication management. PP/PIM concerns were more commonly addressed in the intervention group, except for the subset of conversations about supportive care medications.

摘要

目的

在患有癌症的老年患者中,同时使用多种药物(PP)和潜在不适当药物(PIM)很常见,这会增加不良后果的风险。因此需要寻找识别和处理 PP/PIM 的方法。

材料和方法

本研究纳入了年龄≥70 岁的晚期癌症患者。所有患者均接受老年综合评估(GA),接受干预的肿瘤医生根据 GA 结果提供建议;而在常规护理点则不向肿瘤医生提供任何信息。对于存在 PP(≥5 种药物或≥1 种高风险药物)的患者,其与治疗肿瘤医生的就诊会被录音和转录,并记录关于 PP/PIM 的讨论。医生的回应质量编码为否认、提及、承认或处理。

结果

分析了 40 份患者记录(每组 20 份)。干预组(n=81)的讨论比常规护理组(n=51)更多。干预组每位患者提出的问题更多(4.1 比 2.6,p=0.07)。干预组医生发起的讨论更多(73%比 49%,p=0.006)。干预组更多的 PP 问题被“处理”(59%比 45%,p=0.1)。常规护理组更多地处理肿瘤支持性护理药物的问题(58%比 18%,p=0.008),但干预组更多地处理药物管理问题(38%比 79%,p=0.003)。

结论

在这项二次分析中,GA 驱动的干预增加了 PP 的讨论,尤其是关于药物的总数和药物管理。干预组更常处理 PP/PIM 的问题,但在支持性护理药物的讨论中则不然。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/21f4/6113101/ebdba68b446f/nihms951951f1.jpg

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

10

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验