Division of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Division of Clinical Trials and Epidemiological Sciences, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2024 Apr;41(4):442-451. doi: 10.1177/10499091231180460. Epub 2023 May 28.
Clinical trial evidence on the effect of palliative care models in reducing aggressive end-of-life care is inconclusive. We previously reported on an integrated inpatient palliative care and medical oncology co-rounding model that significantly reduced hospital bed-days and postulate additional effect on reducing care aggressiveness.
To compare the effect of a co-rounding model vs usual care in reducing receipt of aggressive treatment at end-of-life.
Secondary analysis of an open-label stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial comparing two integrated palliative care models within the inpatient oncology setting. The co-rounding model involved pooling specialist palliative care and oncology into one team with daily review of admission issues, while usual care constituted discretionary specialist palliative care referrals by the oncology team. We compared odds of receiving aggressive care at end-of-life: acute healthcare utilization in last 30 days of life, death in hospital, and cancer treatment in last 14 days of life between patients in two trial arms.
2145 patients were included in the analysis, and 1803 patients died by 4th April 2021. Median overall survival was 4.90 (4.07 - 5.72) months in co-rounding and 3.75 (3.22 - 4.21) months in usual care, with no difference in survival We found no significant differences between both models with respect to receipt of aggressive care at end-of-life. (Odds Ratio .67 - 1.27; all > .05).
The co-rounding model within an inpatient setting did not reduce aggressiveness of care at end-of-life. This could be due in part to the overall focus on resolving episodic admission issues.
关于姑息治疗模式在减少临终前激进治疗方面的效果的临床试验证据尚无定论。我们之前报告了一种综合的住院姑息治疗和肿瘤内科联合查房模式,该模式显著减少了住院天数,并假设对减少治疗的激进程度有额外的影响。
比较联合查房模式与常规护理在减少临终时接受激进治疗的效果。
对一项开放标签的阶梯式楔形集群随机试验进行二次分析,该试验在住院肿瘤环境中比较了两种综合姑息治疗模式。联合查房模式涉及将专科姑息治疗和肿瘤学纳入一个团队,每天审查入院问题,而常规护理则由肿瘤团队自由决定是否转介专科姑息治疗。我们比较了两组患者在临终时接受激进治疗的可能性:生命最后 30 天内的急性医疗保健利用情况、院内死亡以及生命最后 14 天内的癌症治疗情况。
共有 2145 名患者纳入分析,截至 2021 年 4 月 4 日,有 1803 名患者死亡。联合查房组的总生存期中位数为 4.90(4.07-5.72)个月,常规护理组为 3.75(3.22-4.21)个月,两组患者的生存期无差异。我们发现两种模式在临终时接受激进治疗的比例方面没有显著差异。(比值比.67-1.27;均>.05)。
住院环境中的联合查房模式并没有降低临终时治疗的激进程度。这可能部分归因于整体关注解决偶发性入院问题。