Acute pain management in radiation oncology: Quality of care and the impact of an integrated palliative oncology service.

Authors

null

Michael A Garcia

University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA

Michael A Garcia, Tracy A. Balboni, Steve E. Braunstein, Shannon E. Fogh, Wendy Anderson, Steve Pantilat, Allison Taylor, Alexander Spektor, Monica Shalini Krishnan, Daphne A. Haas-Kogan, Lauren Michelle Hertan

Organizations

University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Boston, MA

Research Funding

Other

Background: Radiotherapy (RT) effectively palliates bone metastases, but relief may take weeks, frequently necessitating acute pain management (APM). NCCN Guidelines for Adult Cancer Pain (V2.2015) recommend initiation/titration of analgesics for patients with pain scale value (PSV) ≥ 4. We sought to evaluate how often symptomatic patients have analgesic regimens assessed and intervened upon at radiation oncology (RO) consult for bone metastases, and the impact of a dedicated palliative RO service on APM. Methods: We reviewed consult notes for 217 bone metastases patients treated with RT at Dana Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham & Women’s Hospital (DFCI/BWH) and University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) during June-July 2008, Jan-Feb 2010, Jan-Feb 2013, and June-July 2014, time periods before and after implementation in 2011 of a dedicated palliative RO service at DFCI/BWH. For symptomatic patients, rate of assessment of analgesic regimen was recorded. Among patients with PSV ≥ 4, rate of pain intervention was recorded. The impact of a palliative RO service on these rates was evaluated. Results: Median age was 63 and median KPS was 70. Median PSV for painful bone metastases was 5 (IQR 2-7); 51% had PSV ≥ 4. Among symptomatic patients, analgesic regimen was assessed for 44.5% (51.7% at DFCI/BWH and 28.1% at UCSF). Among patients with PSV ≥ 4, pain intervention occurred for 17.2% (20.5% for DFCI/BWH, 0% for UCSF). At DFCI/BWH, consultation by a dedicated palliative RO provider was associated with higher rate of assessment of analgesic regimen (82.4% vs 47.7%, p = 0.007). At DFCI/BWH, consultation by a palliative RO provider was associated with higher rate of pain intervention (31.2% vs 7.9%, p = 0.012). There was no difference in analgesic regimen assessment or intervention between non-dedicated palliative RO providers at DFCI/BWH and UCSF (p = 0.07 and 0.09, respectively). Conclusions: At two cancer centers, half of bone metastases patients seen for RT have PSV ≥ 4, yet a minority have analgesic assessment and intervention, indicating need for APM quality improvement in RO. An integrated palliative RO service was associated with improved assessment and management of acute pain per NCCN guidelines.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2016 Palliative and Supportive Care in Oncology Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session B

Track

Biologic Basis of Symptoms and Treatment Toxicities,Psycho-oncology,End-of-Life Care,Survivorship,Management/Prevention of Symptoms and Treatment Toxicities,Psychosocial and Spiritual Care,Communication in Advanced Cancer

Sub Track

Symptom management

Citation

J Clin Oncol 34, 2016 (suppl 26S; abstr 195)

DOI

10.1200/jco.2016.34.26_suppl.195

Abstract #

195

Poster Bd #

F9

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Tingyu WANG

Abstract

2023 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Quality of colorectal and anal cancer care delivered during the COVID pandemic.

First Author: Melanie Lynn Powis

Abstract

2014 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Implementation of clinical practice guidelines in a multicenter radiation oncology department.

First Author: Sewit Teckie