A randomized study of inpatient versus outpatient continuous intravenous infusion chemotherapy: psychosocial aspects.

D M Magid, E E Vokes, R L Schilsky, C M Guarnieri, S M Whaling, R R Weichselbaum, W R Panje
{"title":"A randomized study of inpatient versus outpatient continuous intravenous infusion chemotherapy: psychosocial aspects.","authors":"D M Magid,&nbsp;E E Vokes,&nbsp;R L Schilsky,&nbsp;C M Guarnieri,&nbsp;S M Whaling,&nbsp;R R Weichselbaum,&nbsp;W R Panje","doi":"10.1089/sct.1989.5.137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study was designed to test whether previously untreated patients with head and neck cancer could effectively manage home continuous infusion chemotherapy, and to compare their acceptance and adjustment to home versus inpatient treatment. Twenty-two patients received 3-4 cycles of induction chemotherapy and a 5-day continuous intravenous infusion (CVI). Patients were randomized to receive the CVI portion of cycle 1 either in the hospital via a standard chemotherapy delivery device or at home via the Travenol Infusor, a portable and disposable drug delivery system. For their second cycle of chemotherapy, patients crossed over to the alternate drug delivery method. Patients who did not want to receive their treatment at home received their chemotherapy as inpatients via the Infusor. Therefore, all patients received treatment with both drug delivery methods. Nineteen patients were evaluable for this study. Eleven patients received at least one cycle of home CVI chemotherapy, and adjusted well to this method of drug delivery. Levels of psychological distress decreased for this group of patients when receiving outpatient chemotherapy compared to their inpatient cycles. The eight patients who received all chemotherapy cycles as inpatients (refused home treatment) were found to be less educated and reported greater physical impairment prior to study entry than future home CVI acceptors. Levels of psychological distress in this group increased with each inpatient chemotherapy cycle. We conclude that home CVI chemotherapy may be an alternative to inpatient treatment for patients who have had at least one cycle of inpatient chemotherapy. The best candidates for home treatment are patients with unimpaired daily functioning and a minimum high school education.</p>","PeriodicalId":21792,"journal":{"name":"Selective cancer therapeutics","volume":"5 3","pages":"137-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1989-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/sct.1989.5.137","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Selective cancer therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/sct.1989.5.137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

This study was designed to test whether previously untreated patients with head and neck cancer could effectively manage home continuous infusion chemotherapy, and to compare their acceptance and adjustment to home versus inpatient treatment. Twenty-two patients received 3-4 cycles of induction chemotherapy and a 5-day continuous intravenous infusion (CVI). Patients were randomized to receive the CVI portion of cycle 1 either in the hospital via a standard chemotherapy delivery device or at home via the Travenol Infusor, a portable and disposable drug delivery system. For their second cycle of chemotherapy, patients crossed over to the alternate drug delivery method. Patients who did not want to receive their treatment at home received their chemotherapy as inpatients via the Infusor. Therefore, all patients received treatment with both drug delivery methods. Nineteen patients were evaluable for this study. Eleven patients received at least one cycle of home CVI chemotherapy, and adjusted well to this method of drug delivery. Levels of psychological distress decreased for this group of patients when receiving outpatient chemotherapy compared to their inpatient cycles. The eight patients who received all chemotherapy cycles as inpatients (refused home treatment) were found to be less educated and reported greater physical impairment prior to study entry than future home CVI acceptors. Levels of psychological distress in this group increased with each inpatient chemotherapy cycle. We conclude that home CVI chemotherapy may be an alternative to inpatient treatment for patients who have had at least one cycle of inpatient chemotherapy. The best candidates for home treatment are patients with unimpaired daily functioning and a minimum high school education.

住院患者与门诊患者持续静脉输注化疗的随机研究:心理社会方面。
本研究旨在检测既往未接受治疗的头颈癌患者是否能够有效地管理家庭持续输注化疗,并比较他们对家庭治疗和住院治疗的接受和适应。22例患者接受3-4个周期诱导化疗和5天连续静脉输注(CVI)。患者被随机分配接受第1周期的CVI部分,要么在医院通过标准化疗给药装置,要么在家中通过曲伏诺输注器(一种便携式和一次性给药系统)。在第二个化疗周期中,患者转而使用另一种给药方法。不想在家接受治疗的患者通过Infusor作为住院患者接受化疗。因此,所有患者均接受两种给药方法的治疗。本研究可评估19例患者。11例患者接受了至少一个周期的家庭CVI化疗,并很好地适应了这种给药方法。与住院周期相比,接受门诊化疗的这组患者的心理困扰水平有所下降。8名接受所有化疗周期的住院患者(拒绝家庭治疗)被发现受教育程度较低,在研究开始前报告的身体损伤比未来的家庭CVI受体更大。这组患者的心理困扰水平随着每个住院化疗周期的增加而增加。我们的结论是,对于至少接受过一个周期住院化疗的患者,家庭CVI化疗可能是一种替代住院治疗的方法。家庭治疗的最佳候选人是日常功能未受损的患者和最低高中教育程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信