End of Life Care Practices at a Tertiary Cancer Centre in India: An Observational Study.

Bhanu P Maurya, Raghav Gupta, Puneet Rathore, Seema Mishra, Sachidanand J Bharati, Vinod Kumar, Nishkarsh Gupta, Rakesh Garg, Sushma Bhatnagar
{"title":"End of Life Care Practices at a Tertiary Cancer Centre in India: An Observational Study.","authors":"Bhanu P Maurya, Raghav Gupta, Puneet Rathore, Seema Mishra, Sachidanand J Bharati, Vinod Kumar, Nishkarsh Gupta, Rakesh Garg, Sushma Bhatnagar","doi":"10.1177/10499091241268585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>PurposeTo assess the End of life care (EOLC ) practices and the magnitude of futile care in a tertiary cancer center. To find out the barriers in provision of good EOLC in cancer patients.MethodsAn observational study was done on 129 patients. Patients were enrolled using the palliative prognostic index (PPI) in the end of life stages. Socio-demographic and clinical details were recorded. Detailed counselling done by the palliative physician or the oncologist was recorded. The barriers in provision of care were recorded.ResultsIn this study initial experience of 129 patients were analyzed. PPI score was >6 (survival shorter than 3 weeks) in 85 (65.89%) ; 34 (26.36%) had PPI score between >4 to 6 (survival between 3 to 6 weeks); and 10 (7.75%) patients had PPI score less than equal to 4( survival more than 6 weeks).77 (59.69%) patients preferred home as their place for EOLC while 41(31.78%) preferred hospital, 7 (5.43%) preferred hospice while 4 (3.10%) opted ICU for their EOLC . The most common barrier associated was caregiver related in 34 case, followed by physician related in 14 cases and patients related in 3 cases, because of hope of being cured in hospital, social stigma, fear of worsening of symptoms at home, denial.ConclusionEOLC is the least studied part of patient care with various barriers. With proper communication and a good palliative care support, futile treatment can be avoided. With healthy communication we can empower family members and patients for a good EOLC.</p>","PeriodicalId":94222,"journal":{"name":"The American journal of hospice & palliative care","volume":" ","pages":"477-482"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American journal of hospice & palliative care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091241268585","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeTo assess the End of life care (EOLC ) practices and the magnitude of futile care in a tertiary cancer center. To find out the barriers in provision of good EOLC in cancer patients.MethodsAn observational study was done on 129 patients. Patients were enrolled using the palliative prognostic index (PPI) in the end of life stages. Socio-demographic and clinical details were recorded. Detailed counselling done by the palliative physician or the oncologist was recorded. The barriers in provision of care were recorded.ResultsIn this study initial experience of 129 patients were analyzed. PPI score was >6 (survival shorter than 3 weeks) in 85 (65.89%) ; 34 (26.36%) had PPI score between >4 to 6 (survival between 3 to 6 weeks); and 10 (7.75%) patients had PPI score less than equal to 4( survival more than 6 weeks).77 (59.69%) patients preferred home as their place for EOLC while 41(31.78%) preferred hospital, 7 (5.43%) preferred hospice while 4 (3.10%) opted ICU for their EOLC . The most common barrier associated was caregiver related in 34 case, followed by physician related in 14 cases and patients related in 3 cases, because of hope of being cured in hospital, social stigma, fear of worsening of symptoms at home, denial.ConclusionEOLC is the least studied part of patient care with various barriers. With proper communication and a good palliative care support, futile treatment can be avoided. With healthy communication we can empower family members and patients for a good EOLC.

印度一家三级癌症中心的临终关怀实践:观察研究。
目的:评估一家三级癌症中心的生命末期护理(EOLC)实践以及无效护理的严重程度。方法:对 129 名癌症患者进行观察研究:对 129 名患者进行了观察研究。方法:对 129 名患者进行了观察性研究,采用生命末期姑息预后指数(PPI)对患者进行登记。记录了社会人口学和临床细节。记录了姑息治疗医生或肿瘤学家提供的详细咨询。记录了在提供护理服务时遇到的障碍:本研究分析了 129 名患者的初步经验。有 85 名患者(65.89%)的 PPI 评分大于 6 分(存活时间短于 3 周);34 名患者(26.36%)的 PPI 评分介于大于 4 分至 6 分之间(存活时间介于 3 周至 6 周之间);10 名患者(7.75%)的 PPI 评分小于等于 4 分(存活时间超过 6 周)。77 名患者(59.69%)选择在家进行临终关怀,41 名患者(31.78%)选择医院,7 名患者(5.43%)选择临终关怀,4 名患者(3.10%)选择重症监护室进行临终关怀。最常见的障碍与护理人员有关的有 34 例,其次是与医生有关的有 14 例,与病人有关的有 3 例:结论:临终关怀是病人护理中研究最少的部分,存在各种障碍。通过适当的沟通和良好的姑息关怀支持,可以避免无用的治疗。通过健康的沟通,我们可以增强家庭成员和患者的能力,从而实现良好的临终关怀。
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