1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evolution of Oncology and Palliative Nursing in Meeting the Changing Landscape of Cancer Care

      review-article
      ,
      Journal of Healthcare Engineering
      Hindawi

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Nursing is a vital health profession. In almost all clinical and hospital settings, nurses offer primary palliative care. Nurses are recognized for their strong philosophy of care for a wide spectrum of disorders. No matter the sickness, condition, or clinical situation, palliative care is considered essential in nursing practice. Palliative care nursing is the provision of palliative care services to cancer patients and their families, regardless of whether cancer can be cured or not. A large body of evidence shows that early palliative care nursing integration improves the quality of life and survival of cancer patients. Due to the intricacy of cancer, the landscape of cancer care is shifting. Cancer is a life-threatening disease with a high mortality rate. Oncology nurses' skills and experience are vital in providing specialized patient care and fulfilling the needs of patients and their families. The current study examines the shifting environment of palliative care nursing in oncology. However, new palliative care nursing approaches are required to adapt to the evolving cancer scenario.

          Related collections

          Most cited references65

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Early palliative care for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

          Patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer have a substantial symptom burden and may receive aggressive care at the end of life. We examined the effect of introducing palliative care early after diagnosis on patient-reported outcomes and end-of-life care among ambulatory patients with newly diagnosed disease. We randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer to receive either early palliative care integrated with standard oncologic care or standard oncologic care alone. Quality of life and mood were assessed at baseline and at 12 weeks with the use of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) scale and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, respectively. The primary outcome was the change in the quality of life at 12 weeks. Data on end-of-life care were collected from electronic medical records. Of the 151 patients who underwent randomization, 27 died by 12 weeks and 107 (86% of the remaining patients) completed assessments. Patients assigned to early palliative care had a better quality of life than did patients assigned to standard care (mean score on the FACT-L scale [in which scores range from 0 to 136, with higher scores indicating better quality of life], 98.0 vs. 91.5; P=0.03). In addition, fewer patients in the palliative care group than in the standard care group had depressive symptoms (16% vs. 38%, P=0.01). Despite the fact that fewer patients in the early palliative care group than in the standard care group received aggressive end-of-life care (33% vs. 54%, P=0.05), median survival was longer among patients receiving early palliative care (11.6 months vs. 8.9 months, P=0.02). Among patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, early palliative care led to significant improvements in both quality of life and mood. As compared with patients receiving standard care, patients receiving early palliative care had less aggressive care at the end of life but longer survival. (Funded by an American Society of Clinical Oncology Career Development Award and philanthropic gifts; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01038271.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020.

            Current estimates of the costs of cancer care in the United States are based on data from 2003 and earlier. However, incidence, survival, and practice patterns have been changing for the majority of cancers. Cancer prevalence was estimated and projected by phase of care (initial year following diagnosis, continuing, and last year of life) and tumor site for 13 cancers in men and 16 cancers in women through 2020. Cancer prevalence was calculated from cancer incidence and survival models estimated from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program data. Annualized net costs were estimated from recent SEER-Medicare linkage data, which included claims through 2006 among beneficiaries aged 65 years and older with a cancer diagnosis. Control subjects without cancer were identified from a 5% random sample of all Medicare beneficiaries residing in the SEER areas to adjust for expenditures not related to cancer. All cost estimates were adjusted to 2010 dollars. Different scenarios for assumptions about future trends in incidence, survival, and cost were assessed with sensitivity analysis. Assuming constant incidence, survival, and cost, we projected 13.8 and 18.1 million cancer survivors in 2010 and 2020, respectively, with associated costs of cancer care of 124.57 and 157.77 billion 2010 US dollars. This 27% increase in medical costs reflects US population changes only. The largest increases were in the continuing phase of care for prostate cancer (42%) and female breast cancer (32%). Projections of current trends in incidence (declining) and survival (increasing) had small effects on 2020 estimates. However, if costs of care increase annually by 2% in the initial and last year of life phases of care, the total cost in 2020 is projected to be $173 billion, which represents a 39% increase from 2010. The national cost of cancer care is substantial and expected to increase because of population changes alone. Our findings have implications for policy makers in planning and allocation of resources.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Associations between end-of-life discussions, patient mental health, medical care near death, and caregiver bereavement adjustment.

              Talking about death can be difficult. Without evidence that end-of-life discussions improve patient outcomes, physicians must balance their desire to honor patient autonomy against a concern of inflicting psychological harm. To determine whether end-of-life discussions with physicians are associated with fewer aggressive interventions. A US multisite, prospective, longitudinal cohort study of patients with advanced cancer and their informal caregivers (n = 332 dyads), September 2002-February 2008. Patients were followed up from enrollment to death, a median of 4.4 months later. Bereaved caregivers' psychiatric illness and quality of life was assessed a median of 6.5 months later. Aggressive medical care (eg, ventilation, resuscitation) and hospice in the final week of life. Secondary outcomes included patients' mental health and caregivers' bereavement adjustment. One hundred twenty-three of 332 (37.0%) patients reported having end-of-life discussions before baseline. Such discussions were not associated with higher rates of major depressive disorder (8.3% vs 5.8%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-3.32), or more worry (mean McGill score, 6.5 vs 7.0; P = .19). After propensity-score weighted adjustment, end-of-life discussions were associated with lower rates of ventilation (1.6% vs 11.0%; adjusted OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.83), resuscitation (0.8% vs 6.7%; adjusted OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03-0.80), ICU admission (4.1% vs 12.4%; adjusted OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.14-0.90), and earlier hospice enrollment (65.6% vs 44.5%; adjusted OR, 1.65;95% CI, 1.04-2.63). In adjusted analyses, more aggressive medical care was associated with worse patient quality of life (6.4 vs 4.6; F = 3.61, P = .01) and higher risk of major depressive disorder in bereaved caregivers (adjusted OR, 3.37; 95% CI, 1.12-10.13), whereas longer hospice stays were associated with better patient quality of life (mean score, 5.6 vs 6.9; F = 3.70, P = .01). Better patient quality of life was associated with better caregiver quality of life at follow-up (beta = .20; P = .001). End-of-life discussions are associated with less aggressive medical care near death and earlier hospice referrals. Aggressive care is associated with worse patient quality of life and worse bereavement adjustment.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Healthc Eng
                J Healthc Eng
                JHE
                Journal of Healthcare Engineering
                Hindawi
                2040-2295
                2040-2309
                2022
                16 April 2022
                : 2022
                : 3831705
                Affiliations
                School of Nursing, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou 646000, China
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Liaqat Ali

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7920-0790
                Article
                10.1155/2022/3831705
                9034913
                5bb54962-bdd2-491c-bc15-a35235d5d07e
                Copyright © 2022 Kaiping Zhou and Jing Fu.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 18 February 2022
                : 24 March 2022
                Categories
                Review Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article