Integration of Oncology and Palliative Care: A Systematic Review

Author:

Hui David1,Kim Yu Jung12,Park Ji Chan13,Zhang Yi14,Strasser Florian5,Cherny Nathan6,Kaasa Stein7,Davis Mellar P.8,Bruera Eduardo1

Affiliation:

1. The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA;

2. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea;

3. Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Daejeon St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Daejeon, Republic of Korea;

4. Department of Medical Oncology, Shuguang Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, People's Republic of China;

5. Oncological Palliative Medicine, Hematology-Oncology, Cantonal Hospital, St. Gallen, Switzerland;

6. Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel;

7. European Palliative Care Research Centre, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology and The Cancer Clinic, St. Olavs Hospital – Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway;

8. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA

Abstract

Abstract Background. Both the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society for Medical Oncology strongly endorse integrating oncology and palliative care (PC); however, a global consensus on what constitutes integration is currently lacking. To better understand what integration entails, we conducted a systematic review to identify articles addressing the clinical, educational, research, and administrative indicators of integration. Materials and Methods. We searched Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBase between 1948 and 2013. Two researchers independently reviewed each citation for inclusion and extracted the indicators related to integration. The inter-rater agreement was high (κ = 0.96, p < .001). Results. Of the 431 publications in our initial search, 101 were included. A majority were review articles (58%) published in oncology journals (59%) and in or after 2010 (64%, p < .001). A total of 55 articles (54%), 33 articles (32%), 24 articles (24%), and 14 articles (14%) discussed the role of outpatient clinics, community-based care, PC units, and inpatient consultation teams in integration, respectively. Process indicators of integration include interdisciplinary PC teams (n = 72), simultaneous care approach (n = 71), routine symptom screening (n = 25), PC guidelines (n = 33), care pathways (n = 11), and combined tumor boards (n = 10). A total of 66 articles (65%) mentioned early involvement of PC, 18 (18%) provided a specific timing, and 28 (28%) discussed referral criteria. A total of 45 articles (45%), 20 articles (20%), and 66 articles (65%) discussed 8, 4, and 9 indicators related to the educational, research, and administrative aspects of integration, respectively. Conclusion. Integration was a heterogeneously defined concept. Our systematic review highlighted 38 clinical, educational, research, and administrative indicators. With further refinement, these indicators may facilitate assessment of the level of integration of oncology and PC.

Funder

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

Cited by 133 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3