Medical Oncologists' Attitudes and Practice in Cancer Pain Management: A National Survey

Author:

Breuer Brenda1,Fleishman Stewart B.1,Cruciani Ricardo A.1,Portenoy Russell K.1

Affiliation:

1. Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, NY.

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the attitudes, knowledge, and practices of US medical oncologists that are related to management of cancer pain. Methods An anonymous survey was mailed to a geographically representative sample of medical oncologists randomly selected from the American Medical Association's Physician Master File. Results From a total of 2,000 oncologists, 354 responded to the original questionnaire and 256 responded to one of two subsequent shortened versions (overall response rate, 32%). Responders were demographically similar to all US medical oncologists. Using numeric rating scales of 0 to 10, oncologists rated their specialty highly for the ability to manage cancer pain (median, 7; interquartile range [IQR], 6 to 8) but rated their peers as more conservative prescribers than themselves (median, 3; IQR, 2 to 5). The quality of pain management training during medical school and residency was rated as 3 (IQR, 1 to 5) and 5 (IQR, 3 to 7), respectively. The most important barriers to pain management were poor assessment (median, 6; IQR, 4 to 7) and patient reluctance to take opioids (median, 6; IQR, 5 to 7) or report pain (median, 6; IQR, 4 to 7). Other barriers included physician reluctance to prescribe opioids (median, 5; IQR, 3 to 7) and perceived excessive regulation (median, 4; IQR, 2 to 7). In response to two vignettes describing challenging clinical scenarios, 60% and 87%, respectively, endorsed treatment decisions that would be considered unacceptable by pain specialists. Frequent referrals to pain or palliative care specialists were reported by only 14% and 16%, respectively. Conclusion These data suggest that, for more than 20 years, a focus on cancer pain has not adequately addressed the perception of treatment barriers or limitations in pain-related knowledge and practice within the oncology community. Additional efforts are needed to achieve meaningful progress.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

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