1.28k likes | 1.58k Views
Update in Hospice and Palliative Care. Bob Arnold, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine James Tulsky, Duke University School of Medicine Sonni Mun, Mount Sinai School of Medicine. Acknowledgments. Daniel Fischberg Karl Lorenz Nathan Cherney Rosanne Leipzig Staff of AAHPM.
E N D
Update in Hospice and Palliative Care Bob Arnold, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine James Tulsky, Duke University School of Medicine Sonni Mun, Mount Sinai School of Medicine
Acknowledgments Daniel Fischberg Karl Lorenz Nathan Cherney Rosanne Leipzig Staff of AAHPM
2004: A Banner Year • NIH State the Science • (http://consensus.nih.gov/ta/024/endoflifeintro.html) • National Consensus Project • (http://www.nationalconsensusproject.org)
2004: A Banner Year • Review of Pediatric Palliative Care in NEJM • Himelstein B. P., Hilden J.M., Boldt A., Weissman D., 350: 1752-1762, April 22, 204 • Review of Palliative Care in NEJM • Morrison, R.S., Meier, D., 350:2582-2590, June 17, 2004
Objectives • Summarize seven important peer-reviewed articles from the last year • Critically analyze their methodologies and understand their conclusions • Determine if the findings are relevant to the care of your patients
Key Issues to Be Considered • Is the question important? • What are the results? • Are the results valid? • Can I apply the results to my patients
Methods • Key Word search of evidence-based reviews • Nathan Cherney database (www.cherneydatabase.org) • State of Science database
Methods • Hand search of leading journals • Selection criteria • Quality of science • Represent breadth of domains • Appeal to breadth of interest • Potential for impact
Relief of Suffering One breakthrough of the last year stands out above all others….
Case 1: Jerrold R • Recently diagnosed stage IV lung cancer • Presents to internist with chest wall pain • Has not taken any analgesics as “not sure what to take?”
Is it appropriate to start with a strong opiate? • WHO therapeutic ladder for the treatment of cancer pain • Data supporting WHO guidelines are weak Pain Severe Strong Opioid Moderate Weak Opioid Mild Non-Opioid
Starting With Strong Opioids • Study Design: Randomized controlled trial • Source of funding: Unknown • Participants: 100 patients • Inclusion Criteria: • Cancer • Not eligible for disease oriented treatment • Home palliative care • >6/10 on VAS for last week
Starting With Strong Opioids • Exclusion Criteria: • Impaired sensory or cognitive function • Predominately neuropathic pain • Previous opiates • Intervention: • Grp A: WHO pain ladder • Grp B: Start with strong opioids • Both groups can get adjuvants
Starting With Strong Opioids • Measurement • Daily • Pain diary-intensity, general condition, side effects • Once a week • Pain relief • Satisfaction with pain relief Y/N • Quality of life • Side effects • Analysis: chi-square and t-tests
Starting With Strong Opioids QOL change Pain Score change Nausea A-16.55 -1.92 315 B-16.05 -2.61 437 Pns p=0.041 p=0.0001 * There was no significant difference in vomiting, constipation, GI bleeding, or mental confusion
Key Issues • Is the question important? • Common clinical problem • What are the results? • All patients had significant pain reduction • Quicker pain relief with starting with non-opiates
Key Issues • Are the results valid? • Small study • Unclear about analgesic use • No controlling for co-morbidities • Poor measures
Key Issues • Can I apply the results to my patients? • Non-neuropathic, cancer pain • Young
Bottom Line • In selected cancer patients presenting with severe pain, starting with strong opioids will lead to better pain relief.
Case 2: Jerrold R (continued) • Stage IV lung cancer • Presents to internist six months later with persistent left arm pain (4/10) • Has received radiation to the arm • Is currently on long acting morphine, monthly bisphosphonates, steroids, and a NSAID • What can you do?
Background • What is the role of co-analgesics in pain relief? • NSAID • Steroids • Acetaminophen • Does adding acetaminophen to opiates improve pain relief in cancer patients?
Adding Acetaminophen • Study Design: RCT, placebo, crossover • Source of Funding: Au Cancer Council Janssen • Participants: 34 patients
Adding acetaminophen • Exclusion Criteria: • Recent XRT • New chemotherapy • Neuropathic pain • Severe liver disease .
Adding acetaminophen • Primary outcome measure: • Pain as measured by 0-10 verbal scale and a 10-cm VAS • Daily rating and at end of study preference • Secondary measures • Breakthrough opiates • Well-being • Side effects
Adding acetaminophen • Sample size • Analysis: ANOVA • If not normal distribution then logit transformation
Key Issues • Is the question important? • Common clinical problem • What are the results? • Consistent decrease in pain and increase in QOL if add acetaminophen • 30% had >1 point change on 0-10 scale for both pain and well-being
Key Issues • Are the results valid? • Small study • Problematic intervention • Short duration • Poor measures
Key Issues • Can I apply the results to my patients? • Consistent with other studies • Cheap and easy • Can stop if does not help
Clinical Bottom Line “Acetaminophen improved pain and well-being without major side-effects in people with cancer and persistent pain despite a strong opioid regimen.” It can be tried in patients with persistent pain
“His final wish was that all his medical bills be paid promptly.”
Case 3: Mary R • 74 year old with severe COPD • Has dyspnea at rest • Current medications • Albuterol/Atrovent • Oxygen • Steroids
Mary R’s Case: continued • Frustrated because dyspnea has made her life “miserable • Is there anything else besides her current regimen that will help alleviate her dyspnea?
Opioids for Dyspnea: Background • Dyspnea is a common symptom • Dyspnea is subjective • Can impair functional status • Particularly difficult for caregivers to observe
Opioids for Dyspnea: Background • Concern over adverse reactions • Conflicting consensus guidelines • Not enough good studies • Small sample numbers • Difficult to blind
Opioids for Dyspnea: Methods • 8 day RCT crossover • 20 mg of sustained release morphine versus placebo • Primary outcome variable: dyspnea on day #4
Opioids for Dyspnea: Methods continued Participants were recruited from outpatient clinics for respiratory, cardiac, general, and palliative medicine • Inclusion criteria • Adults with dyspnea at rest despite “optimal treatment of reversible factors” • Opioid naive • Exclusion criteria • Recent use of opioids • Confusion • Obtundation • Adverse reactions to opioids • History of substance misuse
Opioids for Dyspnea: Results • 104 screened - 87 eligible • 48 consented - 39 refused or too sick • 10 withdrew - 5 in each group