• Gynecologic oncology · Sep 2010

    Hospice enrollment for terminally ill patients with gynecologic malignancies: impact on outcomes and interventions.

    • Erin A Keyser, Beverly G Reed, William J Lowery, Michael J Sundborg, William E Winter, John A Ward, and Charles A Leath.
    • Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Brooke Army Medical Center, Ft. Sam Houston, TX 78234, USA.
    • Gynecol. Oncol. 2010 Sep 1;118(3):274-7.

    ObjectiveTo determine survival and interventions for patients with non-curative gynecologic malignancies based on supportive care enrollment.MethodsAn IRB approved retrospective review identified patients with recurrent/persistent gynecologic cancers from 2002 to 2008. Demographics, therapy, clinicopathologic data, hospice utilization, surgical/invasive procedures and survival were collected. Patients were considered hospice enrollees if they enrolled following recommendation from their provider (HOSPICE); however, patients that declined hospice when recommended were considered (NO HOSPICE), regardless if they ultimately received supportive care. Standard statistical tests including: t-test and Kaplan-Meier with Log Rank were used.ResultsEighty-one patients were identified: 29 patients (36%) NO HOSPICE and 52 (64%) HOSPICE. Mean age was 61. Most patients had ovarian cancer (54.3%), were white (61.7%) and had disease recurrence (72%). Patients utilized a median of 3 anti-neoplastic therapies (range 0-10) for recurrent or progressive/persistent disease. Median time receiving hospice care was 1week for NO HOSPICE patients versus 8weeks HOSPICE patients (p<0.0005). In a subset of patients with recurrent disease, median overall survival for NO HOSPICE patients was 9months (95% CI 5.9-12.1months) versus 17months (95% CI 11.1-22.9months) for HOSPICE patients (p=0.002). NO HOSPICE patients were more likely to have a procedure performed (55% vs. 31%) within 4weeks of their death, including the administration of chemotherapy OR 2.4 (95% CI 1.1-7.1, p=0.036).ConclusionsWhile retrospective reviews evaluating hospice are challenging, our data suggest no detrimental impact on survival for hospice patients. Continued evaluation for patients at the end-of-life is necessary in order to optimize resource utilization.Published by Elsevier Inc.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.