Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session: Breast cancer - early stage, locally advanced & metastatic, CNS tumours, Developmental therapeutics, Genitourinary tumours - prostate & non-prostate, Palliative care, Psycho-oncology, Public health policy, Sarcoma, Supportive care

1178 - Current status of the integration of oncology and palliative care in Japan: A nationwide survey.

Date

22 Oct 2018

Session

Poster display session: Breast cancer - early stage, locally advanced & metastatic, CNS tumours, Developmental therapeutics, Genitourinary tumours - prostate & non-prostate, Palliative care, Psycho-oncology, Public health policy, Sarcoma, Supportive care

Topics

End-of-Life Care

Tumour Site

Presenters

Uneno Yu

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2018) 29 (suppl_8): viii548-viii556. 10.1093/annonc/mdy295

Authors

U. Yu1, K. Sato2, T. Morita3, M. Mori4, C. Shimizu5, Y. Horie6, M. Hirakawa6, T.E. Nakajima6, S. Tsuneto7, M. Muto1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Department Of Therapeutic Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 606-8507 - Kyoto city/JP
  • 2 Department Of Nursing, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 466-8560 - Nagoya city/JP
  • 3 Division Of Supportive And Palliative Care, Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital, 433-8558 - Hamamatsu city/JP
  • 4 Palliative Care Team, Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital, 433-8558 - Hamamatsu city/JP
  • 5 Breast Center, Center Hospital of the National Center for Global Health and Medicine, 162-8655 - Tokyo/JP
  • 6 Department Of Clinical Oncology, St Marianna University School of Medicine, 216-8511 - Kawasaki city/JP
  • 7 Department Of Human Health Sciences, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 606-8507 - Kyoto city/JP

Resources

Login to access the resources on OncologyPRO.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 1178

Background

Based on recommendations from several agencies, including the European Society for Medical Oncology, palliative care (PC) services are increasingly recognised as an essential part of oncology care. However, the implementation of integration of oncology and palliative care (IOP) seems to be evolving slowly and detailed progress of IOP remain unclear. This was a cross-sectional nationwide survey to clarify the current status of IOP in Japan.

Methods

We performed comparison between designated cancer hospitals (DCHs) and non-designated cancer hospitals (non-DCHs), since considerable number of patients in Japan are receiving cancer treatment at non-DCHs. We distributed the questionnaire to executives or directors of oncology departments at cancer hospitals in November 2017 and sent a reminder mail later. Our questionnaire was developed based on indicators of IOP with international consensus. We conducted descriptive statistics, t-tests and Cochrane-Armitage trend tests where appropriate. To adjust the difference of inpatient beds scale, estimates at non-DCHs were weighted by the distribution of inpatient beds at DCHs.

Results

Among the 399 DCHs and 478 non-DCHs that were surveyed, 269 (67%) and 259 (54%) responded, respectively. DCHs had significantly more PC resources than non-DCHs did (e.g. both full-time physicians and nurses on a PC team, 53% vs. 14% (p < 0.001); the availability of outpatient PC service ≥ 3days per week, 48% vs. 21% (p < 0.001)). Clinical tools for PC services were well equipped (e.g. symptom management guidelines, 89% vs. 79% (p = 0.238); PC referral criteria, 72% vs. 59% (p = 0.077)). However, strategies to identify suitable patients for PC referral seemed to be undeveloped (e.g. clinical care pathways, 17% vs. 5% (p < 0.001); referral using time trigger, 9% vs 8% (p = 0.358); referral using needs trigger, 31% vs. 20% (p = 0.820)). Mutual rotation training for both oncology and PC fellows and research opportunities on IOP were limited.

Conclusions

Non-DCHs face a severe lack of PC resources, whereas DCHs might have relatively more resources to enhance IOP. Both education and research opportunities for IOP were limited. Further research is warranted to identify specific barriers to and facilitators for implementation of IOP.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University.

Funding

Ministry of Health Labor and Welfare in Japan (Health Labor Science Research Grant).

Editorial Acknowledgement

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.