Abstract 1499P
Background
To demonstrate the status and differences in knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of lung cancer palliative care (LCPC) management, and to measure patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in cancer pain management in of China.
Methods
A questionnaire on LCPC management was used in this study, which involved a total of 2093 participants from 706 hospitals in China. Seven major components make up the questionnaire, including chi-square tests or Fisher exact probabilities to measure the differences in KAP between hospitals grades. Comparing distributions of ordered data between groups was done using the Kruskal-Wallis H test or the Mann-Whitney U test. Multiple choice questions use multiple response cross analysis. Correlation was evaluated by the Spearman correlation coefficient.
Results
84.2% participants believed that anti-tumor therapy is equally important as palliative care. The satisfaction rate of participants from grade 3 hospitals, which was significantly higher than that of grade 2 and grade 1 hospitals (χ2=27.402, P=0.002). The most common symptoms requiring LCPC was pain. The major barriers toward to LCPC were “Patients and families are concerned about the safety of long-term use of palliative care related drugs”. The most common reasons for the use of PCA treatment were 31.1% participants thought “Patients with systemic application of large doses of opioids or adverse reactions to opioids that cannot be tolerated”. The top three barriers toward PCA treatment of cancer pain were (i) worry about adverse reactions of drug overdose, (ii) worry about opioid addiction, and (iii) increase of patients' economic burden. In the past 24 months, 33.9% of the participants had not participated in online or offline training related to palliative care of lung cancer.
Conclusions
Chinese healthcare workers are in need of training for lung cancer palliative care and, in particular, for controlling cancer pain symptoms.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
1554P - Co payments in cancer patients: Analysis and estimating OOP
Presenter: Krishnamani Kalpathi
Session: Poster session 10
1555P - Estimating the social value of immuno-oncology (IO) therapies in Japan
Presenter: Tomoya Ohno
Session: Poster session 10
1556P - Current landscape of drug approvals for genitourinary (GU) cancers in North America and Europe
Presenter: Jose Tapia
Session: Poster session 10
1557P - The use of patient experience in UK NICE decision making in oncology
Presenter: Noemi Muszbek
Session: Poster session 10
1558P - Independent validation of the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (Gail model) for predicting breast cancer risk in Egyptian population
Presenter: Elaria Yacoub
Session: Poster session 10
1559P - Equity of access and clinical impact of genomic testing in patients with cancer in a UK early phase clinical trials unit
Presenter: Jonathan Poon
Session: Poster session 10
1560P - Optimal age versus real age in breast and gynaecological risk reducing surgery in BRCA1/2 carriers
Presenter: Alberta Ferrari
Session: Poster session 10
1561P - Targeted screening methodologies to select high risk individuals: LungFlag performance in Estonia Lung Cancer Screening Pilot
Presenter: Tanel Laisaar
Session: Poster session 10
1562P - The feasibility of polygenic risk score-based population screening for breast cancer: The experience from the BRIGHT study in Estonia
Presenter: Anni Lepland
Session: Poster session 10
1563P - Increasing the earlier detection of lung cancer: A toolbox for change
Presenter: Helena Wilcox
Session: Poster session 10