Why the study?
Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for patients with cancer admitted to acute care settings, but less is known about its use in palliative care settings.
Do medical oncologists and palliative care physicians differ in their recommendations for thromboprophylaxis in inpatients with advanced cancer?
Do medical oncologists and palliative care physicians differ in their recommendations for thromboprophylaxis in inpatients with advanced cancer?
Medical oncologists are significantly more likely to recommend thromboprophylaxis for inpatients with advanced cancer compared to palliative care physicians.
MO more likely than PC physicians to recommend TP; leaves open optimal use and need for consensus guidelines.
BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer are increasingly discharged from inpatient settings following focused symptom management admissions. Thromboprophylaxis (TP) is recommended for patients with cancer admitted to acute care settings; less is known about TP use in palliative care (PC) settings. This study explored the opinions of Canadian medical oncologists (MO) and PC physicians regarding the use of TP for inpatients with advanced cancer. METHODS: A fractional factorial survey designed to evaluate the impact of patient factors (age, clinical setting, reason for admission, pre-admission performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; ECOG), and risk of bleeding on anticoagulation) and physician demographics on recommending TP was administered by email to Canadian MO and PC physicians. Each respondent received eight vignettes randomly selected from a set of 32. Hierarchical regression was used to evaluate the odds of prescribing TP adjusted for patient factors. RESULTS: 606 MO and 491 PC physicians were surveyed; response rates were 11.1% and 15.0%, respectively. MO were predominantly male (59.7%); PC female (60.3%); most worked in academic environments (90.3% MO; 73.9% PC). Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression demonstrated that all patient factors except age were associated with prescribing TP (ORs range: from 1.34 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.77) for good ECOG, to 2.53 (95% CI 1.9 to 3.37), for reversible reason for admission). Controlling for these factors, medical specialty was independently associated with recommending TP (OR for MO 2.09 (95% CI 1.56 to 2.8)). CONCLUSIONS: MO have higher odds of recommending TP for inpatients with advanced cancer than PC physicians. Further research exploring the drivers of these differing practices is warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hannon et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:
More from BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care