Effect of medical audit on prescription of palliative radiotherapy

Patient preference for radiotherapy fractionation schedule in the palliation of painful bone metastases

PURPOSE

The radiotherapeutic management of painful bone metastases is controversial, with several institutional and national guidelines advocating use of single-fraction radiotherapy. We aimed to determine patient choice of fractionation schedule after involvement in the decision-making process by use of a decision board.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Advantages and disadvantages of two fractionation schedules (24 Gy in six fractions v 8 Gy in one fraction) used in the randomized Dutch Bone Metastasis Study were discussed with patients using a decision board. Patients were asked to choose a fractionation schedule, to give reasons for their choice, and to indicate level of satisfaction with being involved in decision making.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients were entered. Eighty-five percent (95% confidence interval, 74% to 93%) chose 24 Gy in six fractions over 8 Gy in one fraction (P <.0005). Variables including age, sex, performance status, tumor type, pain score, and paying class were not significantly related to patient choice. Multiple fractionation was chosen for lower re-treatment rates (92%) and fewer fractures (32%). Single-fraction treatment was chosen for cost (11%) and convenience (89%). Eighty-four percent of patients expressed positive opinions about being involved in the decision-making process.

CONCLUSION

Decision board instruments are feasible and acceptable in an Asian population. The vast majority of patients preferred 24 Gy fractionated radiotherapy compared with a single fraction of 8 Gy. These results indicate the need for further research in this important area and serve to remind both clinicians and national or institutional policy makers of the importance of individual patient preference in treatment decision making.

Symptom duration and delay in referral for palliative radiotherapy in cancer patients: a pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the frequency of delay in referral for palliative radiotherapy (PRT), and to identify factors associated with delay.

DESIGN

Prospective survey over three months in 1997.

SETTING

Radiotherapy department of a cancer centre in Melbourne, Victoria.

PARTICIPANTS

158 consecutive patients prescribed PRT in the lung, breast, urology and haematology units.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Duration of symptoms; incidence of "unreasonable" delay in referral; and incidence of negative clinical outcome associated with referral delay.

RESULTS

The median duration of symptoms before prescription of radiotherapy was four weeks. Thirty-eight patients (24%) were considered to have had an unreasonable delay in referral, with median symptom duration of 15 weeks, and median delay in referral of 12 weeks. Causes of delay were classified as "diagnostic uncertainty" (29%), "other treatment given" (18%), "patient related" (18%), "language difficulty" (3%), and "unexplained" (32%). Twenty-seven of these 38 patients (71%) had negative outcomes, including persistent pain, neurological deterioration and persistent respiratory symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that delay in referral for PRT is not uncommon, has a variety of causes and can result in negative clinical outcomes. There appears to be a need for greater awareness of patients' symptoms and of the role of PRT among clinicians caring for patients with cancer.

Radiotherapy for painful bone metastases

Bone metastases are a frequent cause of morbidity in patients with malignant disease. Pain is the commonest symptom; it can be treated successfully in the majority of patients by local external beam irradiation. Controversy exists over which regimen should be used, with a single dose necessitating only one treatment visit to the radiotherapy department, or a fractionated course requiring several visits. Many radiotherapists continue to use fractionated regimens despite the current evidence that single fractions are as effective. Many reasons exist for this, including departmental policy and training, fears of recurrence, problems with retreatment of previously treated areas, fears of increased early and late morbidity, and attempts at promoting recalcification. The majority of these reasons are theoretical and have yet to be substantiated. In many patients, symptomatic bone metastases are widespread, and hemibody irradiation, although more toxic, should be considered in order to avoid the need for repeated courses of local treatment.