This approach often results in overestimation and has a 20% to 30% rate of accuracy, even among palliative care specialists. The accuracy of temporal approach is traditionally defined as a predicted survival rate of within ☓3% of actual survival. With the temporal approach, a clinician is asked, “How long will this patient live?” The answer is provided as a specific time frame such as “3 days.” This is the most common approach for prognostication in daily practice. CPS has three question formats: temporal, probabilistic, and surprise questions. In this article, we review important findings on prognostication and communication regarding the last days of life of patients with cancer.Ĭlinician prediction of survival (CPS) is an easy and quick way of prognostication. Over the past decade, several national and international studies have been conducted that systematically investigated signs and symptoms of impending death as well as how to communicate such a prognosis effectively with patients and families. International guidelines state that clinicians should identify patients with impending death, communicate the prognosis with patients and families, help them with their end-of-life (EOL) decision-making, and provide sufficient symptom palliation. It can help patients, families, and clinicians clarify goals of care, promote shared decision-making, avoid unnecessary investigations and aggressive care, ensure goal-concordant care, and allow patients and families to complete unfinished business and achieve a good death. Accurate prediction of impending death (i.e., last few days of life) is essential for terminally-ill cancer patients.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |