@article{APM27000,
author = {Divya Yerramilli and Gregory Parker and Virginia LeBaron and Monica Krishnan and Lauren Hertan and Alexander Spektor and Ron Shiloh and Sonia Skamene and Tracy Balboni},
title = {Ethical issues in patients referred for palliative radiation therapy},
journal = {Annals of Palliative Medicine},
volume = {8},
number = {3},
year = {2019},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: As patients with advanced cancer approach end of life, ethical issues may arise. We describe ethical issues encountered by radiation oncologists in this setting.
Methods: A prospective, survey-based study assessed 162 consecutive consults for palliative radiation therapy (PRT) over 4 months at 3 hospitals. Consulting radiation clinicians completed a survey assessing palliative care issues encountered, based on national guidelines. Ethical issues included 5 subthemes (conflict between clinicians, caregiver-clinician conflict, internal conflict, feeling unable to do what was best for the patient, and violation of personal morals), an option for unclassified issues, and open-ended responses. Multivariate analyses (MVA) assessed potential patient-related predictors of ethical issues: gender, performance status (PS), PRT indication, physical symptoms, and presence of psychosocial, goals of care, care coordination, cultural, or spiritual issues.
Results: Of 162 surveys, 140 were completed (response rate =86%). Overall, 14 (10%) surveys identified ethical issues relevant to care; 11 of 14 (78%) identified more than 1 ethical issue. Half (7; 50%) involved conflict between clinicians and clinician-caregiver conflict; 6 (43%) involved clinician distress or internal conflict; and 2 (14%) felt impeded from doing what they felt was best for the patient. Open-ended responses revealed differences in opinion between medical specialties (n=6, 43%), and conflict related to coordination of care among clinicians (n=3, 21%). On UVA, ethical issues were associated with PRT referrals for bleeding, dyspnea, or dysphagia due to visceral metastases (30%) versus CNS indications such as brain metastases or cord compression (7%) or for bony metastases (4%) P<0.001. On MVA, ethical issues were associated with PRT for visceral metastases (OR 13.0; 95% CI, 2.3–74.6; P<0.001) and presence of spiritual issues (OR 4.0; 95% CI, 1.1–14.5; P=0.04).
Conclusions: At least 1 in 10 referrals for PRT involve ethical issues. Further studies are warranted to assess the ability of radiation oncologists to manage ethical issues.},
issn = {2224-5839}, url = {https://apm.amegroups.org/article/view/27000}
}