Utility of Mayo Clinic's early screen for discharge planning tool for predicting patient length of stay, discharge destination, and readmission risk in an inpatient oncology cohort.

PURPOSE: To examine the feasibility of using the Mayo Clinic's Early Screen for Discharge Planning (ESDP) tool in determining its predictive ability in an inpatient oncology hospital setting for variables including length of stay (LOS), discharge destination, and readmission risk. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted at a metropolitan tertiary cancer centre in Melbourne, Australia. The ESDP score, along with patient outcomes and characteristics, were collected to examine the relationships between positive and negative ESDP scores and patient outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 136 participants met inclusion criteria for this study. The proportion with positive ESDP scores was greater in those with unplanned hospital admissions compared with planned admissions (χ2(1, n = 136) = 3.94, p = 0.047). The ESDP status was not a significant predictor of oncology hospital LOS (rpb = 0.116, p = 0.178); however, the ESDP scores did predict discharge destination (χ2(2, n = 136) = 20.22, p < .001). Those re-admitted within 14 days were more likely to have negative ESDP scores than those not readmitted within this time period (χ2(1, n = 136) = 5.22, p = 0.022). Those with positive ESDP scores received a greater number of hospital services whilst admitted than those with negative scores (rpb = 0.388, p < .001) and were more likely to receive particular types of services. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study suggest that the ESDP tool could be useful in an adult inpatient oncology population in a hospital with defined specialised hospital discharge planning services (SHDCPS). The ESDP may be beneficial for early identification of service types likely to be required in care and likely discharge destination, both of which can assist discharge planning (DP); however, the ESDP was not useful for predicting LOS or readmission risk in the adult inpatient oncology population without a SHDCPS model in place.

Clinical Oncology Society of Australia position statement on exercise in cancer care.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical research has established exercise as a safe and effective intervention to counteract the adverse physical and psychological effects of cancer and its treatment. This article summarises the position of the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia (COSA) on the role of exercise in cancer care, taking into account the strengths and limitations of the evidence base. It provides guidance for all health professionals involved in the care of people with cancer about integrating exercise into routine cancer care. Main recommendations: COSA calls for: exercise to be embedded as part of standard practice in cancer care and to be viewed as an adjunct therapy that helps counteract the adverse effects of cancer and its treatment; all members of the multidisciplinary cancer team to promote physical activity and recommend that people with cancer adhere to exercise guidelines; and best practice cancer care to include referral to an accredited exercise physiologist or physiotherapist with experience in cancer care. Changes in management as a result of the guideline: COSA encourages all health professionals involved in the care of people with cancer to: discuss the role of exercise in cancer recovery; recommend their patients adhere to exercise guidelines (avoid inactivity and progress towards at least 150 minutes of moderate intensity aerobic exercise and two to three moderate intensity resistance exercise sessions each week); and refer their patients to a health professional who specialises in the prescription and delivery of exercise (ie, accredited exercise physiologist or physiotherapist with experience in cancer care).