Cancer patients' perceptions of palliative care.

PURPOSE: Despite clear benefits of early integration of palliative care (PC) and oncology, concerns remain about negative perceptions of PC. Our aim was to explore current knowledge and perceptions of PC in cancer patients. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional survey. A 16-item questionnaire was distributed to all cancer patients (N = 103) upon admission to the oncology ward of an Australian tertiary academic hospital. Chi-squared test was used to examine for significant factors related to patients' perceptions. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients (93%) completed the questionnaire; 76% had metastatic cancer. We explored the following domains:Experience and knowledge: 76% had heard of PC; 21% had received PC. Self-rated PC knowledge was varied. Forty-five percent believed that PC was only associated with EOLC; those more likely to disagree had received PC services (p = 0.039).Integration of PC and oncology: Majority believed that they could receive oncology care (86%) and anti-cancer treatment (81%) whilst receiving PC. Those who had heard of PC and with better self-rated knowledge were more likely to believe that they could receive concurrent anti-cancer treatment (p = 0.005, p = 0.045, respectively).Feelings: 77% felt comforted with PC involvement; this was significantly associated with older age (p = 0.047) and understanding that oncology (p < 0.005) and anti-cancer treatment (p = 0.013) could continue. However, some felt frightened (40%) and hopeless (29%) about referral to PC. Fifty percent felt more comfortable with referral to 'supportive care' services (versus PC). CONCLUSIONS: Our survey demonstrates reasonable understanding and relatively positive feelings about PC, associated with experience and knowledge. Nonetheless, there is ongoing need for better patient and public education about PC.

Migraine: Does aura require investigation?

OBJECTIVES: Migraine is a debilitating condition that affects approximately 15% of the general population. It represents a huge proportion of presentations to the emergency department and a significant number of neurology admissions. Patients are often investigated with imaging. This is particularly the case with migraine with aura (MA). The yield of imaging is however low. There is limited information on Australian hospital presentations and utility of imaging. We aimed to analyse the demographics of migraine presentations to our hospital and the yield of imaging in our centre to help guide future approaches to these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively looked at medical records of patients presenting to the western health from January 2012 to June 2013. Patients were classified as either having migraine with aura or without. Baseline demographics, cardiovascular risk factors and imaging studies (CT brain, MRI brain and carotid Doppler studies) in each group were evaluated. Patients found to have white matter hyperintensities on MRI were further evaluated. RESULTS: We found patients with aura were more likely to have hypercholesterolemia (12% vs 7%, p=0.05). Patients with aura were more likely to be evaluated with imaging (CT brain (70% vs 41% p<0.0001) and MRI brain (44% vs 17% p<0.0001)). The patients investigated with imaging had no clinically significant findings. 21% of patients with aura were investigated with carotid Doppler studies. Only 1 patient had an abnormal result. Patients with white matter hyperintensities were older (51 vs 39 years; p<0.0001) and were more likely to have Hypertension (29% vs 14% p=0.019), Hypercholesterolemia (29% vs 11% p=0.003) and T2DM (16% vs 4% p=0.011). CONCLUSION: We found patients with MA and without aura to be largely similar. We also found imaging in either group to be of almost no clinical value.