Evaluating the utility of the QUAL-EC in the clinical care of patients with advanced cancer — ASN Events

Evaluating the utility of the QUAL-EC in the clinical care of patients with advanced cancer (#388)

Anne M. Wilkinson 1 , Susan Slatyer 2 , Anna Nowak 3 , Cathy Pienaar 4
  1. Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia
  2. Centre for Nursing Research, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  3. School of Medicine and Pharmacology, M503, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  4. Perth Children's Hospital Project, Department of Health WA, Perth, Western Australia, Australia

Background. We piloted the Quality of Life at the End of Life (QUAL-E) in Australian palliative care in-patients (N=52) and demonstrated feasibility, acceptability and face validity. An unexpected finding was the potential for the QUAL-E to prompt psycho-social-spiritual discussion when conducted as an interview, indicating opportunities for enhanced support. Aims. We compared a 17-item QUAL-E-Cancer (QUAL-EC) to the Distress Thermometer Screening Tool (DT) and participants’ experience when the QUAL-EC was conducted as an interview. Methods. A cross-sectional, mixed methods design was used. Convenience sampling recruited patients (N=50) with advanced cancer and a prognosis of less than 12 months from a tertiary hospital. Participants completed the DT, followed by the QUAL-EC which was digitally recorded as an interview. Findings. Correlational and thematic analysis found that 39.6% of participants reported severe distress (score ≥7) while 40% reported moderate distress (score 4-6) on the DT. Levels of distress significantly correlated with two QUAL-EC domains: symptom control (r=0.52, p<0.001) and preparation for end of life (r=0.32, p<0.05). Qualitative analysis identified six themes: the health care team; family issues; approaching death; worry; coping and QUAL-EC experience. Feasibility: completion of the QUAL-EC ranged from 3-14 minutes (M=7.37 minutes, SD 3.05 minutes). Acceptability: Participants overwhelmingly found the questions to be clear and did not find the questions hard to understand, hard to answer or stressful. Ninety per cent of participants agreed or strongly agreed that they were glad they took part. Conclusion. Patient distress was associated with either symptom burden or concerns about their family/loved ones. When distress is identified on screening, the QUAL-EC offers good potential for nuanced, versus vague, assessment of globalised distress (e.g., DT) as an aid in targeting patient-centered clinical/psycho-social interventions.

#COSA2015