In the field of oncology, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) scale is widely used by physicians and nurses to assess a patient’s health status and predict clinical outcomes. This scale is crucial as it correlates with cancer morbidity, mortality, and complications from chemotherapy, helping guide treatment decisions and prognosis. However, a new study aimed to determine whether there is a difference between ECOG-PS scores rated by physicians and nurses in predicting clinical outcomes in cancer patients.
Over a span of 19 months, a retrospective cohort study involving 32 oncologists and 41 chemotherapy nurses from a single academic comprehensive cancer center was conducted. The study involved independently scoring ECOG-PS for a random sample of 311 cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. The researchers evaluated the ability of nurse and physician ECOG-PS scores to predict chemotherapy toxicity, hospitalizations within one month, and 6-month mortality or hospice referrals. Additionally, they also looked at the difference between nurse and physician ECOG-PS scores to determine its impact on clinical outcomes.
The results of the study showed that there was a 71% agreement between physician and nurse ECOG-PS scores. Nurse ECOG-PS scores had a stronger odds ratio for 6-month mortality or hospice referrals compared to physician ECOG-PS scores. Furthermore, nurse ECOG-PS ratings correlated with 1-month chemotherapy toxicity and hospitalizations, whereas physician ratings did not. Nurse-physician disagreement, particularly when physicians gave lower ratings, was associated with worse outcomes.
The findings suggest that nurse-rated ECOG-PS scores are more predictive of important outcomes compared to those rated by physicians. Additionally, nurse-physician disagreement in ECOG-PS ratings can predict worse clinical outcomes. Incorporating nurses in the assessment of patients’ performance statuses can provide additional clinical benefits, such as improved prognostication and informed decision making regarding chemotherapy administration, supportive care, and goals of care discussions.
In conclusion, this study highlights the importance of including nurses in the assessment of cancer patients’ performance statuses. Nurse-rated ECOG-PS scores were found to be more predictive of clinical outcomes, and disagreement between nurses and physicians in rating ECOG-PS can indicate worse outcomes. By leveraging the expertise of nurses in conjunction with physicians, healthcare professionals can enhance patient care and decision-making processes.
FAQs
Q: What is the ECOG-PS scale?
A: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) scale is a commonly used assessment tool in oncology. It helps evaluate a patient’s health status and predict clinical outcomes in cancer patients.
Q: How does nurse-rated ECOG-PS differ from physician-rated ECOG-PS?
A: This study found that nurse-rated ECOG-PS scores were more predictive of clinical outcomes compared to physician-rated scores. Nurses’ assessments correlated with chemotherapy toxicity, hospitalizations, and mortality rates, while physicians’ assessments did not.
Q: Why is nurse involvement important in assessing ECOG-PS?
A: Including nurses in the assessment of patients’ performance statuses provides additional clinical benefits. Nurse-rated ECOG-PS scores can improve prognostication, inform treatment decisions, and facilitate discussions on supportive care and goals of care.
Conclusion
The study comparing physician and nurse ratings of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) scale revealed that nurse ratings were more predictive of important clinical outcomes. Nurse-physician disagreement in ECOG-PS ratings also indicated worse outcomes. Incorporating nurses’ expertise in assessing patients’ performance statuses can provide additional clinical benefits and improve decision-making processes. To read more about current trends in healthcare, visit Instant Global News.