Barriers to Referral for Palliative Radiotherapy by Physicians

A Systematic Review

J. Livergant, M. Howard, Jonathan H. Klein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aims: Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) can relieve symptoms and improve quality of life, but remains underutilised, possibly due to lack of referrals. We conducted a systematic review to study barriers impeding referral for PRT. Materials and methods: We searched EMBASE and MEDLINE to identify published studies of physician barriers to PRT referral. Data were synthesised using the percentage of respondents to the surveys in these studies who identified a given factor as a significant barrier to PRT referral. Barriers were categorised using a conceptual framework for radiotherapy access described by Sundaresan et al. (Aust Health Rev 40 (1), 2016, 11–18.) Results: EMBASE and MEDLINE searches returned 364 distinct papers. Of these, 11 papers (reporting on 12 cohorts of survey respondents) met the study inclusion criteria. All used a cross-sectional survey design. Seven cohorts included mainly family physicians, one surveyed mostly radiation oncologists, one surveyed hospice professionals and one surveyed members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the American Society of Radiation Oncology and the American Academy of Hospice Palliative Medicine. Many factors were identified as strongly influencing referral decisions. Only two cohorts of respondents were asked whether patient wishes influence referrals, but most (78–82%) respondents in these cohorts agreed that it was an important influence. Other important barriers included functional status (five cohorts asked, cited as a strong influence by 53–78% of respondents), short life expectancy (three, 44–59%), treatment length (five, 51–58%), inconvenience (six, 24–65%), cancer type (three, 55–80%), uncertainty of benefits (seven, 18–54%) and toxicity concerns (11, 18–43%). Hospice professionals most frequently cited factors related to expense of treatment. Conclusions: Published high-quality data on barriers to PRT referral are limited to survey studies. Barriers to PRT referral include referrers’ unfamiliarity regarding risks and benefits, cumbersome referral processes and perceived inconvenience of treatment. Interventions to increase referrals should be tailored to different professional groups and may include increased expert participation in multidisciplinary palliative care, shortening treatment courses and in-person interprofessional education.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalClinical Oncology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Radiotherapy
Referral and Consultation
Physicians
Hospices
MEDLINE
Radiation Oncology
Surveys and Questionnaires
Family Physicians
Therapeutics
Life Expectancy
Palliative Care
Uncertainty
Cross-Sectional Studies
Quality of Life
Education
Health
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Pain
  • palliative care
  • radiation oncology
  • radiotherapy
  • systematic review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Barriers to Referral for Palliative Radiotherapy by Physicians : A Systematic Review. / Livergant, J.; Howard, M.; Klein, Jonathan H.

In: Clinical Oncology, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3c5963cc03a8464990dac861e4662f7d,
title = "Barriers to Referral for Palliative Radiotherapy by Physicians: A Systematic Review",
abstract = "Aims: Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) can relieve symptoms and improve quality of life, but remains underutilised, possibly due to lack of referrals. We conducted a systematic review to study barriers impeding referral for PRT. Materials and methods: We searched EMBASE and MEDLINE to identify published studies of physician barriers to PRT referral. Data were synthesised using the percentage of respondents to the surveys in these studies who identified a given factor as a significant barrier to PRT referral. Barriers were categorised using a conceptual framework for radiotherapy access described by Sundaresan et al. (Aust Health Rev 40 (1), 2016, 11–18.) Results: EMBASE and MEDLINE searches returned 364 distinct papers. Of these, 11 papers (reporting on 12 cohorts of survey respondents) met the study inclusion criteria. All used a cross-sectional survey design. Seven cohorts included mainly family physicians, one surveyed mostly radiation oncologists, one surveyed hospice professionals and one surveyed members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the American Society of Radiation Oncology and the American Academy of Hospice Palliative Medicine. Many factors were identified as strongly influencing referral decisions. Only two cohorts of respondents were asked whether patient wishes influence referrals, but most (78–82{\%}) respondents in these cohorts agreed that it was an important influence. Other important barriers included functional status (five cohorts asked, cited as a strong influence by 53–78{\%} of respondents), short life expectancy (three, 44–59{\%}), treatment length (five, 51–58{\%}), inconvenience (six, 24–65{\%}), cancer type (three, 55–80{\%}), uncertainty of benefits (seven, 18–54{\%}) and toxicity concerns (11, 18–43{\%}). Hospice professionals most frequently cited factors related to expense of treatment. Conclusions: Published high-quality data on barriers to PRT referral are limited to survey studies. Barriers to PRT referral include referrers’ unfamiliarity regarding risks and benefits, cumbersome referral processes and perceived inconvenience of treatment. Interventions to increase referrals should be tailored to different professional groups and may include increased expert participation in multidisciplinary palliative care, shortening treatment courses and in-person interprofessional education.",
keywords = "Pain, palliative care, radiation oncology, radiotherapy, systematic review",
author = "J. Livergant and M. Howard and Klein, {Jonathan H.}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.clon.2018.09.009",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Clinical Oncology",
issn = "0936-6555",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Barriers to Referral for Palliative Radiotherapy by Physicians

T2 - A Systematic Review

AU - Livergant, J.

AU - Howard, M.

AU - Klein, Jonathan H.

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Aims: Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) can relieve symptoms and improve quality of life, but remains underutilised, possibly due to lack of referrals. We conducted a systematic review to study barriers impeding referral for PRT. Materials and methods: We searched EMBASE and MEDLINE to identify published studies of physician barriers to PRT referral. Data were synthesised using the percentage of respondents to the surveys in these studies who identified a given factor as a significant barrier to PRT referral. Barriers were categorised using a conceptual framework for radiotherapy access described by Sundaresan et al. (Aust Health Rev 40 (1), 2016, 11–18.) Results: EMBASE and MEDLINE searches returned 364 distinct papers. Of these, 11 papers (reporting on 12 cohorts of survey respondents) met the study inclusion criteria. All used a cross-sectional survey design. Seven cohorts included mainly family physicians, one surveyed mostly radiation oncologists, one surveyed hospice professionals and one surveyed members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the American Society of Radiation Oncology and the American Academy of Hospice Palliative Medicine. Many factors were identified as strongly influencing referral decisions. Only two cohorts of respondents were asked whether patient wishes influence referrals, but most (78–82%) respondents in these cohorts agreed that it was an important influence. Other important barriers included functional status (five cohorts asked, cited as a strong influence by 53–78% of respondents), short life expectancy (three, 44–59%), treatment length (five, 51–58%), inconvenience (six, 24–65%), cancer type (three, 55–80%), uncertainty of benefits (seven, 18–54%) and toxicity concerns (11, 18–43%). Hospice professionals most frequently cited factors related to expense of treatment. Conclusions: Published high-quality data on barriers to PRT referral are limited to survey studies. Barriers to PRT referral include referrers’ unfamiliarity regarding risks and benefits, cumbersome referral processes and perceived inconvenience of treatment. Interventions to increase referrals should be tailored to different professional groups and may include increased expert participation in multidisciplinary palliative care, shortening treatment courses and in-person interprofessional education.

AB - Aims: Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) can relieve symptoms and improve quality of life, but remains underutilised, possibly due to lack of referrals. We conducted a systematic review to study barriers impeding referral for PRT. Materials and methods: We searched EMBASE and MEDLINE to identify published studies of physician barriers to PRT referral. Data were synthesised using the percentage of respondents to the surveys in these studies who identified a given factor as a significant barrier to PRT referral. Barriers were categorised using a conceptual framework for radiotherapy access described by Sundaresan et al. (Aust Health Rev 40 (1), 2016, 11–18.) Results: EMBASE and MEDLINE searches returned 364 distinct papers. Of these, 11 papers (reporting on 12 cohorts of survey respondents) met the study inclusion criteria. All used a cross-sectional survey design. Seven cohorts included mainly family physicians, one surveyed mostly radiation oncologists, one surveyed hospice professionals and one surveyed members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the American Society of Radiation Oncology and the American Academy of Hospice Palliative Medicine. Many factors were identified as strongly influencing referral decisions. Only two cohorts of respondents were asked whether patient wishes influence referrals, but most (78–82%) respondents in these cohorts agreed that it was an important influence. Other important barriers included functional status (five cohorts asked, cited as a strong influence by 53–78% of respondents), short life expectancy (three, 44–59%), treatment length (five, 51–58%), inconvenience (six, 24–65%), cancer type (three, 55–80%), uncertainty of benefits (seven, 18–54%) and toxicity concerns (11, 18–43%). Hospice professionals most frequently cited factors related to expense of treatment. Conclusions: Published high-quality data on barriers to PRT referral are limited to survey studies. Barriers to PRT referral include referrers’ unfamiliarity regarding risks and benefits, cumbersome referral processes and perceived inconvenience of treatment. Interventions to increase referrals should be tailored to different professional groups and may include increased expert participation in multidisciplinary palliative care, shortening treatment courses and in-person interprofessional education.

KW - Pain

KW - palliative care

KW - radiation oncology

KW - radiotherapy

KW - systematic review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055094813&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85055094813&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.clon.2018.09.009

DO - 10.1016/j.clon.2018.09.009

M3 - Article

JO - Clinical Oncology

JF - Clinical Oncology

SN - 0936-6555

ER -