The journal of nutrition, health & aging

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 60–70 | Cite as

A Belgian survey on geriatric assessment in oncology focusing on large-scale implementation and related barriers and facilitators

  • C. Kenis
  • P. Heeren
  • L. Decoster
  • K. Van Puyvelde
  • G. Conings
  • F. Cornelis
  • P. Cornette
  • R. Moor
  • S. Luce
  • Y. Libert
  • R. Van Rijswijk
  • G. Jerusalem
  • M. Rasschaert
  • C. Langenaeken
  • A. Baitar
  • P. Specenier
  • K. Geboers
  • K. Vandenborre
  • P.R. Debruyne
  • K. Vanoverbeke
  • H. Van Den Bulck
  • J.-P. Praet
  • C. Focan
  • V. Verschaeve
  • N. Nols
  • J.-C. Goeminne
  • B. Petit
  • J.-P. Lobelle
  • J. Flamaing
  • K. Milisen
  • Hans Wildiers
Article

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study is to describe a large-scale, Belgian implementation project about geriatric assessment (=GA) in daily oncology practice and to identify barriers and facilitators for implementing GA in this setting.

Design / setting / participants

The principal investigator of every participating hospital (n=22) was invited to complete a newly developed questionnaire with closed- and open-ended questions. The closed-ended questions surveyed how GA was implemented. The open-ended questions identified barriers and facilitators for the implementation of GA in daily oncology practice. Descriptive statistics and conventional content analysis were performed as appropriate.

Results

Qualifying criteria (e.g. disease status and cancer type) for GA varied substantially between hospitals. Thirteen hospitals (59.1%) succeeded to screen more than half of eligible patients. Most hospitals reported that GA data and follow-up data had been collected in almost all screened patients. Implementing geriatric recommendations and formulating new geriatric recommendations at the time of follow-up are important opportunities for improvement. The majority of identified barriers were organizational, with high workload, lack of time or financial/staffing problems as most cited. The most cited facilitators were all related to collaboration.

Conclusion

Interventions to improve the implementation of GA in older patients with cancer need to address a wide range of factors, with organization and collaboration as key elements. All stakeholders, seeking to improve the implementation of GA in older patients with cancer, should consider and address the identified barriers and facilitators.

Keywords

Cancer geriatric assessment older person barriers facilitators survey 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hurria A, Wildes T, Blair SL, Browner IS, Cohen HJ, Deshazo M, et al. Senior adult oncology, version 2.2014: clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network: JNCCN. 2014;12(1):82–126.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pallis AG, Fortpied C, Wedding U, Van Nes MC, Penninckx B, Ring A, et al. EORTC elderly task force position paper: approach to the older cancer patient. European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990). 2010;46(9):1502–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wildiers H, Heeren P, Puts M, Topinkova E, Janssen-Heijnen ML, Extermann M, et al. International society of geriatric oncology consensus on geriatric assessment in older patients with cancer. Journal of clinical oncology: official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2014;32(24):2595–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wellens NI, Deschodt M, Flamaing J, Moons P, Boonen S, Boman X, et al. Firstgeneration versus third-generation comprehensive geriatric assessment instruments in the acute hospital setting: a comparison of the Minimum Geriatric Screening Tools (MGST) and the interRAI Acute Care (interRAI AC). The journal of nutrition, health & aging. 2011;15(8):638–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ellis G, Whitehead MA, O’Neill D, Langhorne P, Robinson D. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2011(7):Cd006211.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aapro M, Extermann M, Repetto L. Evaluation of the elderly with cancer. Annals of oncology: official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology /ESMO. 2000;11 Suppl 3:223–9.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Decoster L, Van Puyvelde K, Mohile S, Wedding U, Basso U, Colloca G, et al. Screening tools for multidimensional health problems warranting a geriatric assessment in older cancer patients: an update on SIOG recommendations. Annals of oncology: official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology /ESMO. 2015;26(2):288–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Patkar V, Acosta D, Davidson T, Jones A, Fox J, Keshtgar M. Cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: evidence, challenges, and the role of clinical decision support technology. International journal of breast cancer. 2011;2011:831605.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kenis C, Heeren P, Bron D, Decoster L, Moor R, Pepersack T, et al. Multicenter implementation of geriatric assessment in Belgian patients with cancer: A survey on treating physicians’ general experiences and expectations. Journal of geriatric oncology. 2014;5(4):431–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Puts MT, Santos B, Hardt J, Monette J, Girre V, Atenafu EG, et al. An update on a systematic review of the use of geriatric assessment for older adults in oncology. Annals of oncology: official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology /ESMO. 2014;25(2):307–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grol R, Wensing M. What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. The Medical journal of Australia. 2004;180(6 Suppl):S57–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kenis C, Decoster L, Van Puyvelde K, De Greve J, Conings G, Milisen K, et al. Performance of two geriatric screening tools in older patients with cancer. Journal of clinical oncology: official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2014;32(1):19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bellera CA, Rainfray M, Mathoulin-Pelissier S, Mertens C, Delva F, Fonck M, et al. Screening older cancer patients: first evaluation of the G-8 geriatric screening tool. Annals of oncology: official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology/ESMO. 2012;23(8):2166–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health research. 2005;15(9):1277–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Allen CM, Becker PM, McVey LJ, Saltz C, Feussner JR, Cohen HJ. A randomized, controlled clinical trial of a geriatric consultation team. Compliance with recommendations. Jama. 1986;255(19):2617–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Decoster L, Kenis C, Van Puyvelde K, Flamaing J, Conings G, De Greve J, et al. The influence of clinical assessment (including age) and geriatric assessment on treatment decisions in older patients with cancer. Journal of geriatric oncology. 2013;4(3):235–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Blanc M, Dialla O, Manckoundia P, Arveux P, Dabakuyo S, Quipourt V. Influence of the geriatric oncology consultation on the final therapeutic decision in elderly subjects with cancer: analysis of 191 patients. The journal of nutrition, health & aging. 2014;18(1):76–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jonker JM, Smorenburg CH, Schiphorst AH, van Rixtel B, Portielje JE, Hamaker ME. Geriatric oncology in the Netherlands: a survey of medical oncology specialists and oncology nursing specialists. European journal of cancer care. 2014;23(6):803–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Abrahamson KA, Fox RL, Doebbeling BN. Facilitators and barriers to clinical practice guideline use among nurses. The American journal of nursing. 2012;112(7):26–35; quiz 46,36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gravel K, Legare F, Graham ID. Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals’ perceptions. Implementation science: IS. 2006;1:16.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Serdi and Springer-Verlag France 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Kenis
    • 1
    • 27
  • P. Heeren
    • 2
  • L. Decoster
    • 3
  • K. Van Puyvelde
    • 4
  • G. Conings
    • 3
  • F. Cornelis
    • 5
  • P. Cornette
    • 6
  • R. Moor
    • 5
  • S. Luce
    • 7
  • Y. Libert
    • 8
  • R. Van Rijswijk
    • 9
  • G. Jerusalem
    • 10
  • M. Rasschaert
    • 11
  • C. Langenaeken
    • 12
  • A. Baitar
    • 13
  • P. Specenier
    • 14
  • K. Geboers
    • 15
  • K. Vandenborre
    • 16
  • P.R. Debruyne
    • 17
  • K. Vanoverbeke
    • 18
  • H. Van Den Bulck
    • 19
  • J.-P. Praet
    • 20
  • C. Focan
    • 21
  • V. Verschaeve
    • 22
  • N. Nols
    • 23
  • J.-C. Goeminne
    • 24
  • B. Petit
    • 25
  • J.-P. Lobelle
    • 26
  • J. Flamaing
    • 27
    • 28
  • K. Milisen
    • 2
    • 27
  • Hans Wildiers
    • 1
    • 29
  1. 1.Department of General Medical OncologyUniversity Hospitals LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Health Services and Nursing ResearchKU LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  3. 3.Department of Medical Oncology, Oncologisch Centrum, Universitair Ziekenhuis BrusselVrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselsBelgium
  4. 4.Frailty in Ageing (FRIA) Research GroupVrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselsBelgium
  5. 5.Department of Medical OncologyCliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, UCLBrusselsBelgium
  6. 6.Department of Geriatric MedicineCliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, UCLBrusselsBelgium
  7. 7.Department Medical Oncology, University Hospital ErasmeUniversité Libre de Bruxelles (ULB)BrusselsBelgium
  8. 8.Clinic of Psycho-OncologyULB Institut Jules BordetBrusselsBelgium
  9. 9.Department Medical OncologyZNA StuivenbergAntwerpBelgium
  10. 10.Department of Medical OncologyCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sart TilmanLiegeBelgium
  11. 11.Department of Medical OncologyIridium Cancer Network AntwerpSt. Augustinus, WilrijkBelgium
  12. 12.Department Medical OncologyIridium Cancer Network Antwerp, AZ KlinaBrasschaatBelgium
  13. 13.Department of Medical OncologyZNA MiddelheimAntwerpBelgium
  14. 14.Department of Medical OncologyUniversity Hospital AntwerpAntwerpBelgium
  15. 15.Centre for Oncology and Hematology, AZ TurnhoutTurnhoutBelgium
  16. 16.Department of Medical Oncology, AZ VesaliusTongerenBelgium
  17. 17.Cancer Centre, General Hospital Groeninge, Kortrijk, Belgium & Ageing & Cancer Research Cluster, Centre for Positive AgeingUniversity of GreenwichLondonUK
  18. 18.Department of Geriatric MedicineAZ Sint-LucasGentBelgium
  19. 19.Department of Medical OncologyImelda hospitalBonheidenBelgium
  20. 20.Department of Geriatric Medicine, CHU St-PierreFree Universities BrusselsBrusselsBelgium
  21. 21.Department of Oncology, Clinique Saint-JosephCHC-Liège Hospital GroupBrusselsBelgium
  22. 22.Department of Medical OncologyGHDC Grand Hôpital de CharleroiCharleroiBelgium
  23. 23.Department of Medical OncologyCentre Hospitalier de MouscronMouscronBelgium
  24. 24.Department of Medical OncologyClinique et Maternité Sainte-ElisabethNamurBelgium
  25. 25.Department of Medical OncologyCentre Hospitalier JolimontLa LouvièreBelgium
  26. 26.Consultant in StatisticsBeernemBelgium
  27. 27.Department of Geriatric MedicineUniversity Hospitals LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  28. 28.Department of Clinical and Experimental MedicineKU LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  29. 29.Department of OncologyKU LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations