Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2006 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition).
Vol 24, No 18S (June 20 Supplement), 2006: 18519
© 2006 American Society of Clinical Oncology

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hurria, A. Articles by Lachs, M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Hurria, A. Articles by Lachs, M.

Abstract

Feasibility of a self-administered geriatric assessment tool for older patients with cancer

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; New York Downtown Hospital, New York, NY; Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY

18519

Background: As the population ages, there is an emerging need to develop a geriatric assessment (GA) tool for oncologists to characterize the ‘functional age‘ of older patients in order to tailor treatment, stratify outcomes by factors other than chronological age, and develop interventions to optimize cancer treatment. The GA tool must be easy to administer in order to minimize burden on clinic resources. The goal of this study was to determine the feasibility of administering a brief, comprehensive, self-administered GA tool to older patients before their meeting with the oncologist. Methods: The self-administered GA tool addresses the following domains: functional status, comorbidity, psychological state, nutritional status, and social support. The measures which comprise the tool are brief, reliable, validated, predictive of mortality and morbidity in older patients, and do not require a staff member to administer. Feasibility was assessed by the following parameters: 1) % able to complete the GA tool unassisted; 2) % requiring the assistance of staff members versus non-staff members; 3) overall patient satisfaction; 4) time to complete. Results: 168 (96%) of 175 patients completed the GA tool with a mean age of 76 (range 64–92) with AJCC stages [I (33%), II (17%), III (10%), IV (39%)] across a variety of tumor types. Of the study cohort, 67% were women, 57% were married, and 89% were retired. Median time to complete the GA tool was 13 minutes and mean time was 16 minutes (SD 11, range 3–60). Most completed the GA tool on their own (75%) or received assistance from a friend or family member (20%). Only 4% required assistance from a member of the healthcare team. Patient satisfaction with the GA tool was high: 88% satisfied with the length, 92% reported no difficult questions, and 97% reported no upsetting questions. Based on the assessment scores, the following interventions were offered: referral to a social worker (38%), nutritionist (43%), visiting nurse/home health aide (30%), internist (23%), rehabilitation (13%), ENT (13%), ophthalmology (7%), and psychiatry (5%). Conclusion: This brief, comprehensive, self-administered GA tool is feasible for use in the outpatient oncology setting. Prospective trials are needed to determine the effectiveness of the interventions offered.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.