Oncologist’s knowledge and implementation of guidelines for breakthrough cancer pain in Spain: CONOCE study
Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) has been shown to be a prevalent and poor prognostic factor for oncologic patients, which remain under diagnosed and undertreated. In 2012, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) published a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for the treatment of cancer pain which specifically addressed the management of BTcP.
Fundación ECO designed a qualitative study using an Internet-based survey to investigate the attitudes toward, compliance with, and use of SEOM Guideline.
A total of 83 oncologists with a mean experience of 13 years responded. Overall, 82% were aware of different guidelines to manage BTcP. Notably, attitudes toward guidelines were highly positive and there was nearly unanimous agreement that CPG provided the best scientific evidence available (99%), on the minimum information to be gathered for the medical history (100%), on the need for a specific treatment for BTcP (100%), and fentanyl as the first-choice drug (99%). Interestingly, there were discrepancies between what oncologists agreed with and what they do in clinical practice. In fact, 87.6% declare full compliance with SEOM guideline, although adherence to registration of BTcP data in medical records ranged from 30.1 to 91.6% (mean 64.5%); therapeutic management compliance was higher ranging from 75.9 to 91.6%. Main barriers identified were time pressure together with vague statements and limited dissemination of the guidelines.
Despite oncologist’s clinical practice is increasingly guided by GPC, it suffers from limited compliance, at least in part due to suboptimal statements. Improved dissemination and education are needed to enhance guideline implementation.
KeywordsBreakthrough pain Oncologists Practice guidelines Pain management Attitude of health personnel Clinical competence
The authors acknowledge all the medical oncologists who answered the survey for their contribution to the study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This study was funded by Kyowa Kirin Farmacéutica S. L.U. through Fundación ECO.
This study was approved by the Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía de Córdoba Clinical Research Ethics Committee and conforms to the ethical norms and standards in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. The manuscript does not contain clinical studies or patient data.
- 1.Foley KM. Pain assessment and cancer pain syndromes. In: Doyle D, Hanks GWC, Calman K, Cherny N, editors. Oxford textbook of palliative medicine. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.Google Scholar
- 9.Virizuela JA, Escobar Y, Cassinello J, Borrega P; SEOM (Spanish Society of Clinical Oncology). Treatment of cancer pain: Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) recommendations for clinical practice. Clin Transl Oncol. 2012;14:499–504.Google Scholar
- 10.Ripamonti CI, Santini D, Maranzano E, Berti M, Roila F; ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Management of cancer pain: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:vii139–54.Google Scholar
- 11.Davies AN, Dickman A, Reid C, Stevens AM, Zeppetella G; Science Committee of the Association for Palliative Medicine of Great Britain and Ireland. The management of cancer-related breakthrough pain: recommendations of the task group of the Association for Palliative Medicine of Great Britain and Ireland. Eur J Pain. 2009;12:331–8.Google Scholar
- 20.Es Berner. Graver ML. Overconfidence as a cause of diagnostic error in medicine. Am J Med. 2008;121:s2–3.Google Scholar
- 26.Jandhyala R, Fullarton JR, Bennett MI. Efficacy of rapid-onset oral fentanyl formulations vs. oral morphine for cancer-related breakthrough pain: a metaanalysis of comparative trials. J Pain Symp Manag. 2013; 46:573–80.Google Scholar
- 29.National Collaborating Centre for Cancer (UK). Palliative care for adults: strong opioids for pain relief [Internet]. Cardiff: Royal College of Physicians (UK); 2012. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg140. Cited 15 July 2016.