MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521839831 · doi:10.4103/2347-5625.189808

Cancer cachexia and its impact on patient dignity: What nurses need to know

2016· editorial· en· W2521839831 on OpenAlexaff
Susan McClement

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing · 2016
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPatient Dignity and Privacy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonhoodDignityMedicineDiseasePalliative careSet (abstract data type)PsychologyNursingEpistemologyLawPhilosophyPolitical sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Noted physician, Sr. William Osler, is credited with saying, “Care more particularly for the individual patient than for the special features of the disease”. Osler understood that each patient for whom we care is first and foremost a person, who also happens to be living with a particular illness. In addition to understanding the nature of the patient's illness, therefore, it is also critically important that we come to understand the patient's unique story and set of circumstances. Doing so allows us to engage with patients in a way that affirms their sense of dignity and personhood. Drawing on the exemplar of cancer cachexia, this editorial reminds clinicians of the importance of Osler's sage advice to attend to patient dignity and personhood, and provides nurses with direction about how they can do that in practice. Noted physician, Sr. William Osler, is credited with saying, “Care more particularly for the individual patient than for the special features of the disease”. Osler understood that each patient for whom we care is first and foremost a person, who also happens to be living with a particular illness. In addition to understanding the nature of the patient's illness, therefore, it is also critically important that we come to understand the patient's unique story and set of circumstances. Doing so allows us to engage with patients in a way that affirms their sense of dignity and personhood. Drawing on the exemplar of cancer cachexia, this editorial reminds clinicians of the importance of Osler's sage advice to attend to patient dignity and personhood, and provides nurses with direction about how they can do that in practice. Nurses caring for those with advanced malignancies are likely quite familiar with the appearance of patients who have developed cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome (CACS). These patients often look like victims of famine-skeletal and frail.1Silverman ME Murray TJ Bryan CS The Quotable Osler. American College of Physicians, Philadelphia2008: 33Google Scholar However, do nurses know how the changes in appearancepatients experience as a result of illness affects their sense of dignity — their sense of being worthy, honored, or esteemed?2McClement S. Cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome: Psychological effect on the patient and family. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 264–8.Google Scholar Research evidence can help clinicians understand the effect of disease-related variables on patient dignity. A cross-sectional study of 213 terminally ill cancer patients rated their sense of dignity, pain and symptom distress, independence in activities of daily living, quality of life, desire for death, hopelessness, and anxiety. Patients who indicated that loss of dignity was a great concern reported significantly more physical and psychological symptom distress, heightened dependency needs, and loss of will to live. The most significant predictor of a decreased sense of dignity, however, was perceived change in appearance.3Chochinov HM. Dignity.Dignity. Dignity&# 674–5.Google Scholar Given its impact on appearance, individuals with CACS are clearly at risk of having their sense of dignity eroded. What can nurses do to help support patient dignity? We need to be mindful that how patients come to see themselves is very much affected by the nature of the interactions they have with the clinicians who care for them.4Chochinov HM, Hack T, Hassard T, Kristjanson LJ, McClement S, Harlos M. Dignity in the terminally ill: A cross-sectional, cohort study. Lancet 2026–30.Google Scholar Research speaks to the need to be sensitive to issues of privacy, communicate respectfully, and reassure patients that they are not a burden to care for.5Chochinov HM. Dignity and the essence of medicine: The A, B, C, and D of dignity conserving care. BMJ 184–7.Google Scholar, 6Chochinov HM, Hack T, McClement S, Kristjanson L, Harlos M. Dignity in the terminally ill: A developing empirical model. Soc Sci Med 433–43.Google Scholar, 7McClement SE, Chochinov HM, Hack TF, Kristjanson LJ, Harlos M. Dignity-conserving care: Application of research findings to practice. Int J Palliat Nurs 173–9.Google Scholar We need to acknowledge the patient as a person not merely a disease. To accomplish this, nurse scan ask the patient dignity question (PDQ): “What would you want any staff member walking in this room to know about you as a person?” Research has been conducted examining the impact of this question on patients and families, and its influence on health care providers (HCPs). Chochinov et al. invited 66 palliative care in-patients and 60 family members to respond to the PDQ.8Chochinov HM McClement S Hack T Thompson G Dufault B Harlos M Eliciting personhood within clinical practice: Effects on patients, families, and health care providers.J Pain Symptom Manage. 2015; 49: 974-80e2Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (64) Google Scholar After summarizing the responses and ensuring their accuracy, permission was requested to place the answers to the PDQ on patients' charts. The majority of patients and families (93%) felt that the information was important for HCPs to know and 99% recommended the PDQ for others. A total of 137 HCPs completed evaluations of 293 individual patient PDQ summaries. The PDQ summaries taught HCPs things they didn't know about the patient (90%), affected them emotionally (64%), and influenced their sense of empathy (59%) and their care (44%).8Chochinov HM McClement S Hack T Thompson G Dufault B Harlos M Eliciting personhood within clinical practice: Effects on patients, families, and health care providers.J Pain Symptom Manage. 2015; 49: 974-80e2Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (64) Google Scholar Bolstering patient dignity by attending to personhood is neither expensive nor time-consuming. It requires a willingness to transcend impersonal routinized approaches to care so that patients feel valued, respected, and cared for. Is not that what nursing is all about?

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.369 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia-Pacific Journal of Oncology NursingSame topicPatient Dignity and PrivacyFrench-language works237,207