Patients with malignant wounds suffer from physical and psychological symptom burden. Despite psychological support being required, the impact of malignant wounds on patients’ psychological distress is poorly investigated. We evaluated psychological distress associated with malignant wounds for patients at their end of life.

This study used the secondary analysis of the results of a large prospective cohort study, which investigated the dying process among patients with advanced cancer in 23 palliative care units in Japan. The primary outcome of this study was the prevalence of moderate to severe psychological symptom burden, evaluated by the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS)-feeling at peace scores of 2–4. In addition, the factors affecting psychological symptoms were investigated. The quality of death was also evaluated upon death using the Good Death Scale score.

Out of the total 1896 patients, 156 had malignant wounds (8.2%). Malignant wounds were more common in female and young people. The breast, head, and neck were the most prevalent primary sites. More patients with malignant wounds had IPOS-feeling at peace scores of 2–4 than patients without malignant wounds (41.0% vs. 31.3%, p = 0.024). Furthermore, psychological distress was associated with moderate to severe IPOS-pain and the frequency of dressing changes. The presence of malignant wounds did not affect the quality of death.

This study showed increased psychological distress due to malignant wounds. Patients with malignant wounds require psychological support in addition to the treatment of physical symptoms for maintaining their quality of life.

The goal of palliative and supportive care is to improve patients’ quality of life (QoL). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the gold standard for the assessment of QoL and symptoms; however, when self-reporting is complicated, PROMs are often substituted with proxy-reported outcome measures, such as clinician-reported outcome measures. The objective of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) for staff (IPOS-Staff).

This multicenter, cross-sectional observational study was conducted concurrently with the validation of the IPOS for patients (IPOS-Patient). Japanese adult patients with cancer and their staff were recruited. We assessed the characteristics of the patients and staff members, missing values, prevalence, and total IPOS scores. For the analysis of criterion validity, intra-rater, and inter-rater reliability, we calculated intraclass correlations (ICCs).

One hundred and forty-three patients completed the IPOS-Patient, and 79 medical staff members completed the IPOS-Staff. The most common missing values from IPOS-Staff were Family Anxiety (3.5%) and Sharing Feelings (3.5%). Over half of the patients scored themselves moderate or worse for Poor Mobility, Anxiety, and Family Anxiety, while staff members scored patients moderate or worse for Weakness, Anxiety, and Family Anxiety. For criterion validity (patient–staff agreement) as well as intra-rater and inter-rater reliability, ICCs ranged from 0.114 (Sharing Feelings) to 0.826 (Nausea), 0.720 (Anxiety) to 0.933 (Nausea), and −0.038 (Practical Problems) to 0.830 (Nausea), respectively.

The IPOS-Staff is easy to respond to; it has fair validity and reliability for physical items but poor for psycho-social items. By defining the context and objectives of its use and interpretation, the IPOS-Staff can be a useful tool for measuring outcomes in adult patients with cancer who cannot complete self-evaluations.

Although hospitals have been described as inadequate place for end-of-life care, many deaths still occur in hospital settings. Although patient-reported outcome measures have shown positive effects for patients in need of palliative care, little is known about how to implement them. We aimed to explore the feasibility of a pilot version of an implementation strategy for the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) in acute care settings.

A strategy, including information, training, and facilitation to support the use of IPOS, was developed and carried out at three acute care units. For an even broader understanding of the strategy, it was also tested at a palliative care unit. A process evaluation was conducted including collecting quantitative data and performing interviews with healthcare professionals.

Factors related to the design and performance of the strategy and the context contributed to the results. The prevalence of completed IPOS in the patient's records varied from 6% to 44% in the acute care settings. At the palliative care unit, the prevalence in the inpatient unit was 53% and the specialized home care team 35%. The qualitative results showed opposing perspectives concerning the training provided: Related to everyday work at the acute care units and Nothing in it for us at the palliative care unit. In the acute care settings, A need for an improved culture regarding palliative care was identified. A context characterized by A constantly increasing workload, a feeling of Constantly on-going changes, and a feeling of Change fatigue were found at all units. Furthermore, the internal facilitators and the nurse managers’ involvement in the implementation differed between the units.

The feasibility of the strategy in our study is considered to be questionable and the components need to be further explored to enhance the impact of the strategy and thereby improve the use of IPOS.