Beliefs and Perceptions About Parenteral Nutrition and Hydration by Advanced Cancer Patients

Background: The beliefs and perceptions of parenteral nutrition and hydration (PNH) by advanced cancer patients have not been elucidated.Objectives: To clarify their beliefs and perceptions and to explore the relationships between their beliefs and perceptions and cachexia stages.Design/setting/subjects: A questionnaire survey of advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care across Japan.Measurements: We asked patients to answer 15 items regarding their beliefs and perceptions of PNH. Frequencies were calculated for the patient characteristics and survey parameters. Comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test. We conducted a factor analysis and a multiple logistic regression analysis to identify the independent factors affecting cancer cachexia stages.Results: Among 495 patients, 378 responded. Due to missing data, 357 remained in the frequency distribution analysis, and 344 were classified into the noncachexia group (n = 174) and cachexia group (n = 170). Approximately 60% thought that PNH were beneficial. Approximately 70% considered PNH a standard medical practice. Approximately 70% did not feel that they received a sufficient explanation. There were no significant differences in any items between the two groups. We extracted four conceptual groups. The concept of Belief that PNH are harmful was identified as an independent factor [odds ratio 2.57 (95% confidence intervals 1.10-6.01), p = 0.030].Conclusion: More than half of the patients thought that PNH were beneficial and standard medical practices with or without cancer cachexia. The negative perception of PNH decreased in patients with cancer cachexia.

Automated summary

Beliefs and perceptions of parenteral nutrition and hydration (PNH) among advanced cancer patients have not been clarified. However, more than half of the patients believe that PNH is beneficial and a standard medical practice, but many patients feel that they have not received sufficient explanation.