Survey-Based Evaluation of Cancer Patients’ Satisfaction and Discomfort Experienced During Central Venous Port Use

Abstract

Introduction: The use of central venous port provides a safer and better quality of life for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Refusal of central venous port implantation in patients with inadequate venous access may lead to discontinuation of chemotherapy or even extravasation of peripheral vasculitis and anti-cancer drugs. By doing this survey-based study, it was aimed to determine the reasons before the implantation of central venous port systems, the patient’s satisfaction afterwards, the complications associated with the port system, the discomfort they cause and the expectations of the patients. Patients and Methods: The study was carried out based on a questionnaire and through one-to-one interview by a cardiovascular surgeon with 100 patients who were treated with central venous port in the chemotherapy unit of Eskişehir City Hospital between August 1 and October 31, 2022. Results: Sixty-one percent of the patients cited long-term intravenous therapy and 44% cited inadequate venous access as the cause of port implantation. Ninety-six percent of the participants stated that they were satisfied with their ports. Only six patients stated that they had various problems, but were satisfied overall. When asked about the advantages of using the port, 76% of the patients stated that they no longer had more than one vascular puncture problem and 75% stated that they felt less pain. Fifty-one percent of the patients stated that they felt anxiety before the procedure; the most felt concern was possible complications (13 patients) and the thought that it would cause discomfort in life. Nine patients experienced complications after port implantation. Five patients described port system obstruction and four patients described the development of skin infection. Conclusion: Especially in our country, most patients still do not use central venous ports. The fact that existing fears and anxiety of the patients before the procedure cannot be eliminated with adequate and correct information plays an important role in this. At this point, the operator who performs the surgical procedure in the center where the procedure is performed should inform the patient and the oncology and chemotherapy nurse who give first information to the patient.

Keywords

• Chemotherapy
• central venous catheter
• port catheter

References

1. 1. Moralar DG, Turkmen UA, Bilen A, Turkmen S, Feyizi H, Altan HA. Our central venous port catheter system practice-a retrospective study. J Pak Med Assoc 2021;71(5):1442-5.
2. 2. Kesici S, Tuna V, Özkan S, Cengiz E, Türkmen A. Venöz port kateter implantasyonu uygulanan hastaların retrospektif analizi. Çukurova Med J 2017;42(3):604-5.
3. 3. Tsuji Y, Tsushima T, Abe S, Tamura F, Mızushıma T, Nagashıma H, et al. A retrospective analysis of central venous access port in patients with malignancies. Jon J Clin 2008;58:675-80.
4. 4. Taxbro K, Hammarskjöld F, Thelin B, Lewin F, Hagman H, Hanberger H, et al. Clinical impact of peripherally inserted central catheters vs implanted port catheters in patients with cancer: An open-label, randomised, two-centre trial. Br J Anaesth 2019;122(6):734-41.
5. 5. Lipitz-Snyderman A, Elkin EB, Atoria CL, Sima CS, Epstein AS, Blinder V, et al. “Provider differences in use of implanted ports in older adults with cancer.” Med Care 2015;53(7):646.
6. 6. Madabhavi I, Patel A, Sarkar M, Anand A, Panchal H, Parikh S. “A study of use of “PORT” catheter in patients with cancer: A single-center experience.” Clin Med Insights Oncol 2017;11:1-6.
7. 7. Robinson A, Souied O, Bota A, Levasseur N, Stober C, Hilton J, et al. “Optimal vascular access strategies for patients receiving chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer: A systematic review.” Breast Cancer Res Treat 2018;171(3):607-20.
8. 8. Yeşi̇lbalkan ÖU, Kir S, Karadakovan A, Uslu R. “Knowledge and attitudes of Turkish cancer patients regarding the implantable port catheter.” Türk Onkoloji Derg 2009;24(3):108-14.

9. 9. Nagel SN, Teichgräber UK, Kausche S, Lehmann A. Satisfaction and quality of life: A survey-based assessment in patients with a totally implantable venous port system. Eur J Cancer Care 2012;21:197-204.
10. 10. Taxbro K, Berg S, Hammarskjöld F, Hanberger H, Malmvall BE. A prospective observational study on 249 subcutaneous central vein access ports in a Swedish country hospital. Acta Oncol 2013;52:893-901.
11. 11. Vardy J, Engelhardt K, Cox K, Jacquet J, McDade A, Boyer M, et al. Long-term outcome of radiological-guided insertion of implanted central venous access port devices (CVAPD) for the delivery of chemotherapy in cancer patients: Institutional experience and review of the literature. Brit J Cancer 2004;91:1045-9.
12. 12. Yagi T, Sakamoto T, Nakai K, Tanizawa M, Okabe T, Hoshikawa N, et al. “A questionnaire-based assessment of the anxiety, satisfaction and discomfort experienced by Japanese cancer patients during the use of central venous ports.” Intern Med 2016;55(17):2393-9.