We developed a virtual career thinking game and provided third-year medical students with workshop-type career instruction to identify "transition" in a career and their own values. The game is a group work activity based on the assumption that the virtual character will respond to a turning point during undergraduate school and after graduation, and experience the story of a doctor's life. After playing the game and sharing the story of each group, participants were asked to think about what they would do at a possible turning point. Although favorable response were observed in the first year, problems were found, and improvements were made in the second year, and further effects were observed. The results show that career education using games increases students' ability to respond to turning points and is an effective technique in career education.

In career education, devising ways to elicit proactive participation is vital, thus we conducted face-to-face workshops to drive learners’ participation. However, the COVID-19 pandemic forced us to teach classes online. Therefore, to motivate more than 100 students to participate actively in the online format, we conducted career education using Active Book Dialogue® where several students read a book together in a short period of time. Each student read a specific part of the book they were assigned and summarized it in collaboration with their group members. This enabled them to learn career theory. Additionally, the online format allowed several lectures to be held within a remote and interactive environment. We will reflect on this experience and report on how this can be applied in other schools.

Introduction: Antiepileptic drugs were occasionally administered to manage seizures in terminally-ill cancer patients. When enteral route is no longer feasible due to dysphagia or depressed level of consciousness, subcutaneous route could be an option. We reported three cases of terminally cancer patients who received subcutaneous levetiracetam (LEV) due to an inability to administer via intravenous route. Cases: The age of 3 cases was 83, 75, 82 years, respectively. In all cases, the prognosis prediction at the start of subcutaneous LEV was about 1 month. In all cases, the route of administration of LEV was changed from intravenous to subcutaneous. No exacerbation of convulsions, or injection site reaction was confirmed after subcutaneous LEV administration. Discussion: We believe that subcutaneous LEV administration may be one of the treatment options for seizures in patients with terminal cancer for whom intravenous administration of LEV is no longer feasible.

Introduction: Our palliative care staff began the support activity in opioid introduction for outpatients with cancer at Komaki City Hospital in March 2018, because it was difficult to make them understand about proper use of opioid analgesics and misinterpretation about abuse at the time of opioid introduction in outpatient settings. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of the activity (patient education on pain control, telephone follow up, and assessment of the symptom). Method: Outpatients with cancer receiving strong opioids for pain relief from January 2017 to March 2019 were eligible. We retrospectively investigated the difference of the variables between baseline and after the activity as follows; the ratios of prescribing immediate-release opioids, antiemetics, and laxatives when opioids were prescribed and side effects due to opioid analgesics appeared. Results: The study included 122 patients. The prescribing ratios of immediate-release opioids antiemetics and laxatives all increased from 90.7 to 98.5%, from 63.0 to 70.6%, and from 61.1 to 70.6%, respectively. The side effect incidence due to opioids with STAS-J 2 or more decreased from 12 (22.2%) to 9 (13.2%). Discussion: The activity could contribute to the provision of drug treatments and counselling needed for opioid therapy.

It is important to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on inpatient care and the needs of inpatients and their families. We conducted an anonymous self-administered questionnaire survey of inpatients who had been referred to our palliative care team, their families (hereafter referred to as patients' families), and their primary nurses (hereafter referred to as PNs). The EZR statistical software was used for statistical analysis, and p<0.05 was considered to indicate a significant difference. 31 patients [9 males, 22 females; median age 65 years (range 30-85 years)], 25 family members, and 26 PNs responded. The question “Do you ever feel depressed due to restricted visitation?” had a significantly stronger impact on patient families than on patients (p<0.05). Compared to patients, patient families tended to prefer face-to-face visits (p<0.05). The impact of visitation restrictions was greater on patients’ families than on the inpatients, suggesting that it is important to provide care and support to patients’ families especially during periods when there are visitation restrictions.