James D. Harrison

What are the unmet supportive care needs of people with cancer? A systematic review

Goals of workThe identification and management of unmet supportive care needs is an essential component of health care for people with cancer. Information about the prevalence of unmet need can inform service planning/redesign.Materials and methodsA systematic review of electronic databases was conducted to determine the prevalence of unmet supportive care needs at difference time points of the cancer experience.ResultsOf 94 articles or reports identified, 57 quantified the prevalence of unmet need. Prevalence of unmet need, their trends and predictors were highly variable in all domains at all time points. The most frequently reported unmet needs were those in the activities of daily living domain (1–73%), followed by psychological (12–85%), information (6–93%), psychosocial (1–89%) and physical (7–89%). Needs within the spiritual (14–51%), communication (2–57%) and sexuality (33–63%) domains were least frequently investigated. Unmet needs appear to be highest and most varied during treatment, however a greater number of individuals were likely to express unmet need post-treatment compared to any other time. Tumour-specific unmet needs were difficult to distinguish. Variations in the classification of unmet need, differences in reporting methods and the diverse samples from which patients were drawn inhibit comparisons of studies.ConclusionThe diversity of methods used in studies hinders analysis of patterns and predictors of unmet need among people with cancer and precludes generalisation. Well-designed, context-specific, prospective studies, using validated instruments and standard methods of analysis and reporting, are needed to benefit future interventional research to identify how best to address the unmet supportive care needs of people with cancer.

The unmet needs of partners and caregivers of adults diagnosed with cancer: a systematic review

Objectives The recognition that a partner or caregiver is typically the patients primary support person and is also deeply affected by the cancer diagnosis has prompted efforts to document their unmet supportive care needs. This review aimed to: (1) quantify the prevalence of unmet needs reported by partners and caregivers, (2) categorise their unmet needs by domain and (3) identify the main variables associated with reporting more unmet needs. Methods Manuscripts were identified through systematically searching electronic databases, checking the reference lists of retrieved publications, online searching of key journals and contacting researchers in this field. Results Unmet need items across 29 manuscripts were clustered into six domains: comprehensive cancer care (prevalence 1.1%–96%), emotional and psychological (3%–93.2%), partner or caregiver impact and daily activities (2.8%–79%), relationship (3.7% and 58%), information (2.2%–86%) and spiritual (2%–43%). Studies of caregivers of palliative care or terminal patients often reported a higher prevalence of unmet needs than studies of caregivers of cancer survivors. Variables associated with higher unmet needs included being female, not being the spouse of the patient, having lower social support or reporting distress. Conclusions Despite the ability to classify unmet needs within broad domains, quantification of unmet needs was challenging. This was mainly due to the diversity in methods used across studies (eg, different measures, variability in conceptualisation of unmet needs, etc). Rigorous, context-specific, longitudinal studies that use validated measures are needed to benefit future intervention research.

Assessing the impact of a sacral resection on morbidity and survival after extended radical surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer.

Objectives: To describe the experience of sacrectomy with extended radical resection in the treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer. Background: Resections of the bony pelvis, especially the sacrum, are becoming more common as part of extended radical exenterations for patients with recurrent rectal cancer. However, sacrectomy has been shown to carry a significant decrease in survival. Morbidity rates have been associated with the level of the sacrectomy (ie, >S3 junction). Methods: An analysis was conducted using prospective data from patients with recurrent rectal cancer who underwent pelvic exenteration involving sacrectomy from July 1998 until June 2011. The impact of the proximal level of sacrectomy [low (⩽S3) vs high (≥S2–S3 disc)] was compared. Results: Of 240 exenteration patients, 79 underwent sacrectomy, with 49 for recurrent rectal cancer. An R0 margin was achieved in 36 (74%) patients. Achievement of clear operative margins (R0) conferred a large and significant benefit for disease-free survival compared with R1 and R2 resections (median 45 months vs 19 and 8 months, respectively; P = 0.045). Complications were reported in 40 (82%) patients, with major and minor complications in 19 (39%) and 38 (78%) patients, respectively. The proximal level of the sacrectomy (high vs low) did not significantly impair the ability to achieve a clear margin and was not associated with an increase in major or minor complications. Conclusions: This large, single-center series has demonstrated that extended pelvic exenteration involving sacrectomy has excellent R0 margins and survival rates for recurrent rectal cancer. A high sacrectomy has comparable results with a more distal abdominosacral resection.

Measuring patient preference and surgeon choice

One of the major barriers to randomized trials in the field of surgery is the presence of strong preferences for one of the treatment options. Patients and surgeons who favor strongly a particular treatment approach are usually reluctant to participate in trials where operative intervention is determined on the basis of randomization. This then affects both the feasibility of the trial in terms of achieving the required sample size as well as the generalizability of the studys findings. Therefore, measurement of patient and surgeon preference is a crucial component of the feasibility assessment for surgery trials. In this article, we introduce the Prospective Measure of Preference, which is a novel method to measure preferences that has been designed to accommodate the complexity of surgical decision-making. We also present a simple method to measure individual and community equipoise among expert clinicians to assess the feasibility of future randomized trials in surgery.

Health professional and consumer views on involving breast cancer patients in the multidisciplinary discussion of their disease and treatment plan

The aim was to obtain the views of health professionals and patients about the concept of involving breast cancer patients in the multidisciplinary (MD) treatment planning meeting.

Multicenter Randomized Trial of Centralized Nurse-Led Telephone-Based Care Coordination to Improve Outcomes After Surgical Resection for Colorectal Cancer: The CONNECT Intervention

PURPOSE To investigate the effectiveness of a centralized, nurse-delivered telephone-based service to improve care coordination and patient-reported outcomes after surgery for colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with a newly diagnosed colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to the CONNECT intervention or usual care. Intervention-group patients received standardized calls from the centrally based nurse 3 and 10 days and 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge from hospital. Unmet supportive care needs, experience of care coordination, unplanned readmissions, emergency department presentations, distress, and quality of life (QOL) were assessed by questionnaire at 1, 3, and 6 months. RESULTS Of 775 patients treated at 23 public and private hospitals in Australia, 387 were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 369 to the control group. There were no significant differences between groups in unmet supportive care needs, but these were consistently low in both groups at both follow-up time points. There were no differences between the groups in emergency department presentations (10.8% v 13.8%; P = .2) or unplanned hospital readmissions (8.6% v 10.5%; P = .4) at 1 month. By 6 months, 25.6% of intervention-group patients had reported an unplanned readmission compared with 27.9% of controls (P = .5). There were no significant differences in experience of care coordination, distress, or QOL between groups at any follow-up time point. CONCLUSION This trial failed to demonstrate substantial benefit of a centralized system to provide standardized, telephone follow-up for postoperative patients with colorectal cancer. Future interventions could investigate a more tailored approach.

Patient Preferences Between Surgical and Medical Treatment in Crohn’s Disease

PurposeCrohn’s disease poses difficult choices in which the most appropriate treatment option is not always obvious. When this state of uncertainty exists, patients’ preferences should have an increasingly important part of clinical decision making. The purpose of this study was to compare patients’ preferences for surgical intervention in Crohn’s disease with the preferences of surgeons and gastroenterologists.MethodsOutpatients with Crohn’s disease were interviewed to quantify their preferences for six scenarios by using the prospective preference measure. An identical questionnaire was mailed to all Australian and New Zealand colorectal surgeons and a random sample of 300 Australian gastroenterologists.ResultsForty-one of 123 patients with Crohn’s disease (33 percent), 92 of 127 colorectal surgeons (72 percent), and 74 of 272 gastroenterologists (27 percent) participated. There were significant differences between patients and gastroenterologists for three of six scenarios and between surgeons and gastroenterologists in four of six scenarios. Seventy-six percent of gastroenterologists were willing to gamble to avoid an ileocolic resection compared with 37 percent of surgeons (chi-squared = 25.44; P < 0.0001) and 39 percent of patients (chi-squared = 15.44; P < 0.001).ConclusionsPatients and clinicians were able to trade and gamble life expectancy as a measure of preference for varying hypothetical surgical treatments, even though these treatment options impacted on quality of life rather than survival. Patients’ preferences did not align with clinicians. For most scenarios, colorectal surgeons’ preferences were significantly different to those of gastroenterologists.

Preferences for outcomes of treatment for rectal cancer: patient and clinician utilities and their application in an interactive computer-based decision aid.

PURPOSE: To quantify the importance that patients and clinicians assign to specific quality-of-life outcomes associated with the treatment of rectal cancer and to demonstrate a clinical application of these data in a computer-based multidimension decision aid (Annalisa©). METHODS: For patients, a researcher-administered questionnaire using the time trade-off method was used to quantify the importance of nine outcomes. Information was ascertained from clinicians by use of a self-administered questionnaire. Responses were ranked and compared between groups. Mean values for each outcome were entered into Annalisa©. RESULTS: Overall, 103 patients, 87 colorectal surgeons, 97 medical oncologists, and 80 radiation oncologists participated. For all groups, local cancer recurrence in the pelvis and fecal incontinence (mean utility scores 0.53 and 0.57, respectively) were the two outcomes to most avoid. In Annalisa©, the “best fit” treatment for patients and surgeons was a low anterior resection with postoperative chemotherapy, whereas for medical and radiation oncologists the best-fit treatment was surgery alone. CONCLUSION: Local recurrence and fecal incontinence are considered the worst outcomes by patients and clinicians alike, but values for other outcomes vary. Decision aids that incorporate patients’ individual values with evidence-based data hold considerable potential to optimize treatment decision-making.

Quantifying postdischarge unmet supportive care needs of people with colorectal cancer: a clinical audit1

Aim  There are limited data concerning the unmet needs experienced by patients with colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to identify unmet supportive care needs of people with colorectal cancer following discharge from hospital.

Urological leaks after pelvic exenterations comparing formation of colonic and ileal conduits

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to assess possible risk factors for urinary leakage of a newly formed urinary conduit after a partial or total pelvic exenteration. METHODS An analysis was conducted from prospectively collected data of patients who underwent a pelvic exenteration with conduit formation for advanced and recurrent pelvic cancer. RESULTS Of 232 patients undergoing a pelvic exenteration, 74 (32%) had a conduit formed. Of these, 47 (64%) had an ileal conduit compared with 27 (36%) a colonic conduit. Twelve (16%) patients developed a leak, of which nine occurred within the first month. Factors associated with a conduit leak included involvement of R2 surgical margins (43%), the magnitude of the exenteration and a current cardiovascular medical history (27%). Leaks were not found to be associated with either radiotherapy or chemotherapy. The 30-day leak rate for ileal conduits was 17% (8/47) and 4% (1/27) for colonic conduits with enterocutaneous fistula only occurring in the ileal conduit group (2/47). Fistula, drained collections and sepsis occurred in 40% of ileal and 19% of colonic conduits (p < 0.01). Patients with a conduit leak had a longer length of stay (59 versus 23 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Urine leaks after conduit formation in association with exenterations are relatively common with a prolonged length of hospital stay. Positive surgical margins and exenterations involving all four quadrants of the pelvis were associated with higher leak rates. There was no evidence of a difference between ileal and colonic conduits and number of leaks. However colonic conduits had less total complications including sepsis, leak and pelvic collections with comparatively no complications of a small bowel fistula.