The treatment landscape for gastric cancer (GC) is constantly evolving with therapies affecting all aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) which need careful monitoring. While there are ...HRQoL measures designed specifically to capture issues relevant to patients with GC, these might be outdated and only relevant to patients in westernised cultures. This review identifies the patient-reported measures used to assess HRQoL of patients with GC and compares the HRQoL measures used across cultures including East Asia, where GC is more prevalent. We conducted a systematic review of publications between January 2001 and January 2021. A total of 267 papers were identified; the majority (66%) of studies involved patients from East Asian countries. Out of the 24 HRQoL questionnaires captured, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Cancer measure (QLQ-C30) was the most widely used (60% of all studies and 62% of those involving patients from East Asian countries), followed by its gastric cancer-specific module (QLQ-STO22, 34% of all studies and 41% from East Asia). Eight questionnaires were developed within East Asian countries and, of the 20 studies including bespoke questions, 16 were from East Asia. There were six qualitative studies. HRQoL issues captured include diarrhoea, constipation, reflux, abdominal pain and abdominal fulness or bloating, difficulty swallowing, restricted eating, and weight loss. Psychosocial issues related to these problems were also assessed. Issues relating to the compatibility of some of the westernised measures within East Asian cultures were highlighted.
ObjectiveThe reporting of outcomes in surgical trials for gastric cancer is inconsistent. The GASTROS study (GAstric Cancer Surgery TRials Reported Outcome Standardisation) aims to address this by ...developing a core outcome set (COS) for use in all future trials within this field. A COS should reflect the views of all stakeholders, including patients. We undertook a series of interviews to identify outcomes important to patients which would be considered for inclusion in a COS.SettingAll interviews took place within the UK. Interviews were carried out face-to-face at hospitals and cancer support centres or via the telephone.ParticipantsTwenty participants at varying stages of recovery following surgery for gastric cancer with curative intent.DesignQualitative design using semistructured interviews, supported by an interview guide which was iteratively modified; thematic analysis was used to explore patient priorities.ResultsSix themes enveloping 38 outcomes were identified; surviving and controlling cancer, technical aspects of surgery, adverse events from surgery, recovering from surgery, long-term problems following surgery and long-term life impact of surgery. The ‘most important’ patient priority was to be ‘cured of cancer’.ConclusionSurgical trials for gastric cancer should consider broader priorities of patients when choosing which outcomes to report. This study highlighted the importance of longer-term outcomes such as cancer survival. Outcomes identified in this study will be used to inform an international Delphi survey to develop a COS in this field.
Background:
The global COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the widespread suspension of bariatric surgical programs. Although this rapid adaption was initially necessary, the implications of delaying ...the most effective treatment for weight loss in a population at risk from this crisis are not well known. Moreover, as the health care trusts plan the reintroduction of elective services, it is vital to also consider the patient’s perspectives, to adequately weigh up the benefits and risks of this recommencement in the current climate.
Objectives:
We aimed to investigate the impacts that postponing bariatric surgery has had on patients, and their priorities when restarting elective surgery.
Methods:
An online survey of patients awaiting surgery was undertaken, examining the physical and psychological impacts of pandemic isolation policies and postponing surgery, and exploring patient preferences regarding surgery during the pandemic.
Results:
Of 71 patients, 67.6% gained a median of 4 kg (interquartile range: 2.6-6.4), and 74.6% had adverse psychological effects; 93.0% were keen to proceed with surgery. Thematic analysis of qualitative data revealed delays have worsened physical symptoms, increased anxiety, and delayed secondary life-altering treatments.
Conclusion:
From the patient’s perspective, postponing surgery has been deleterious and efforts to safely reintroduce bariatric programs should be promoted.
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unparalleled changes to patient care, including the suspension of cancer surgery. Concerns regarding COVID-19-related risks to patients and ...healthcare workers with the re-introduction of major complex minimally invasive and open surgery have been raised. This study examines the COVID-19 related risks to patients and healthcare workers following the re-introduction of major oesophago-gastric (EG) surgery.
Patients and Methods
This was an international, multi-centre, observational study of consecutive patients treated by open and minimally invasive oesophagectomy and gastrectomy for malignant or benign disease. Patients were recruited from nine European centres serving regions with a high population incidence of COVID-19 between 1 May and 1 July 2020. The primary endpoint was 30-day COVID-19-related mortality. All staff involved in the operative care of patients were invited to complete a health-related survey to assess the incidence of COVID-19 in this group.
Results
In total, 158 patients were included in the study (71 oesophagectomy, 82 gastrectomy). Overall, 87 patients (57%) underwent MIS (59 oesophagectomy, 28 gastrectomy). A total of 403 staff were eligible for inclusion, of whom 313 (78%) completed the health survey. Approaches to mitigate against the risks of COVID-19 for patients and staff varied amongst centres. No patients developed COVID-19 in the post-operative period. Two healthcare workers developed self-limiting COVID-19.
Conclusions
Precautions to minimise the risk of COVID-19 infection have enabled the safe re-introduction of minimally invasive and open EG surgery for both patients and staff. Further studies are necessary to determine the minimum requirements for mitigations against COVID-19.
International stakeholder participation is important in the development of core outcome sets (COS). Stakeholders from varying regions may value health outcomes differently. Here, we explore how ...region, health income and participant characteristics influence prioritisation of outcomes during development of a COS for gastric cancer surgery trials (the GASTROS study).
952 participants from 55 countries participating in a Delphi survey during COS development were eligible for inclusion. Recruits were grouped according to region (East or West), country income classification (high and low-to-middle income) and other characteristics (e.g. patients; age, sex, time since surgery, mode of treatment, surgical approach and healthcare professionals; clinical experience). Groups were compared with respect to how they categorised 56 outcomes identified as potentially important to include in the final COS ('consensus in', 'consensus out', 'no consensus'). Outcomes categorised as 'consensus in' or 'consensus out' by all 3 stakeholder groups would be automatically included in or excluded from the COS respectively.
In total, 13 outcomes were categorised 'consensus in' (disease-free survival, disease-specific survival, surgery-related death, recurrence of cancer, completeness of tumour removal, overall quality of life, nutritional effects, all-cause complications, intraoperative complications, anaesthetic complications, anastomotic complications, multiple organ failure, and bleeding), 13 'consensus out' and 31 'no consensus'. There was little variation in prioritisation of outcomes by stakeholders from Eastern or Western countries and high or low-to-middle income countries. There was little variation in outcome prioritisation within either health professional or patient groups.
Our study suggests that there is little variation in opinion within stakeholder groups when participant region and other characteristics are considered. This finding may help COS developers when designing their Delphi surveys and recruitment strategies. Further work across other clinical fields is needed before broad recommendations can be made.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
