Purpose Improvement in the quality of life of patients with cancer requires attention to symptom burden across the continuum of care, with the use of patient-reported outcomes key to achieving ...optimal care. Yet there have been few studies that have examined symptoms in the early postdiagnosis period during which suboptimal symptom control may be common. A comprehensive analysis of temporal trends and risk factors for symptom burden in newly diagnosed patients with cancer is essential to guide supportive care strategies. Methods A retrospective observational study was performed of patients who were diagnosed with cancer between January 2007 and December 2014 and who survived at least 1 year. Patient-reported Edmonton Symptom Assessment System scores, which are prospectively collected at outpatient visits, were linked to provincial administrative health care data. We described the proportion of patients who reported moderate-to-severe symptom scores by month during the first year after diagnosis according to disease site. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to identify risk factors for moderate-to-severe symptom scores. Results Of 120,745 patients, 729,861 symptom assessments were recorded within 12 months of diagnosis. For most symptoms, odds of elevated scores were highest in the first month, whereas nausea had increased odds of elevated scores up to 6 months after diagnosis. On multivariable analysis, cancer site, younger age, higher comorbidity, female sex, lower income, and urban residence were associated with significantly higher odds of elevated symptom burden. Conclusion A high prevalence of moderate-to-severe symptom scores was observed in cancers of all sites. Patients are at risk of experiencing multiple symptoms in the immediate postdiagnosis period, which underscores the need to address supportive care requirements early in the cancer journey. Patient subgroups who are at higher risk of experiencing moderate-to-severe symptoms should be targeted for tailored supportive care interventions.
Objectives To identify inequalities in cancer survival rates for patients with a history of severe psychiatric illness (SPI) compared to those with no history of mental illness and explore ...differences in the provision of recommended cancer treatment as a potential explanation. Design Population-based retrospective cohort study using linked cancer registry and administrative data at ICES. Setting The universal healthcare system in Ontario, Canada. Participants Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients diagnosed between April 1st, 2007 and December 31st, 2012. SPI history (schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorders, other psychotic disorders, bipolar disorders or major depressive disorders) was determined using hospitalization, emergency department, and psychiatrist visit data and categorized as 'no history of mental illness, 'outpatient SPI history', and 'inpatient SPI history'. Main outcome measures Cancer-specific survival, non-receipt of surgical resection, and non-receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation. Results 24,507 CRC patients were included; 482 (2.0%) had an outpatient SPI history and 258 (1.0%) had an inpatient SPI history. Individuals with an SPI history had significantly lower survival rates and were significantly less likely to receive guideline recommended treatment than CRC patients with no history of mental illness. The adjusted HR for cancer-specific death was 1.69 times higher for individuals with an inpatient SPI (95% CI 1.36-2.09) and 1.24 times higher for individuals with an outpatient SPI history (95% CI 1.04-1.48). Stage II and III CRC patients with an inpatient SPI history were 2.15 times less likely (95% CI 1.07-4.33) to receive potentially curative surgical resection and 2.07 times less likely (95% CI 1.72-2.50) to receive adjuvant radiation or chemotherapy. These findings were consistent across multiple sensitivity analyses. Conclusions Individuals with an SPI history experience inequalities in colorectal cancer care and survival within a universal healthcare system. Increasing advocacy and the availability of resources to support individuals with an SPI within the cancer system are warranted to reduce the potential for unnecessary harm.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Ensuring safe, timely, and effective surgery is critical for high-quality healthcare and is the goal of surgical quality monitoring systems. At the heart of these systems are health administrative ...databases which house patient clinico-demographic information, healthcare processes and outcomes. Through analysis of monitoring systems outputs, we can identify gaps within healthcare delivery, patient experience, and surgical outcomes. However, gaps in our healthcare can only be measured by the variables we collect.
Equity stratifiers are sociodemographic descriptors that can identify patient populations who experience differences in health and healthcare that may be considered unjust or unfair. They include age, education, gender, geographic location, income, Indigenous identity, racialized group, and sex at birth. These equity stratifiers represent measurable components of the social determinants of health housed within health administrative databases and allow for standardized analysis and reporting of health inequity. However, not all databases collect these stratifiers – making granular analysis of patient subgroups who may experience health inequity impossible to measure. Moreover, in databases that do collect this information, a wide range in the classification systems used makes for comparisons across jurisdictions challenging.
The focus of this narrative review will be to apply the principles of the equity stratifier framework to examine what measures are collected in surgical quality improvement databases, cancer monitoring systems and provincial/state health administrative databases in the United States of America and Canada. The goal of this narrative review is to 1) inform researchers, surgeons, and policymakers of the current landscape of social variables collected within common health administrative databases. 2) Outline the pros and cons of the current collection system. 3) Issue a call to action for policymakers to incorporate health equity frameworks into the collection and reporting of data.
•Equity stratifiers represent measurable components of the social determinants of health housed within health administrative databases.•Pro: In the US, nearly all equity stratifiers are measured within healthcare databases suggesting a robust collection system.•Con: Heterogeneity in the equity stratifiers used and lack of standardization precludes accurate comparisons of inequities across jurisdictions.•Pro: In Canada, comprehensive guidance on best practices in collection and reporting of equity stratifiers has emerged.•Con: Canada has lagged behind the US as databases do not routinely collect income, education, and race at the individual-level.
OBJECTIVE:To examine the association between Textbook Outcome (TO)—a new composite quality measurement—and long-term survival in gastric cancer surgery.
BACKGROUND:Single-quality indicators do not ...sufficiently reflect the complex and multifaceted nature of perioperative care in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma.
METHODS:All patients undergoing gastrectomy for nonmetastatic gastric adenocarcinoma registered in the Population Registry of Esophageal and Stomach Tumours of Ontario (PRESTO) between 2004 and 2015 were included. TO was defined according to negative margins; >15 lymph nodes sampled; no severe complications; no re-interventions; no unplanned ICU admission; length of stay ≤21 days; no 30-day readmission; and no 30-day mortality. Three-year survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A marginal multivariable Cox proportional-hazards model was used to estimate the association between achieving TO metrics and long-term survival. E-value methodology was used to assess for risk of residual confounding.
RESULTS:Of the 1836 patients included in this study, 402 (22%) achieved all TO metrics. TO patients had a higher 3-year survival rate compared to non-TO patients (75% vs 55%, log-rank P < 0.001). After adjustments for covariates and clustering within hospitals, TO was associated with a 41% reduction in mortality (adjusted hazards ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.48, 0.72, P < 0.001). These results were robust to potential residual confounding.
CONCLUSIONS:Achieving TO is strongly associated with improved long-term survival in gastric cancer patients and merits further focus in surgical quality improvement efforts.
IMPORTANCE: Intraoperative anesthesiology care is crucial to high-quality surgical care. The clinical expertise and experience of anesthesiologists may decrease the risk of adverse outcomes. ...OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between anesthesiologist volume and short-term postoperative outcomes for complex gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This population-based cohort study used administrative health care data sets from various data sources in Ontario, Canada. Adult patients who underwent esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, or hepatectomy for GI cancer from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2018, were eligible. Patients with an invalid identification number, a duplicate surgery record, and missing primary anesthesiologist information were excluded. EXPOSURES: Primary anesthesiologist volume was defined as the annual number of procedures of interest (esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, and hepatectomy) supported by that anesthesiologist in the 2 years before the index surgery. Volume was dichotomized into low-volume and high-volume categories, with 75th percentile or 6 or more procedures per year selected as the cutoff point. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of 90-day major morbidity (with a Clavien-Dindo classification grade 3-5) and readmission. Secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome. The association between exposure and outcomes was examined using multivariable logistic regression models, accounting for potential confounders. RESULTS: Of the 8096 patients included, 5369 were men (66.3%) and the median (interquartile range IQR) age was 65 (57-72) years. Operations were supported by 842 anesthesiologists and performed by 186 surgeons, and the median (IQR) anesthesiologist volume was 3 (1.5-6) procedures per year. A total of 2166 patients (26.7%) received care from high-volume anesthesiologists. Primary outcome occurred in 36.3% of patients in the high-volume group and 45.7% of patients in the low-volume group. After adjustment, care by high-volume anesthesiologists was independently associated with lower odds of the primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio aOR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94), major morbidity (aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.91), unplanned intensive care unit admission (aOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94), but not readmission (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-1.05) or mortality (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.84-1.31). E-values analysis indicated that an unmeasured variable would unlikely substantively change the observed risk estimates. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study found that, among adults who underwent complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery, those who received care from high-volume anesthesiologists had a lower risk of adverse postoperative outcomes compared with those who received care from low-volume anesthesiologists. These findings support organizing perioperative care to increase anesthesiologist volume to optimize patient outcomes.
IMPORTANCE: Functional outcomes are central to cancer care decision-making by older adults. OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term functional outcomes of older adults after a resection for cancer using ...time at home as the measure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This population-based cohort study was conducted in Ontario, Canada, using the administrative databases stored at ICES (formerly the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences). The analysis included adults 70 years or older with a new diagnosis of cancer between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2017, who underwent a resection 90 days to 180 days after the diagnosis. Patients were followed up until and censored at the date of death, date of last contact, or December 31, 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcome was time at home, dichotomized as high time at home (defined as ≤14 institution days annually) and low time at home (defined as >14 institution days) during the 5 years after surgical cancer treatment. Time-to-event analyses with Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used. RESULTS: A total of 82 037 patients were included, with a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 46 (23-80) months. Of these patients, 52 119 were women (63.5%) and the mean (SD) age was 77.5 (5.7) years. The median (interquartile range) number of days at home per days alive per patient was high, at 0.98 (0.94-0.99) in postoperative year 1, 0.99 (0.97-1.00) in year 2, 0.99 (0.96-1.00) in year 3, 0.99 (0.96-1.00) in year 4, and 0.99 (0.96-1.00) in year 5. The probability of high time at home was 70.3% (95% CI, 70.0%-70.6%) at postoperative year 1 and 53.2% (95% CI, 52.8%-53.5%) at postoperative year 5. Advancing age (≥85 years: hazard ratio HR, 2.11; 95% CI, 2.04-2.18); preoperative frailty (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.68-1.80); high material deprivation (5th quintile: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.20-1.29); rural residency (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10-1.18); high-intensity surgical procedure (HR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.84-2.25); and gastrointestinal (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.18-1.27), gynecologic (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.18-1.45), and oropharyngeal (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.95-1.16) cancers were associated with low time at home. Inpatient acute care was responsible for 76.0% and long-term care was responsible for 2.0% of institution days in postoperative year 1. Inpatient days decreased to 31.0% by year 3, but days in long-term care increased over time. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study found that older adults predominantly experienced high time at home after resection for cancer, reflecting the overall favorable functional outcomes in this population. The oldest adults and those with preoperative frailty and material deprivation appeared to be the most vulnerable to low time at home, and efforts to optimize and manage expectations about surgical outcomes can be targeted for this population; this information is important for patient counseling regarding surgical cancer treatment and for preparation for postoperative recovery.
Background
Among patients not undergoing curative-intent therapy for esophagogastric cancer, access to care may vary. We examined the geographic distribution of care delivery and survival and their ...relationship with distance to cancer centres for non-curative esophagogastric cancer, hypothesising that patients living further from cancer centres have worse outcomes.
Methods
We conducted a population-based analysis of adults with non-curative esophagogastric cancer from 2005 to 2017 using linked administrative healthcare datasets in Ontario, Canada. Outcomes were medical oncology consultation, receipt of chemotherapy, and overall survival. Using geographic information system analysis, we mapped locations of cancer centres and outcomes across census divisions. Bivariate choropleth maps identified regional outcome discordances. Multivariable regression models assessed the relationship between distance from patient residence to the nearest cancer centre and outcomes, adjusting for demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic factors.
Results
Of 10,228 patients surviving a median 5.1 months (IQR: 2.0–12.0), 68.5% had medical oncology consultation and 32.2% received chemotherapy. Certain distances (reference ≤ 10 km) were associated with lower consultation relative risk 0.79 (95% CI 0.63–0.97) for ≥ 101 km, chemotherapy receipt relative risk 0.67 (95% CI 0.53–0.85) for ≥ 101 km, and overall survival hazard ratio 1.07 (95% CI 1.02–1.13) for 11–50 km, hazard ratio 1.13 (95% CI 1.04–1.23) for 51–100 km.
Conclusion
A third of patients did not see medical oncology and most did not receive chemotherapy. Outcomes exhibited high geographic variability. Location of residence influenced outcomes, with inferior outcomes at certain distances > 10 km from cancer centres. These findings are important for designing interventions to reduce access disparities for non-curative esophagogastric cancer care.
PDF
