| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Brännström, Fredrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Multidisciplinary team conferences promote treatment according to guidelines in rectal cancer
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Acta Oncologica. - : Informa Healthcare. - 0284-186X .- 1651-226X. ; 54:4, s. 447-453
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) conferences have been introduced into standard cancer care, though evidence that it benefits the patient is weak. We used the national Swedish Rectal Cancer Register to evaluate predictors for case discussion at a MDT conference and its impact on treatment.Material and methods. Of the 6760 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer in Sweden between 2007 and 2010, 78% were evaluated at a MDT. Factors that influenced whether a patient was discussed at a preoperative MDT conference were evaluated in 4883 patients, and the impact of MDT evaluation on the implementation of preoperative radiotherapy was evaluated in 1043 patients with pT3c-pT4 M0 tumours, and in 1991 patients with pN+ M0 tumours.Results. Hospital volume, i.e. the number of rectal cancer surgical procedures performed per year, was the major predictor for MDT evaluation. Patients treated at hospitals with < 29 procedures per year had an odds ratio (OR) for MDT evaluation of 0.15. Age and tumour stage also influenced the chance of MDT evaluation. MDT evaluation significantly predicted the likelihood of being treated with preoperative radiotherapy in patients with pT3c-pT4 M0 tumours (OR 5.06, 95% CI 3.08–8.34), and pN+ M0 (OR 3.55, 95% CI 2.60–4.85), even when corrected for co-morbidity and age.Conclusion. Patients with rectal cancer treated at high-volume hospitals are more likely to be discussed at a MDT conference, and that is an independent predictor of the use of adjuvant radiotherapy. These results indirectly support the introduction into clinical practice of discussing all rectal cancer patients at MDT conferences, not least those being treated at low-volume hospitals.
|
|
| 3. |
- Carlsson, Christina, et al.
(författare)
-
Benefits from membership in cancer patient associations: relations to gender and involvement.
- 2006
-
Ingår i: Acta oncologica. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0284-186X .- 1651-226X. ; 45:5, s. 559-563
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Cancer patient associations report a growing number of members and increasing possibilities to influence health care, but knowledge about the members' views on the benefit of involvement is scarce. We therefore investigated how members (n = 1742) of Swedish patient associations for breast cancer and prostate cancer rate the benefit of membership for their physical and psychological well-being and social adjustment to cancer. Using a scoring scale, 2/3 of the members reported that membership had benefit for psychological well-being, whereas half of the members reported benefit for physical well-being and social adjustment. Individuals who had been actively involved in board work and/or contact person activities within the associations reported significantly more benefit for all three parameters. Gender differences were observed with men, represented by individuals affected by prostate cancer, reporting greater benefit for all three parameters, although especially evident for psychological well-being. Individuals who obtained membership within two years of diagnosis reported greater benefit for psychological well-being and social adjustment compared to those who became members later. In conclusion, members in patient associations for cancer report benefit particularly for their psychological well-being and actively involved members and men affected by prostate cancer perceive the greatest benefit from membership.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Nilbert, Mef, et al.
(författare)
-
The power of empirical data; lessons from the clinical registry initiatives in Scandinavian cancer care
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Acta Oncologica. - 0284-186X. ; 59:11, s. 1343-1356
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: In Scandinavia, there is a strong tradition for research and quality monitoring based on registry data. In Denmark, Norway and Sweden, 63 clinical registries collect data on disease characteristics, treatment and outcome of various cancer diagnoses and groups based on process-related and outcome-related variables. Aim: We describe the cancer-related clinical registries, compare organizational structures and quality indicators and provide examples of how these registries have been used to monitor clinical performance, develop prediction models, assess outcome and provide quality benchmarks. Further, we define unmet needs such as inclusion of patient-reported outcome variables, harmonization of variables and barriers for data sharing. Results and conclusions: The clinical registry framework provides an empirical basis for evidence-based development of high-quality and equitable cancer care. The registries can be used to follow implementation of new treatment principles and monitor patterns of care across geographical areas and patient groups. At the same time, the lessons learnt suggest that further developments and coordination are needed to utilize the full potential of the registry initiative in cancer care.
|
|
| 7. |
- Alexandersson, Nathalie, et al.
(författare)
-
Determinants of variable resource use for multidisciplinary team meetings in cancer care
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Acta Oncologica. - 0284-186X. ; 57:5, s. 675-680
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) have developed into standard of care to provide expert opinion and to grant evidence-based recommendations on diagnostics and treatment of cancer. Though MDTMs are associated with a range of benefits, a growing number of cases, complex case discussion and an increasing number of participants raise questions on cost versus benefit. We aimed to determine cost of MDTMs and to define determinants hereof based on observations in Swedish cancer care. Methods: Data were collected through observations of 50 MDTMs and from questionnaire data from 206 health professionals that participated in these meetings. Results: The MDTMs lasted mean 0.88 h and managed mean 12.6 cases with mean 4.2 min per case. Participants were mean 8.2 physicians and 2.9 nurses/other health professionals. Besides the number of cases discussed, meeting duration was also influenced by cancer diagnosis, hospital type and use of video facilities. When preparatory work, participation and post-MDTM work were considered, physicians spent mean 4.1 h per meeting. The cost per case discussion was mean 212 (range 91–595) EUR and the cost per MDTM was mean 2675 (range 1439–4070) EUR. Conclusions: We identify considerable variability in resource use for MDTMs in cancer care and demonstrate that 84% of the total cost is derived from physician time. The variability demonstrated underscores the need for regular and structured evaluations to ensure cost effective MDTM services.
|
|
| 8. |
- Langballe, Rikke, et al.
(författare)
-
Understanding quality data correctly : a randomized comparison of presentation formats among cancer patients and relatives
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Acta Oncologica. - 0284-186X. ; 61:12, s. 1454-1462
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Patient representatives are increasingly engaged in quality in health care, and even though quality data are publicly available, correct interpretation may be challenging. We designed a randomized study with the primary aim to examine the association between preferred data presentation format and the interpretation of quality data among cancer patients and relatives. Material and methods: Surveys were distributed to the Danish Cancer Society Citizens’ Panel between 31 March and 14 April 2019 and 55% completed the survey (N = 464) including six storyboards that presented authentic quality data in table format, league table and point estimates. The storyboards were randomized to expose participants to the data in the three different formats and in varying presentation order. Logistic regression models were used to calculate Odds Ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between preferred presentation format, health literacy, education and cohabitation status as exposures and interpretation of quality data as outcome. Results: The majority of participants (97%) had high literacy and 57% had a medium or long higher education. A total of 60% found the questions difficult or very difficult and 33% were not able to correctly interpret at least one format. Correct interpretation was associated with preferred league table (OR = 1.62; 95% CI = 1.04–5.52) and if the data was presented in the preferred format. Medium and long education were associated with correct interpretation of at least one format (OR = 1.93; 95% CI = 1.16–3.21 and OR = 3.89; 95% CI = 1.90–7.95, respectively) while health literacy and cohabitation status were not. Conclusions: More than one third of the participants were not able to correctly interpret the data and the understanding of quality data improved with longer education and if the data was presented in the preferred format. Decision-makers should carefully consider displaying quality data according to preferred presentation format and to guide interpretation for individuals with short education.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
