| 1. |
- Mauri, Davide, et al.
(författare)
-
Cancer pain ... who cares? : International and national patterns of evidence-based global guide-lines recommendations for physicians on the Web (2011 vs. 2018)
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of B.U.ON. (JBUON). - 1107-0625 .- 2241-6293. ; 25:1, s. 62-73
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: Although pain is a common event during treatment of cancer, its assessment and management remains suboptimal in everyday clinical practice at global level.Methods: Considering both the important role of Internet in daily life and that clinical guidelines are important for translating evidence in clinical practice, we performed a prospective study to scrutinize the magnitude of updated evidence-based cancer-pain guideline recommendation for physicians on the web. Changes over-time at a global level were scrutinized at two time points: 2011 for baseline and 2018 at first follow-up. Both anesthesiology and oncology societies were analyzed.Results: In 2011 we scrutinized 181,00 WebPages and 370 eligible societies were identified; 364 of these were eligible for analyses both in 2011 and 2018. The magnitude of cancer pain updated and evidence-based guideline recommendations on the web for health care providers was extremely low at global level and at any time point considered 1.1% (4/364) in 2011 and 4.7% (17364) in 2018. Continental and intercontinental patterns, National's highest developmental index, oncology tradition and economic-geographic areas were not found to influence cancer pain web-guideline provision. In 2018, pain & supportive care societies provided the highest rate of updated evidence-based cancer-pain guidelines for clinicians. Only 3/25 medical oncology societies and 1/34 radiation oncology societies, provided own or e-link (to other societies) evidence-based guidelines in their websites.Conclusions: Major medical oncology and radiation oncology societies - at global level - fail to produce updated cancer pain recommendations for their physicians, with most of these providing no or inconsistent or outdated guidelines.
|
|
| 2. |
- Mauri, Davide, et al.
(författare)
-
Behind the numbers and the panic of a viral pandemic : fixed restrictive oncology guidance may jeopardize patients' survival
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Balkan Union of Oncology. Journal. - : Zerbinis Publications. - 1107-0625. ; 25:3, s. 1277-1280
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To protect cancer patients from COVID-19 exposure, prioritization strategies are being implemented at global level. Measures include use of tele-health services, deferring elective surgeries, delaying non life-saving therapies, interrupting maintenance and supportive care regimens and suspending screening and regular follow-up visits.Nonetheless, the risk of infection may not always outweigh oncology treatment benefit. Lives of most oncology patients depend on their ability to receive medical, surgical and radiotherapy care. Postponing screening,follow-up and radical surgeries increase patients' risk of developing metastatic disease.A viral pandemic lasts long time and exhibits seasonal and geographical variations. Though vaccines will be available only in the 2021, a global, aggressive, all-embracing and protracted slowdown of oncologic activities will severely jeopardize patients' outcomes.A present international oncologists' panel, ECPC and FAVO, strongly suggest that Hospital measures in a specific geographical area/Nation should be in line with the local epidemic, and restrictions adopted should be adapted and stratified over time.
|
|
