| 1. |
- Olsson, Cecilia, 1971-, et al.
(författare)
-
Adaption of the Quality From the Patient’s Perspective Instrument for Use in Assessing Gynecological Cancer Care and Patients’ Perceptions of Quality Care Received
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Cancer Care Research Online. - : Wolters Kluwer. - 2691-3623. ; 2:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Research focusing on patients’ perceptions of the quality of gynecological cancer care is needed.Objective: To adapt the Quality from the Patient’s Perspective instrument for use in gynecological cancer care (QPP-GynCa) and describe patients’ perceptions of their quality of care in terms of the care received and the subjective importance of the aspects of care.Methods: A cross-sectional study 6–8 months after diagnosis was conducted, involving 1511 patients (response rate of 50.4%) included in the Swedish quality registry for gynecologic cancer.Results: The exploratory factor analysis (n = 1431) resulted in the QPP-GynCa with a 5-factor structure and an eigenvalue of ≥1, explaining 73.1% of the total scale variance. The final 27-item version of the QPP-GynCa consisted of 18 items with 8 additional single items and 1 global single item. The Cronbach’s alpha was acceptable for most factors (>.80). Subjective importance scores were higher than corresponding quality of care scores for care received (P ≤ .01)in all dimensions, factors, and items.Conclusions: The QPP-GynCa instrument reflects all 4 dimensions of the theoretical model of quality of care and achieved good validity as a reliable instrument in assessing the quality of gynecological cancer care.Implication for Practice: Information related to self-care, aspects of sexuality, and reducing patient waiting times need improvement.What Is Foundational: This study contributes to a better understanding of quality of gynecological cancer treatment and care. The validated QPP-GynCa instrument will be a platform for more research on how this group of patients experience their received care, as well as importance of each aspect of care.
|
|
| 2. |
- Radestad, A. F., et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term incidence of endometrial cancer after endometrial resection and ablation: A population based Swedish gynecologic cancer group (SweGCG) study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. - : Wiley. - 0001-6349 .- 1600-0412. ; 101:8, s. 923-930
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction Minimally invasive methods to reduce menorrhagia were introduced in the 1980s and 1990s. Transcervical endometrial resection (TCRE) and endometrial ablation (EA) are two of the most frequently used methods. As none of them can guarantee a complete removal of the endometrium, there are concerns that the remaining endometrium may develop to endometrial cancer (EC) later in life. The primary aim was to analyze the long-term incidence of EC after TCRE and EA in a nationwide population. The secondary aim was to assess the two treatment modalities separately. Material and Methods The Swedish National Patient Registry and National Quality Registry for Gynecological Surgery were used for identification of women who had TCRE or EA performed between 1997-2017. The cohort was followed from the first TCRE or EA until hysterectomy, diagnosis of EC, or death. Follow-up data were retrieved from the National Cancer Registry and the National Death Registry. Expected incidence for EC in Swedish women was calculated using Swedish data retrieved from the NORDCAN project after having taken into account differences of age and follow-up time. Cumulative incidence of EC after TCRE and EA, was calculated. A standardized incidence ratio was calculated based on the expected and observed incidence, stratified by age and year of diagnosis. Results In total, 17 296 women (mean age 45.1 years) underwent TCRE (n = 8626) or EA (n = 8670). Excluded were 3121 who had a hysterectomy for benign causes during follow up. During a median follow-up time of 7.1 years (interquartile range 3.1-13.3 years) the numbers of EC were 25 (0.3%) after TCRE and 2 (0.02%) after EA, respectively. The observed incidence was significantly lower than expected (population-based estimate) after EA but not after TCRE, giving a standardized incidence ratio of 0.13 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03-0.53) after EA and 1.27 (95% CI 0.86-1.88) after TCRE. Median times to EC were 3.0 and 8.3 years after TCRE and EA, respectively. Conclusions There was a significant reduction of EC after EA, suggesting a protective effect, whereas endometrial resection showed an incidence within the expected rate.
|
|
