Definition and recommendations for advance care planning: an international consensus supported by the European Association for Palliative Care

Advance care planning (ACP) is increasingly implemented in oncology and beyond, but a definition of ACP and recommendations concerning its use are lacking. We used a formal Delphi consensus process to help develop a definition of ACP and provide recommendations for its application. Of the 109 experts (82 from Europe, 16 from North America, and 11 from Australia) who rated the ACP definitions and its 41 recommendations, agreement for each definition or recommendation was between 68–100%. ACP was defined as the ability to enable individuals to define goals and preferences for future medical treatment and care, to discuss these goals and preferences with family and health-care providers, and to record and review these preferences if appropriate. Recommendations included the adaptation of ACP based on the readiness of the individual; targeting ACP content as the individual's health condition worsens; and, using trained non-physician facilitators to support the ACP process. We present a list of outcome measures to enable the pooling and comparison of results of ACP studies. We believe that our recommendations can provide guidance for clinical practice, ACP policy, and research

Ventilation and outcomes following robotic-assisted abdominal surgery: an international, multicentre observational study

Background: International data on the epidemiology, ventilation practice, and outcomes in patients undergoing abdominal robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) are lacking. The aim of the study was to assess the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), and to describe ventilator management after abdominal RAS. Methods: This was an international, multicentre, prospective study in 34 centres in nine countries. Patients ≥18 yr of age undergoing abdominal RAS were enrolled between April 2017 and March 2019. The Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score was used to stratify for higher risk of PPCs (≥26). The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs. Secondary endpoints included the preoperative risk for PPCs and ventilator management. Results: Of 1167 subjects screened, 905 abdominal RAS patients were included. Overall, 590 (65.2%) patients were at increased risk for PPCs. Meanwhile, 172 (19%) patients sustained PPCs, which occurred more frequently in 132 (22.4%) patients at increased risk, compared with 40 (12.7%) patients at lower risk of PPCs (absolute risk difference: 12.2% [95% confidence intervals (CI), 6.8–17.6%]; P<0.001). Plateau and driving pressures were higher in patients at increased risk, compared with patients at low risk of PPCs, but no ventilatory variables were independently associated with increased occurrence of PPCs. Development of PPCs was associated with a longer hospital stay. Conclusions: One in five patients developed one or more PPCs (chiefly unplanned oxygen requirement), which was associated with a longer hospital stay. No ventilatory variables were independently associated with PPCs. Clinical trial registration: NCT02989415

Needs and preferences of patients regarding basal cell carcinoma and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma care: a qualitative focus group study

Background: Despite the high and rising incidence rate of keratinocyte cancer (KC) and the importance of incorporating patient values into evidence-based care, few studies have focused on the perspectives of patients with KC. Objectives: To identify the needs and preferences of patients with basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) regarding care. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted consisting of three focus groups with patients with BCC and three focus groups with patients with SCC. In total 42 patients participated. In each focus group, the patients’ needs and preferences regarding treatment and follow-up were discussed, using a predefined topic list. All sessions were transcribed verbatim and analysed by two researchers. Results: The following needs and preferences were identified: (i) the need to receive all relevant, tailored information; (ii) a physician who takes you seriously and communicates well; (iii) a short waiting period and the best treatment with direct results; (iv) to be seen by the same physician; a preference for a dermatologist during (v) treatment and (vi) follow-up; (vii) a general need for structured follow-up care and (viii) a full-body skin examination during follow-up. Patients with BCC additionally expressed the need for openness and transparency and wanting to participate in shared decision making. Conclusions: It is advocated to organize skin cancer care that is better tailored to the needs of patients with KC, providing patient-centred care. This should include investing in the patient–physician relationship, and personalizing the type and form of information and the follow-up schedules. Adding the patient's perspective to current guidelines could facilitate this process