Avantages et inconvénients de la formation médicale continue virtuelle : une étude de la portée

Introduction: With the COVID-19 pandemic, most continuing medical education activities became virtual (VCME). The authors conducted a scoping review to synthesize the advantages and disadvantages of VCME to establish the impact of this approach on inequities that physicians face along the intersections of gender, race, and location of practice. Methods: Guided by the methodological framework of Arksey and O’Malley, the search included six databases and was limited to studies published between January 1991 to April 2021. Eligible studies included those related to accredited/non-accredited post-certification medical education, conferences, or meetings in a virtual setting focused on physicians. Numeric and inductive thematic analyses were performed.   Results: 282 studies were included in the review. Salient advantages identified were convenience, favourable learning formats, collaboration opportunities, effectiveness at improving knowledge and clinical practices, and cost-effectiveness. Prominent disadvantages included technological barriers, poor design, cost, lack of sufficient technological skill, and time. Analysis of the studies showed that VCME was most common in the general/family practice specialty, in suburban settings, and held by countries in the Global North. A minority of studies reported on gender (35%) and race (4%).  Discussion: Most studies report advantages of VCME, but disadvantages and barriers exist that are contextual to the location of practice and medical subspecialty. VCME events are largely organized by Global North countries with suboptimized accessibility for Global South attendees. A lack of reported data on gender and race reveals a limited understanding of how VCME affects vulnerable populations, prompting potential future considerations as it evolves. Introduction : Par suite de la pandémie de la COVID-19, la plupart des activités de formation médicale continue ont été offertes en ligne. Les auteurs ont effectué une revue de la portée visant à synthétiser les avantages et les inconvénients de la formation médicale continue en mode virtuel (FMCV) et à examiner les effets de cette approche sur les inégalités qui affectent les médecins en fonction du sexe, de la race et du lieu d’exercice. Méthodes : Suivant le cadre méthodologique d’Arksey et O’Malley, nous avons effectué une recherche dans six banques de données, que nous avons limitée aux études publiées entre janvier 1991 et avril 2021. Les études incluses étaient celles relatives à la formation médicale post-certification, accréditée ou non, aux conférences et aux réunions destinées aux médecins qui se sont déroulées dans un cadre virtuel. Une analyse numérique et une analyse thématique inductive ont été réalisées. Résultats : Au total, 282 articles ont été inclus dans l’étude. Les principaux avantages identifiés sont la commodité, les formats favorables à l’apprentissage, les possibilités de collaboration, l’efficacité pour l’amélioration des connaissances et des pratiques cliniques et le rapport coût-efficacité. Les principaux inconvénients sont les obstacles technologiques, les défauts de conception, le coût, les compétences technologiques insuffisantes et le manque de temps. L’analyse des études a montré que la FMCV était la plus courante dans la spécialité de la médecine générale/familiale, dans les banlieues et dans les pays du Nord. Quelques études considèrent les facteurs sexe (35 %) et race (4 %). Discussion : La plupart des études évoquent les avantages de la FMCV, mais il existe des inconvénients et des obstacles liés au lieu d’exercice et à la sous-spécialité médicale. La plupart des activités de FMCV sont organisées dans les pays du Nord et leur accessibilité n’est pas optimale pour les participants provenant des pays du Sud. Le manque de données sur le sexe et la race pose une limite à notre compréhension de la façon dont la FMCV affecte les populations vulnérables. Ces facteurs seraient à prendre en considération dans les recherches futures sur le sujet et au fur et à mesure que la FMCV évolue.

Implementation of self-management support in cancer care and normalization into routine practice: a systematic scoping literature review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors face a myriad of biopsychosocial consequences due to cancer and treatment that may be potentially mitigated through enabling their self-management skills and behaviors for managing illness. Unfortunately, the cancer system lags in its systematic provision of self-management support (SMS) in routine care, and it is unclear what implementation approaches or strategies work to embed SMS in the cancer context to inform health policy and administrator decision-making. METHODS/DESIGN: A comprehensive scoping review study of the literature will be conducted based on methods and steps identified by Arksey and O'Malley and experts in the field. Electronic searches will be conducted in multiple databases including CINAHL, CENTRAL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, AMED, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (up to Issue 2, 2015), ISI Proceedings (Web of Science), PsychAbstracts, and Sociological Abstracts from January 1997 to November 5, 2018. Following the PRISMA-Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), two authors will independently screen all titles/abstracts to determine eligibility, data will be abstracted by one author and checked by a second author, and findings will be narratively summarized based on constructs of implementation in the Normalization Process Theory. DISCUSSION: This will be the first scoping review study to synthesize knowledge of implementation of SMS in the cancer care context and the implementation approaches and strategies on embedding in care. This information will be critical to inform health policy and knowledge end users about the necessary changes in care to embed SMS in practices and to stimulate future research

Bevacizumab Treatment for Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review

Serous epithelial ovarian cancer, classified as either high-grade (90%) or low-grade (10%), varies in molecular, histological, and clinicopathological presentation. Low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) is a rare histologic subtype that lacks disease-specific evidence-based treatment regimens. However, LGSOC is relatively chemo-resistant and has a poor response to traditional treatments. Alternative treatments, including biologic therapies such as bevacizumab, have shown some activity in LGSOC. Thus, the objective of this systematic review is to determine the effect and safety of bevacizumab in the treatment of LGSOC. Following PRISMA guidelines, Medline ALL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase all from the OvidSP platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry were searched from inception to February 2022. Articles describing bevacizumab use in patients with LGSOC were included. Article screening, data extraction, and critical appraisal of included studies were completed by two independent reviewers. The effect of bevacizumab on the overall response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and adverse effects were summarized. The literature search identified 3064 articles, 6 of which were included in this study. A total of 153 patients were analyzed; the majority had stage IIIC cancer (56.2%). The overall median response rate reported in the studies was 47.5%. Overall, bevacizumab is a promising treatment for LGSOC, with response rates higher than traditional treatment modalities such as conventional chemotherapy, and is often overlooked as a treatment tool. A prospective clinical trial evaluating the use of bevacizumab in LGSOC is necessary to provide greater evidence and support these findings

On the advantages and disadvantages of virtual continuing medical education: A scoping review

Introduction: With the COVID-19 pandemic, most continuing medical education activities became virtual (VCME). The authors conducted a scoping review to synthesize the advantages and disadvantages of VCME to establish the impact of this approach on inequities that physicians face along the intersections of gender, race, and location of practice. Methods: Guided by the methodological framework of Arksey and O’Malley, the search included six databases and was limited to studies published between January 1991 to April 2021. Eligible studies included those related to accredited/non-accredited post-certification medical education, conferences, or meetings in a virtual setting focused on physicians. Numeric and inductive thematic analyses were performed. Results: 282 studies were included in the review. Salient advantages identified were convenience, favourable learning formats, collaboration opportunities, effectiveness at improving knowledge and clinical practices, and cost-effectiveness. Prominent disadvantages included technological barriers, poor design, cost, lack of sufficient technological skill, and time. Analysis of the studies showed that VCME was most common in the general/family practice specialty, in suburban settings, and held by countries in the Global North. A minority of studies reported on gender (35%) and race (4%). Discussion: Most studies report advantages of VCME, but disadvantages and barriers exist that are contextual to the location of practice and medical subspecialty. VCME events are largely organized by Global North countries with suboptimized accessibility for Global South attendees. A lack of reported data on gender and race reveals a limited understanding of how VCME affects vulnerable populations, prompting potential future considerations as it evolves.Introduction : Par suite de la pandémie de la COVID-19, la plupart des activités de formation médicale continue ont été offertes en ligne. Les auteurs ont effectué une revue exploratoire de la littérature visant à faire la synthèse des avantages et des inconvénients de la formation médicale continue en mode virtuel (FMCV) et à évaluer les effets de cette approche sur les inégalités qui affectent les médecins en fonction du sexe, de la race et du lieu d’exercice. Méthodes : Suivant le cadre méthodologique d’Arksey et O’Malley, nous avons effectué une recherche dans six banques de données, que nous avons limitée aux études publiées entre janvier 1991 et avril 2021. Les études incluses étaient celles relatives à la formation médicale post-certification, accréditée ou non, aux conférences et aux réunions destinées aux médecins qui se sont déroulées dans un cadre virtuel. Une analyse numérique et une analyse thématique inductive ont été réalisées. Résultats : Au total, 282 articles ont été inclus dans l’étude. Les principaux avantages identifiés sont la commodité, les formats favorables à l’apprentissage, les possibilités de collaboration, l’efficacité pour l’amélioration des connaissances et des pratiques cliniques et le rapport coût-efficacité. Les principaux inconvénients sont les obstacles technologiques, les défauts de conception, le coût, les compétences technologiques insuffisantes et le manque de temps. L’analyse des études a montré que la FMCV était plus courante dans la spécialité de la médecine générale/familiale, dans les banlieues et dans les pays du Nord. Quelques études prennent en compte sexe (35 %) et race (4 %). Discussion : La plupart des études évoquent les avantages de la FMCV, mais il existe des inconvénients et des obstacles liés au lieu de pratique et à la surspécialité médicale. La plupart des activités de FMCV sont organisées dans les pays du Nord et leur accessibilité n’est pas optimale pour les participants provenant des pays du Sud. Le manque de données sur e sexe et la race des participants limite à notre compréhension de la façon dont la FMCV affecte les populations vulnérables. Ces facteurs seraient à prendre en considération dans les recherches futures sur le sujet au fur et à mesure que la FMCV évolue

Ethical Frameworks in Clinical Research Processes during Times of Global Stress: A Scoping Review

A review of the existing medical literature surrounding COVID-19 for references to ethical framework

Assessment tools for problematic opioid use in palliative care: A scoping review

Background: Screening for problematic opioid use is increasingly recommended in patients receiving palliative care. Aim: To identify tools used to assess for the presence or risk of problematic opioid use in palliative care. Design: Scoping review. Data sources: Bibliographic databases (inception to January 31, 2020), reference lists, and grey literature were searched to find primary studies reporting on adults receiving palliative care and prescription opioids to manage symptoms from advanced cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, or end-stage organ diseases; and included tools to assess for problematic opioid use. There were no restrictions based on study design, location, or language. Results: We identified 42 observational studies (total 14,431 participants) published between 2009 and 2020 that used questionnaires (n = 32) and urine drug tests (n = 21) to assess for problematic opioid use in palliative care, primarily in US (n = 38) and outpatient palliative care settings (n = 36). The questionnaires were Cut down, Annoyed, Guilty, and Eye-opener (CAGE, n = 8), CAGE-Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID, n = 6), Opioid Risk Tool (n = 9), Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP; n = 3), SOAPP-Revised (n = 2), and SOAPP-Short Form (n = 5). Only two studies’ primary objectives were to evaluate a questionnaire’s psychometric properties in patients receiving palliative care. There was wide variation in how urine drug tests were incorporated into palliative care; frequency of abnormal urine drug test results ranged from 8.6% to 70%. Conclusion: Given the dearth of studies using tools developed or validated specifically for patients receiving palliative care, further research is needed to inform clinical practice and policy regarding problematic opioid use in palliative care.This work was supported by the Canadian Institute of Health Research [grant number OCK_156774] for Dr. J Lau

Artificial intelligence in cancer palliative care: a scoping review

scoping revie

Palliative care for people who use drugs during communicable disease epidemics and pandemics: a scoping review on access, policies, and programs and guidelines.

BACKGROUND: People who use drugs with life-limiting illnesses experience substantial barriers to accessing palliative care. Demand for palliative care is expected to increase during communicable disease epidemics and pandemics. Understanding how epidemics and pandemics affect palliative care for people who use drugs is important from a service delivery perspective and for reducing population health inequities. AIM: To explore what is known about communicable disease epidemics and pandemics, palliative care, and people who use drugs. DATA SOURCES: This was a scoping review. We searched six bibliographic databases from inception to April 2021 as well as the grey literature. We included English and French records about palliative care access, programs, and policies and guidelines for people ⩾18 years old who use drugs during communicable disease epidemics and pandemics. RESULTS: Forty-four articles were included in our analysis. We identified limited knowledge about palliative care for people who use drugs during epidemics and pandemics other than HIV/AIDS. Through our thematic synthesis of the records, we generated the following themes: enablers and barriers to access, organizational barriers, structural inequity, access to opioids and other psychoactive substances, and stigma. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the need for further research about how best to provide palliative care for people who use drugs during epidemics and pandemics. We suggest four ways that health systems can be better prepared to help alleviate the structural barriers that limit access as well as support the provision of high-quality palliative care during future epidemics and pandemics