8 research outputs found
The Toronto General Hospital Transitional Pain Service: development and implementation of a multidisciplinary program to prevent chronic postsurgical pain
Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP), an often unanticipated result of necessary and even life-saving procedures, develops in 5â10% of patients one-year after major surgery. Substantial advances have been made in identifying patients at elevated risk of developing CPSP based on perioperative pain, opioid use, and negative affect, including depression, anxiety, pain catastrophizing, and posttraumatic stress disorder-like symptoms. The Transitional Pain Service (TPS) at Toronto General Hospital (TGH) is the first to comprehensively address the problem of CPSP at three stages: 1) preoperatively, 2) postoperatively in hospital, and 3) postoperatively in an outpatient setting for up to 6 months after surgery. Patients at high risk for CPSP are identified early and offered coordinated and comprehensive care by the multidisciplinary team consisting of pain physicians, advanced practice nurses, psychologists, and physiotherapists. Access to expert intervention through the Transitional Pain Service bypasses typically long wait times for surgical patients to be referred and seen in chronic pain clinics. This affords the opportunity to impact patientsâ pain trajectories, preventing the transition from acute to chronic pain, and reducing suffering, disability, and health care costs. In this report, we describe the workings of the Transitional Pain Service at Toronto General Hospital, including the clinical algorithm used to identify patients, and clinical services offered to patients as they transition through the stages of surgical recovery. We describe the role of the psychological treatment, which draws on innovations in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy that allow for brief and effective behavioral interventions to be applied transdiagnostically and preventatively. Finally, we describe our vision for future growth.Joel Katz is supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research Canada Research Chair in Health Psychology at York University. Hance Clarke is supported by a Merit Award from the Department of Anesthesia, University of Toronto and received funding from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, Medically Complex Patients Demonstration Project Program for a project entitled âThe Transitional Pain Service Demonstration Projectâ
Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19
IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.
Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 nonâcritically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022).
INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (nâ=â257), ARB (nâ=â248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; nâ=â10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; nâ=â264) for up to 10 days.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ supportâfree days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes.
RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ supportâfree days among critically ill patients was 10 (â1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (nâ=â231), 8 (â1 to 17) in the ARB group (nâ=â217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (nâ=â231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ supportâfree days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570
Patients with progression of spinal metastases who present to the clinic have better outcomes compared to those who present to the emergency department
Abstract Background As cancer therapies have improved, spinal metastases are increasingly common. Resulting complications have a significant impact on patient's quality of life. Optimal methods of surveillance and avoidance of neurologic deficits are understudied. This study compares the clinical course of patients who initially presented to the emergency department (ED) versus a multidisciplinary spine oncology clinic and who underwent stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) secondary to progression/presentation of metastatic spine disease. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of adult oncologic patients who underwent spinal SBRT at a single hospital from 2010 to 2021. Descriptive statistics and survival analyses were performed. Results We identified 498 spinal radiographic treatment sites in 390 patients. Of these patients, 118 (30.3%) presented to the ED. Patients presenting to the ED compared to the clinic had significantly more severe spinal compression (52.5% vs. 11.7%; pâ<â0.0001), severe pain (28.8% vs. 10.3%; pâ<â0.0001), weakness (24.5% vs. 4.5%; pâ<â0.0001), and difficulty walking (24.5% vs. 4.5%; pâ<â0.0001). Patients who presented to the ED compared to the clinic were significantly more likely to have surgical intervention followed by SBRT (55.4% vs. 15.3%; pâ<â0.0001) compared to SBRT alone. Patients who presented to the ED compared to the clinic had a significantly quicker interval to distant spine progression (5.1â±â6.5 vs. 9.1â±â10.2âmonths; pâ=â0.004), systemic progression (5.1â±â7.2 vs. 9.2â±â10.7âmonths; pâ<â0.0001), and worse overall survival (9.3â±â10.0 vs. 14.3â±â13.7âmonths; pâ=â0.002). Conclusion The establishment of multidisciplinary spine oncology clinics is an opportunity to potentially allow for earlier, more dataâdriven treatment of their spinal metastatic disease
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in neuro-oncology: A pilot study of feasibility and utility in telehealth and in-person clinical assessments
BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairments are a common burden for patients with primary CNS tumors. Neuropsychological assessment batteries can be too lengthy, which limits their use as an objective measure of cognition during routine care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and utility of the brief Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in routine in-person and telehealth visits (as a result of the global COVID-19 pandemic) with neuro-oncology patients. METHODS: Seventy-one adults with primary CNS tumors completed MoCA testing in person (n = 47) and via telehealth (n = 24). Correlation analysis and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including symptom burden and interference, perceived cognition, general health status, and anxiety and depression, were included in this study. Feasibility was assessed through a provider satisfaction questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients were primarily White (83%), college-educated (71%) males (54%) with high-grade tumors (66%). The average total score on the MoCA administered in person was 25 (range: 6-30), with 34% classified as abnormal, and the average total score via telehealth was 26 (range: 12-30), with 29% classified as abnormal. Providers reported satisfaction in using the MoCA during routine clinical care, both in person and via telehealth. Lower MoCA scores correlated with worse symptom severity, KPS, age, education, and previous treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The MoCA was feasible in clinical and telehealth settings, and its relationship to clinical characteristics and PROs highlights the need for both objective and patient-reported measures of cognition to understand the overall cognitive profile of a patient with a CNS tumor
Research gaps and opportunities in precision nutrition : an NIH workshop report
Precision nutrition is an emerging concept that aims to develop nutrition recommendations tailored to different people's circumstances and biological characteristics. Responses to dietary change and the resulting health outcomes from consuming different diets may vary significantly between people based on interactions between their genetic backgrounds, physiology, microbiome, underlying health status, behaviors, social influences, and environmental exposures. On 11-12 January 2021, the National Institutes of Health convened a workshop entitled "Precision Nutrition: Research Gaps and Opportunities" to bring together experts to discuss the issues involved in better understanding and addressing precision nutrition. The workshop proceeded in 3 parts: part I covered many aspects of genetics and physiology that mediate the links between nutrient intake and health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer disease, and cancer; part II reviewed potential contributors to interindividual variability in dietary exposures and responses such as baseline nutritional status, circadian rhythm/sleep, environmental exposures, sensory properties of food, stress, inflammation, and the social determinants of health; part III presented the need for systems approaches, with new methods and technologies that can facilitate the study and implementation of precision nutrition, and workforce development needed to create a new generation of researchers. The workshop concluded that much research will be needed before more precise nutrition recommendations can be achieved. This includes better understanding and accounting for variables such as age, sex, ethnicity, medical history, genetics, and social and environmental factors. The advent of new methods and technologies and the availability of considerably more data bring tremendous opportunity. However, the field must proceed with appropriate levels of caution and make sure the factors listed above are all considered, and systems approaches and methods are incorporated. It will be important to develop and train an expanded workforce with the goal of reducing health disparities and improving precision nutritional advice for all Americans
Recommended from our members
Proceedings of the Survivorship Care in Neuro-Oncology Workshop sponsored by the Comprehensive Oncology Network Evaluating Rare CNS Tumors (NCI-CONNECT).
BackgroundSurvivorship for those living with primary CNS cancers begins at diagnosis, continues throughout a person's life, and includes caregivers. Opportunities and challenges exist to advance survivorship care for those living with primary CNS cancers that necessitate stakeholder involvement.MethodsIn June 2021, NCI-CONNECT convened a two-day virtual workshop about survivorship care in neuro-oncology. Two expert panels provided key recommendations and five working groups considered critical questions to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to the advancement of survivorship care and developed recommendations and action items.ResultsThe following action items emanated from the workshop: seek endorsement of meeting report from stakeholder organizations; address barriers in access to survivorship care and provider reimbursement; advance survivorship research through NIH and private grant support; develop a survivorship tool kit for providers, people living with primary CNS cancers and their caregivers; provide accessible educational content for neuro-oncology, neurology, and oncology community providers about survivorship care in neuro-oncology; and establish core competencies for survivorship care for neuro-oncology providers to be included in training and standardized exams.ConclusionsAction items aim to address access and reimbursement barriers, expand patient and provider education, develop core competencies, and support survivorship research through funding and other supports
Same data, different analysts: variation in effect sizes due to analytical decisions in ecology and evolutionary biology
Gould E, Fraser H, Parker T, et al. Same data, different analysts: variation in effect sizes due to analytical decisions in ecology and evolutionary biology. 2023.Although variation in effect sizes and predicted values among studies of similar phenomena is inevitable, such variation far exceeds what might be produced by sampling error alone. One possible explanation for variation among results is differences among researchers in the decisions they make regarding statistical analyses. A growing array of studies has explored this analytical variability in different (mostly social science) fields, and has found substantial variability among results, despite analysts having the same data and research question. We implemented an analogous study in ecology and evolutionary biology, fields in which there have been no empirical exploration of the variation in effect sizes or model predictions generated by the analytical decisions of different researchers. We used two unpublished datasets, one from evolutionary ecology (blue tit, Cyanistes caeruleus, to compare sibling number and nestling growth) and one from conservation ecology (Eucalyptus, to compare grass cover and tree seedling recruitment), and the project leaders recruited 174 analyst teams, comprising 246 analysts, to investigate the answers to prespecified research questions. Analyses conducted by these teams yielded 141 usable effects for the blue tit dataset, and 85 usable effects for the Eucalyptus dataset. We found substantial heterogeneity among results for both datasets, although the patterns of variation differed between them. For the blue tit analyses, the average effect was convincingly negative, with less growth for nestlings living with more siblings, but there was near continuous variation in effect size from large negative effects to effects near zero, and even effects crossing the traditional threshold of statistical significance in the opposite direction. In contrast, the average relationship between grass cover and Eucalyptus seedling number was only slightly negative and not convincingly different from zero, and most effects ranged from weakly negative to weakly positive, with about a third of effects crossing the traditional threshold of significance in one direction or the other. However, there were also several striking outliers in the Eucalyptus dataset, with effects far from zero. For both datasets, we found substantial variation in the variable selection and random effects structures among analyses, as well as in the ratings of the analytical methods by peer reviewers, but we found no strong relationship between any of these and deviation from the meta-analytic mean. In other words, analyses with results that were far from the mean were no more or less likely to have dissimilar variable sets, use random effects in their models, or receive poor peer reviews than those analyses that found results that were close to the mean. The existence of substantial variability among analysis outcomes raises important questions about how ecologists and evolutionary biologists should interpret published results, and how they should conduct analyses in the future