Therapeutic Use of Self and Fieldwork Experience: An Exploration of the Art and Science of Occupational Therapy

The clinical practice of occupational therapy has been described as a blend of both art and science. For occupational therapy students, Level II fieldwork experiences offer early opportunities to refine both client-centered attitudes and scientific aptitude in relationship-based caregiving. In this retrospective study, researchers examined the ability to predict final Fieldwork Performance Evaluation scores from the following non-cognitive (i.e., art) and cognitive (i.e., science) variables: ranked student responses to the Self-Assessment of Modes Questionnaire (v.II); undergraduate grade point average (GPA; cumulative and science), and Graduate Record Examination (GRE) scores (quantitative, verbal, and analytic). Using a series of simple linear regressions, researchers analyzed data from sixty-nine master’s-level occupational therapy students. For the first Level II fieldwork experience, empathizing and empathizing-revised modes appeared to be a significant predictor with moderate, positive correlation coefficients (p=.008, r=.329; p=.01, r=.296, respectively). For the second Level II fieldwork experience, collaborating and instructing modes appeared to be significant predictors (p=.036, r= -.255; p=.037, r=.254 respectively). GPA and GRE scores were not predictive of fieldwork success. The degree to which art and science shape expectations for relationship-based client interactions during fieldwork experiences requires further investigation. However, calling attention to occupational therapy students’ preferred communication modes highlight how client interactions may be shaped to fit the students’ natural tendencies rather than the needs of the client

UNISENSE: A Unified and Sustainable Sensing and Transport Architecture for Large Scale and Heterogeneous Sensor Networks

This book contains all refereed papers that were accepted to the first edition of the Asia-Pacific conference on « Complex Systems Design & Management » (CSD&M Asia 2014) that took place in Singapore from December 10 to December 12, 2014 (Website: http://www.2014.csdm-asia.net/). These proceedings cover the most recent trends in the emerging field of Complex Systems, both from an academic and a professional perspective. A special focus is put on Designing Smart cities. The CSD&M Asia 2014 conference is organized under the guidance of the Center of Excellence on Systems Architecture, Management, Economy and Strategy, CESAMES, non-profit organization, address: CESAMES, 8 rue de Hanovre, 75002 Paris, France ( Website : http://www.cesames.net/en)

From research to bedside: Incorporation of a CGA‐based frailty index among multiple comanagement services

The comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is the core tool used by geriatricians across diverse clinical settings to identify vulnerabilities and estimate physiologic reserve in older adults. In this paper, we demonstrate the iterative process at our institution to identify and develop a feasible, acceptable, and sustainable bedside CGA‐based frailty index tool (FI‐CGA) that not only quantifies and grades frailty but also provides a uniform way to efficiently communicate complex geriatric concepts such as reserve and vulnerability with other teams. We describe our incorporation of the FI‐CGA into the electronic health record (EHR) and dissemination among clinical services. We demonstrate that an increasing number of patients have documented FI‐CGA in their initial assessment from 2018 to 2020, while additional comanagement services were established (Figure 2). The acceptability and sustainability of the FI‐CGA, and its routine use by geriatricians in our division, were demonstrated by a survey where the majority of clinicians report using the FI‐CGA when assessing a new patient and that the FI‐CGA informs their clinical management. Finally, we demonstrate how we refined and updated the FI‐CGA, we provide examples of applications of the FI‐CGA across the institution and describe areas of ongoing process improvement and challenges for the use of this tailored yet standardized tool across diverse inpatient and outpatient services. The process outlined can be used by other geriatric departments to introduce and incorporate an FI‐CGA.See related editorial by Callahan in this issue.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171594/1/jgs17446_am.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171594/2/jgs17446.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171594/3/jgs17446-sup-0001-supinfo.pd

GOSAFE - Geriatric Oncology Surgical Assessment and Functional rEcovery after Surgery:early analysis on 977 patients

Objective: Older patients with cancer value functional outcomes as much as survival, but surgical studies lack functional recovery (FR) data. The value of a standardized frailty assessment has been confirmed, yet it's infrequently utilized due to time restrictions into everyday practice. The multicenter GOSAFE study was designed to (1) evaluate the trajectory of patients' quality of life (QoL) after cancer surgery (2) assess baseline frailty indicators in unselected patients (3) clarify the most relevant tools in predicting FR and clinical outcomes. This is a report of the study design and baseline patient evaluations. Materials & Methods: GOSAFE prospectively collected a baseline multidimensional evaluation before major elective surgery in patients (≥70 years) from 26 international units. Short−/mid−/long-term surgical outcomes were recorded with QoL and FR data. Results: 1003 patients were enrolled in a 26-month span. Complete baseline data were available for 977(97.4%). Median age was 78 years (range 70–94); 52.8% males. 968(99%) lived at home, 51.6% without caregiver. 54.4% had ≥ 3 medications, 5.9% none. Patients were dependent (ADL 20 s (5.2%) or ASAIII-IV (48.8%). Major comorbidities (CACI > 6) were detected in 36%; 20.9% of patients had cognitive impairment according to Mini-Cog. Conclusion: The GOSAFE showed that frailty is frequent in older patients undergoing cancer surgery. QoL and FR, for the first time, are going to be primary outcomes of a real-life observational study. The crucial role of frailty assessment is going to be addressed in the ability to predict postoperative outcomes and to correlate with QoL and FR

Predicting Functional Recovery and Quality of Life in Older Patients Undergoing Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Real-World Data From the International GOSAFE Study

PURPOSE The GOSAFE study evaluates risk factors for failing to achieve good quality of life (QoL) and functional recovery (FR) in older patients undergoing surgery for colon and rectal cancer.METHODS Patients age 70 years and older undergoing major elective colorectal surgery were prospectively enrolled. Frailty assessment was performed and outcomes, including QoL (EQ-5D-3L) recorded (3/6 months postoperatively). Postoperative FR was defined as a combination of Activity of Daily Living >= 5 + Timed Up & Go test <20 seconds + MiniCog >2.RESULTS Prospective complete data were available for 625/646 consecutive patients (96.9%; 435 colon and 190 rectal cancer), 52.6% men, and median age was 79.0 years (IQR, 74.6-82.9 years). Surgery was minimally invasive in 73% of patients (321/435 colon; 135/190 rectum). At 3-6 months, 68.9%-70.3% patients experienced equal/better QoL (72.8%-72.9% colon, 60.1%-63.9% rectal cancer). At logistic regression analysis, preoperative Flemish Triage Risk Screening Tool >= 2 (3-month odds ratio [OR], 1.68; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.73; P = .034, 6-month OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.06 to 2.75; P = .027) and postoperative complications (3-month OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.20 to 3.42; P = .008, 6-month OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.15 to 5.68; P = .02) are associated with decreased QoL after colectomy. Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) >= 2 is a strong predictor of postoperative QoL decline in the rectal cancer subgroup (OR, 3.81; 95% CI, 1.45 to 9.92; P = .006). FR was reported by 254/323 (78.6%) patients with colon and 94/133 (70.6%) with rectal cancer. Charlson Age Comorbidity Index >= 7 (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.26 to 5.32; P = .009), ECOG >= 2 (OR, 3.12; 95% CI, 1.36 to 7.20; P = .007 colon; OR, 4.61; 95% CI, 1.45 to 14.63; P = .009 rectal surgery), severe complications (OR, 17.33; 95% CI, 7.30 to 40.8; P < .001), fTRST >= 2 (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.40 to 5.25; P = .003), and palliative surgery (OR, 4.11; 95% CI, 1.29 to 13.07; P = .017) are risk factors for not achieving FR.CONCLUSION The majority of older patients experience good QoL and stay independent after colorectal cancer surgery. Predictors for failing to achieve these essential outcomes are now defined to guide patients' and families' preoperative counseling

Quality of life in older adults after major cancer surgery: the GOSAFE international study

Abstract Background Accurate quality of life (QoL) data and functional results after cancer surgery are lacking for older patients. The international, multicenter Geriatric Oncology Surgical Assessment and Functional rEcovery after Surgery (GOSAFE) Study compares QoL before and after surgery and identifies predictors of decline in QoL. Methods GOSAFE prospectively collected data before and after major elective cancer surgery on older adults (≥70 years). Frailty assessment was performed and postoperative outcomes recorded (30, 90, and 180 days postoperatively) together with QoL data by means of the three-level version of the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L), including 2 components: an index (range = 0-1) generated by 5 domains (mobility, self-care, ability to perform the usual activities, pain or discomfort, anxiety or depression) and a visual analog scale. Results Data from 26 centers were collected (February 2017-March 2019). Complete data were available for 942/1005 consecutive patients (94.0%): 492 male (52.2%), median age 78 years (range = 70-95 years), and primary tumor was colorectal in 67.8%. A total 61.2% of all surgeries were via a minimally invasive approach. The 30-, 90-, and 180-day mortality was 3.7%, 6.3%, and 9%, respectively. At 30 and 180 days, postoperative morbidity was 39.2% and 52.4%, respectively, and Clavien-Dindo III-IV complications were 13.5% and 18.7%, respectively. The mean EQ-5D-3L index was similar before vs 3 months but improved at 6 months (0.79 vs 0.82; P < .001). Domains showing improvement were pain and anxiety or depression. A Flemish Triage Risk Screening Tool score greater than or equal to 2 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.13 to 2.21, P = .007), palliative surgery (OR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.01 to 4.52, P = .046), postoperative complications (OR = 1.95, 95% CI = 1.19 to 3.18, P = .007) correlated with worsening QoL. Conclusions GOSAFE shows that older adults’ preoperative QoL is preserved 3 months after cancer surgery, independent of their age. Frailty screening tools, patient-reported outcomes, and goals-of-care discussions can guide decisions to pursue surgery and direct patients’ expectations