18 research outputs found

    Identifying patients at risk of emergency admission for colorectal cancer.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Patients whose colorectal cancer is treated after an emergency admission tend to have late-stage cancer and a poor prognosis. We identified risk factors for an emergency admission by linking data from the National Bowel Cancer Audit (NBCA) and the English Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), an administrative database of all admissions to English National Health Service hospitals, which includes data on mode of admission. METHODS: We identified all adults included in the NBCA with a primary diagnosis of bowel cancer, excluding cancer of the appendix, between August 2007 and July 2011 whose record could be linked to HES. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (OR) for an emergency admission for colorectal cancer. All risk factors were adjusted for cancer site and calendar year. RESULTS: 97,909 adults were identified with a primary diagnosis of bowel cancer and 82,777 patients could be linked to HES. Patients who were older, female, of a non-white ethnic background, and more socioeconomically deprived, and those with dementia or cardiac, neurologic and liver disease had an increased risk of presenting as an emergency admission. The strongest risk factors were age (90 compared with 70 years: OR 2.99, 95% CI 2.84 to 3.15), dementia (OR 2.46, 2.18 to 2.79), and liver disease (OR 1.87, 1.69 to 2.08). CONCLUSIONS: Our study identifies risk factors that may impair health-seeking behaviour and access to healthcare. An earlier recognition of symptoms in patients with these risk factors may contribute to better outcomes

    Determinants of Variation in the Use of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage III Colon Cancer in England.

    Get PDF
    AIMS: Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) for stage III colon cancer is well-established. This study aimed to explore the determinants of ACT use and between-hospital variation within the English National Health Service (NHS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 11 932 patients (diagnosed 2014-2017) with pathological stage III colon cancer in the English NHS were identified from the National Bowel Cancer Audit. Records were linked to Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy and Hospital Episode Statistics databases. Multi-level logistic regression analyses were carried out to estimate independent factors for ACT use, including age, sex, deprivation, comorbidities, performance status, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade, surgical urgency, surgical access, TNM staging, readmission and hospital-level factors (university teaching hospital, on-site chemotherapy and high-volume centre). A random intercept was modelled for each English NHS hospital (n = 142). Between-hospital variation was explored using funnel plot methodology. Fully adjusted random-intercept models were fitted separately in young (<70 years) and elderly (≥70 years) patients and intra-class correlation coefficients estimated. RESULTS: 60.7% of patients received ACT. Age was the strongest determinant. Compared with patients aged <60 years, those aged 60-64 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.93), 65-69 (aOR 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.54-0.74), 70-74 (aOR 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.44-0.62), 75-79 (aOR 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.19-0.27) and ≥80 years (aOR 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.06) were significantly less likely to receive ACT. With adjustment for other factors, ACT use was more likely in patients with higher socioeconomic status, fewer comorbidities, better performance status, lower ASA grade, advanced disease, elective resections, laparoscopic procedures and no unplanned readmissions. Hospital-level factors were non-significant. The observed proportions of ACT administration in the young and elderly were 46-100% (80% of hospitals 74-90%) and 10-81% (80% of hospitals 33-65%), respectively. Risk adjustment did not reduce between-hospital variation. Despite adjustment, age accounted for 9.9% (7.2-13.4%) of between-hospital variation in the elderly compared with 2.7% (1.2-5.7%) in the young. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant between-hospital variation in ACT use for stage III colon cancer, especially for older patients. Advanced age alone seems to be a greater barrier to ACT use in some hospitals

    Severity of Dementia and Survival in Patients Diagnosed with Colorectal Cancer: A National Cohort Study in England and Wales

    Get PDF
    AIMS: There is little evidence about the survival of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) also diagnosed with dementia. We quantified dementia severity and estimated how it is associated with 2-year overall survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records of patients aged 65 years or older diagnosed with CRC in England and Wales were identified. A novel proxy for dementia severity combined dementia diagnosis in administrative hospital data with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios with and without risk adjustment. RESULTS: In total, 4033 of 105 250 CRC patients (3.8%) had dementia recorded. Two-year survival decreased with increasing dementia severity from 65.4% without dementia, 53.5% with mild dementia, 33.0% with moderate dementia to 16.5% with severe dementia (hazard ratio comparing severe with no dementia: 2.97; 95% confidence interval 2.79, 3.16). Risk adjustment for comorbidity and cancer stage reduced this association slightly (hazard ratio 2.52; 95% confidence interval 2.37, 2.68) and additional adjustment for treatment factors reduced it further (hazard ratio 1.60; 95% confidence interval 1.50, 1.70). CONCLUSIONS: Survival of CRC patients varied strongly according to dementia severity, suggesting that a 'one-size-fits-all' policy for the care of CRC patients with dementia is not appropriate. Comprehensive assessment of cancer patients with dementia that considers dementia severity is essential in a shared decision-making process that ensures patients receive the most appropriate treatment for their individual needs and preferences

    Failure to rescue patients after emergency laparotomy for large bowel perforation: analysis of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA).

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Past studies have highlighted variation in in-hospital mortality rates among hospitals performing emergency laparotomy for large bowel perforation. The aim of this study was to investigate whether failure to rescue (FTR) contributes to this variability. METHODS: Patients aged 18 years or over requiring surgery for large bowel perforation between 2013 and 2016 were extracted from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) database. Information on complications were identified using linked Hospital Episode Statistics data and in-hospital deaths from the Office for National Statistics. The FTR rate was defined as the proportion of patients dying in hospital with a recorded complication, and was examined in hospitals grouped as having low, medium or high overall postoperative mortality. RESULTS: Overall, 6413 patients were included with 1029 (16.0 per cent) in-hospital deaths. Some 3533 patients (55.1 per cent) had at least one complication: 1023 surgical (16.0 per cent) and 3332 medical (52.0 per cent) complications. There were 22 in-hospital deaths following a surgical complication alone, 685 deaths following a medical complication alone, 150 deaths following both a surgical and medical complication, and 172 deaths with no recorded complication. The risk of in-hospital death was high among patients who suffered either type of complication (857 deaths in 3533 patients; FTR rate 24.3 per cent): 172 deaths followed a surgical complication (FTR-surgical rate 16.8 per cent) and 835 deaths followed a medical complication (FTR-medical rate of 25.1 per cent). After adjustment for patient characteristics and hospital factors, hospitals grouped as having low, medium or high overall postoperative mortality did not have different FTR rates (P = 0.770). CONCLUSION: Among patients having emergency laparotomy for large bowel perforation, efforts to reduce the risk of in-hospital death should focus on reducing avoidable complications. There was no evidence of variation in FTR rates across National Health Service hospitals in England

    The impact of the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer services in England and Wales: A national survey.

    Get PDF
    AIM: The object of this work was to study how National Health Service hospitals in England and Wales aimed to maintain effective and safe colorectal cancer (CRC) services during the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020). METHOD: A national survey was performed among all 148 hospitals providing CRC services. Information was collected about changes in referrals, diagnostic, staging and therapeutic procedures, as well as whether there was access to a 'cold site' (a hospital facility free of COVID-19). Clinicians in each hospital were also asked to give the 'single most important lesson learned' about keeping services safe and effective. RESULTS: Full responses were received from 123 (83%) hospitals, and information about 'cold sites' was available for 146 (99%). Eighty hospitals (54%) had access to a 'cold site' and this was increased in regions with higher COVID-19 infection rates (p <0.001). Of the 123 responding hospitals, 105 (85%) indicated that referrals of patients with suspected CRC had dropped by at least 30%, and 69 (56%) indicated that treatment plans were altered in at least 50% of CRC patients. However, 'cold site' availability protected the capacity for diagnostic colonoscopy (p = 0.013) and CRC resection (p = 0.010). Many 'lessons learned' highlighted the importance of adequate structural service organization, often mentioning 'cold sites' and regional coordination as examples, good communication and triage of patients based on clinical urgency. CONCLUSION: Access to 'cold sites', as well as regional coordination, clear communication and strong leadership, were found to be pivotal in maintaining capacity for diagnosis and treatment of CRC during the COVID-19 surge

    Socioeconomic deprivation and mortality after emergency laparotomy: an observational epidemiological study

    Get PDF
    Background: Socioeconomic circumstances can influence access to healthcare, the standard of care provided, and a variety of outcomes. This study aimed to determine the association between crude and risk-adjusted 30-day mortality and socioeconomic group after emergency laparotomy, measure differences in meeting relevant perioperative standards of care, and investigate whether variation in hospital structure or process could explain any difference in mortality between socioeconomic groups. / Methods: This was an observational study of 58 790 patients, with data prospectively collected for the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit in 178 National Health Service hospitals in England between December 1, 2013 and November 31, 2016, linked with national administrative databases. The socioeconomic group was determined according to the Index of Multiple Deprivation quintile of each patient's usual place of residence. / Results: Overall, the crude 30-day mortality was 10.3%, with differences between the most-deprived (11.2%) and least-deprived (9.8%) quintiles (P<0.001). The more-deprived patients were more likely to have multiple comorbidities, were more acutely unwell at the time of surgery, and required a more-urgent surgery. After risk adjustment, the patients in the most-deprived quintile were at significantly higher risk of death compared with all other quintiles (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: Q1 [most deprived]: reference; Q2: 0.83 [0.76–0.92]; Q3: 0.84 [0.76–0.92]; Q4: 0.87 [0.79–0.96]; Q5 [least deprived]: 0.77 [0.70–0.86]). We found no evidence that differences in hospital-level structure or patient-level performance in standards of care explained this association. / Conclusions: More-deprived patients have higher crude and risk-adjusted 30-day mortality after emergency laparotomy, but this is not explained by differences in the standards of care recorded within the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit

    Surgical Treatment and Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Population-based Study in England.

    Get PDF
    To compare the management and outcomes of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic with the preceding 6 months. BACKGROUND: The pandemic has affected the diagnosis and treatment of CRC patients worldwide. Little is known about the safety of major resection and whether creating "cold" sites (COVID-free hospitals) is effective. METHODS: A national study in England used administrative hospital data for 14,930 CRC patients undergoing surgery between October 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020. Mortality of CRC resection was compared before and after March 23, 2020 ("lockdown" start). RESULTS: The number of elective CRC procedures dropped sharply during the pandemic (from average 386 to 214 per week), whereas emergency procedures were hardly affected (from 88 to 84 per week). There was little change in characteristics of surgical patients during the pandemic. Laparoscopic surgery decreased from 62.5% to 35.9% for elective and from 17.7% to 9.7% for emergency resections. Surgical mortality increased slightly (from 0.9% to 1.2%, P = 0.06) after elective and markedly (from 5.6% to 8.9%, P = 0.003) after emergency resections. The observed increase in mortality during the first phase of the pandemic was similar in "cold" and "hot" sites (P > 0.5 elective and emergency procedures). CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic resulted in a 50% reduction in elective CRC procedures during the initial surge and a substantial increase in mortality after emergency resection. There was no evidence that surgery in COVID-free "cold" sites led to better outcomes in the first 2 months

    Improving risk models for patients having emergency bowel cancer surgery using linked electronic health records: a national cohort study

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Life-saving emergency major resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is a high-risk procedure. Accurate prediction of post-operative mortality for patients undergoing this procedure is essential for both healthcare performance monitoring and pre-operative risk assessment. Risk-adjustment models for CRC patients often include patient and tumour characteristics, widely available in cancer registries and audits. We investigated to what extent inclusion of additional physiological and surgical measures, available through linkage or additional data collection, improves accuracy of risk models. METHODS: Linked, routinely-collected data on patients undergoing emergency CRC surgery in England between December 2016 and November 2019 were used to develop a risk model for 90-day mortality. Backwards selection identified a 'selected model' of physiological and surgical measures in addition to patient and tumour characteristics. Model performance was assessed compared to a 'basic model' including only patient and tumour characteristics. Missing data was multiply imputed. RESULTS: 846 of 10,578 (8.0%) patients died within 90 days of surgery. The selected model included seven pre-operative physiological and surgical measures (pulse rate, systolic blood pressure, breathlessness, sodium, urea, albumin, and predicted peritoneal soiling), in addition to the ten patient and tumour characteristics in the basic model (calendar year of surgery, age, sex, ASA grade, TNM T stage, TNM N stage, TNM M stage, cancer site, number of comorbidities, emergency admission). The selected model had considerably better discrimination compared to the basic model (C-statistic: 0.824 versus 0.783, respectively). CONCLUSION: Linkage of disease-specific and treatment-specific datasets allowed the inclusion of physiological and surgical measures in a risk model alongside patient and tumour characteristics which improves the accuracy of the prediction of the mortality risk for CRC patients having emergency surgery. This improvement will allow more accurate performance monitoring of healthcare providers and enhance clinical care planning

    Association between surgeon special interest and mortality after emergency laparotomy

    Get PDF
    © 2019 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd Background: Approximately 30 000 emergency laparotomies are performed each year in England and Wales. Patients with pathology of the gastrointestinal tract requiring emergency laparotomy are managed by general surgeons with an elective special interest focused on either the upper or lower gastrointestinal tract. This study investigated the impact of special interest on mortality after emergency laparotomy. Methods: Adult patients having emergency laparotomy with either colorectal or gastroduodenal pathology were identified from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit database and grouped according to operative procedure. Outcomes included all-cause 30-day mortality, length of hospital stay and return to theatre. Logistic and Poisson regression were used to analyse the association between consultant special interest and the three outcomes. Results: A total of 33 819 patients (28 546 colorectal, 5273 upper gastrointestinal (UGI)) were included. Patients who had colorectal procedures performed by a consultant without a special interest in colorectal surgery had an increased adjusted 30-day mortality risk (odds ratio (OR) 1·23, 95 per cent c.i. 1·13 to 1·33). Return to theatre also increased in this group (OR 1·13, 1·05 to 1·20). UGI procedures performed by non-UGI special interest surgeons carried an increased adjusted risk of 30-day mortality (OR 1·24, 1·02 to 1·53). The risk of return to theatre was not increased (OR 0·89, 0·70 to 1·12). Conclusion: Emergency laparotomy performed by a surgeon whose special interest is not in the area of the pathology carries an increased risk of death at 30 days. This finding potentially has significant implications for emergency service configuration, training and workforce provision, and should stimulate discussion among all stakeholders

    Socioeconomic differences in selection for liver resection in metastatic colorectal cancer and the impact on survival

    Get PDF
    Background Socioeconomic inequalities in colorectal cancer (CRC) survival are well recognised. The aim of this study was to describe the impact of socioeconomic deprivation on survival in patients with synchronous CRC liver-limited metastases, and to investigate if any survival inequalities are explained by differences in liver resection rates. Methods Patients in the National Bowel Cancer Audit diagnosed with CRC between 2010 and 2016 in the English National Health Service were included. Linked Hospital Episode Statistics data were used to identify the presence of liver metastases and whether a liver resection had been performed. Multivariable random-effects logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of liver resection by Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) quintile. Cox-proportional hazards model was used to compare 3-year survival. Results 13,656 patients were included, of whom 2213 (16.2%) underwent liver resection. Patients in the least deprived IMD quintile were more likely to undergo liver resection than those in the most deprived quintile (adjusted OR 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18–1.70). Patients in the least deprived quintile had better 3-year survival (least deprived vs. most deprived quintile, 22.3% vs. 17.4%; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.20, 1.11–1.30). Adjusting for liver resection attenuated, but did not remove, this effect. There was no difference in survival between IMD quintile when restricted to patients who underwent liver resection (adjusted HR 0.97, 0.76–1.23). Conclusions Deprived CRC patients with synchronous liver-limited metastases have worse survival than more affluent patients. Lower rates of liver resection in more deprived patients is a contributory factor
    corecore