Patients' perspectives and the perceptions of healthcare providers in the treatment of early rectal cancer: a qualitative study

BackgroundShared decision-making has become of increased importance in choosing the most suitable treatment strategy for early rectal cancer, however, clinical decision-making is still primarily based on physicians' perspectives. Balancing quality of life and oncological outcomes is difficult, and guidance on patients' involvement in this subject in early rectal cancer is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to explore preferences and priorities of patients as well as physicians' perspectives in treatment for early rectal cancer.MethodsIn this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were performed with early rectal cancer patients (n = 10) and healthcare providers (n = 10). Participants were asked which factors influenced their preferences and how important these factors were. Thematic analyses were performed. In addition, participants were asked to rank the discussed factors according to importance to gain additional insights.ResultsPatients addressed the following relevant factors: the risk of an ostomy, risk of poor bowel function and treatment related complications. Healthcare providers emphasized oncological outcomes as tumour recurrence, risk of an ostomy and poor bowel function. Patients perceived absolute risks of adverse outcome to be lower than healthcare providers and were quite willing undergo organ preservation to achieve a better prospect of quality of life.ConclusionPatients' preferences in treatment of early rectal cancer vary between patients and frequently differ from assumptions of preferences by healthcare providers. To optimize future shared decision-making, healthcare providers should be aware of these differences and should invite patients to explore and address their priorities more explicitly during consultation. Factors deemed important by both physicians and patients should be expressed during consultation to decide on a tailored treatment strategy.Surgical oncolog

Prehospital control of life-threatening truncal and junctional haemorrhage is the ultimate challenge in optimizing trauma care; a review of treatment options and their applicability in the civilian trauma setting

Contains fulltext : 171245.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)INTRODUCTION: Exsanguination following trauma is potentially preventable. Extremity tourniquets have been successfully implemented in military and civilian prehospital care. Prehospital control of bleeding from the torso and junctional area's remains challenging but offers a great potential to improve survival rates. This review aims to provide an overview of potential treatment options in both clinical as preclinical state of research on truncal and junctional bleeding. Since many options have been developed for application in the military primarily, translation to the civilian situation is discussed. METHODS: Medline (via Pubmed) and Embase were searched to identify known and potential prehospital treatment options. Search terms were|: haemorrhage/hemorrhage, exsanguination, junctional, truncal, intra-abdominal, intrathoracic, intervention, haemostasis/hemostasis, prehospital, en route, junctional tourniquet, REBOA, resuscitative thoracotomy, emergency thoracotomy, pelvic binder, pelvic sheet, circumferential. Treatment options were listed per anatomical site: axilla, groin, thorax, abdomen and pelvis Also, the available evidence was graded in (pre) clinical stadia of research. RESULTS: Identified treatment options were wound clamps, injectable haemostatic sponges, pelvic circumferential stabilizers, resuscitative thoracotomy, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA), intra-abdominal gas insufflation, intra-abdominal self-expanding foam, junctional and truncal tourniquets. A total of 70 papers on these aforementioned options was retrieved. No clinical reports on injectable haemostatic sponges, intra-abdominal insufflation or self-expanding foam injections and one type of junctional tourniquets were available. CONCLUSION: Options to stop truncal and junctional traumatic haemorrhage in the prehospital arena are evolving and may offer a potentially great survival advantage. Because of differences in injury pattern, time to definitive care, different prehospital scenario's and level of proficiency of care providers; successful translation of various military applications to the civilian situation has to be awaited. Overall, the level of evidence on the retrieved adjuncts is extremely low

Levensbedreigend bloedverlies na een aanslag.

Item does not contain fulltex

[How can life-threatening external blood loss be stopped? Treatment options in the prehospital phase].

- 3,500 people die of injuries in the Netherlands every year; 40% of the deaths are attributable to bleeding.- Treatment of patients with life-threatening blood loss is part of the trauma care continuum: all the way from incident to hospital treatment.- This article presents an overview of all treatment options for stopping life-threatening external blood loss, divided in medical assistance phases. It also makes a distinction between different types of care providers, based on the presence or absence of their medical skills

[How can life-threatening external blood loss be stopped? Treatment options in the prehospital phase].

Item does not contain fulltext- 3,500 people die of injuries in the Netherlands every year; 40% of the deaths are attributable to bleeding.- Treatment of patients with life-threatening blood loss is part of the trauma care continuum: all the way from incident to hospital treatment.- This article presents an overview of all treatment options for stopping life-threatening external blood loss, divided in medical assistance phases. It also makes a distinction between different types of care providers, based on the presence or absence of their medical skills

Organ preservation in rectal cancer: a synopsis of current guidelines.

The high morbidity associated with radical resection for rectal cancer is an incentive for surgeons to adopt strategies aimed at organ preservation, particularly for early disease. There are a number of different approaches to achieve this. In this study we have collated current national and international guidelines to produce a synopsis to support this changing practice. The databases PubMed, Embase, Trip database, national guideline clearinghouse, BMJ Best practice were interrogated. Guidelines published before 2010 were excluded. The AGREE-II tool was used for quality assessment. 24 guidelines were drawn from 2278 potential publications. A consensus exists for local excision for "low risk" T1 rectal cancer but there is no agreement how to stratify the risk of treatment failure. There is a low level of agreement for rectal preservation for more advanced disease but when mentioned is recommended for unfit patients or in th context of a clinical trial. Guidelines are inconsistent with respect to surveillance in node negative disease and after, complete response to chemoradiotherapy CONCLUSION: According to current guidelines and consensus statements organ preservation for rectal cancer beyond low risk T1, is still considered experimental and only indicated in patients unsuitable for radical surgery.. Follow up strategies and cN0 staging deserve attention and highlight the need for high quality clinical trials. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Three-Year Nationwide Experience with Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer in the Netherlands: A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision

Surgical oncolog