45 research outputs found
Colorectal Stenting in Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction: The Learning Curve
Aim. Self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) are increasingly used for the palliation of metastatic colorectal cancer and as a bridge to surgery for obstructing tumours. This case series analyses the learning curve and changes in practice of colorectal stenting over a three year period. Methods. A study of 40 patients who underwent placement of SEMS for the management of colorectal cancer. Patients spanned the learning curve of a single surgeon endoscopist. Results. Technical success rates increased from 82% initially, using an average of 1.7 stents per procedure, to a 94% success rate where all patients were stented using a single stent. There has been a change in practice from elective palliative stenting toward emergency preoperative stenting. Conclusion. There is a steep learning curve for the use of SEMS in the management of malignant colorectal bowel obstruction. We suggest that at least 20 cases are required for an operator to be considered experienced
Can early warning scores identify deteriorating patients in pre-hospital settings? A systematic review
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and predictive accuracy of early warning scores (EWS) to predict deteriorating patients in pre-hospital settings. METHODS: Systematic review. Seven databases searched to August 2017. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2. A narrative synthesis is presented. ELIGIBILITY: Studies that evaluated EWS predictive accuracy or that compared outcomes in populations that did or did not use EWS, in any pre-hospital setting were eligible for inclusion. EWS were included if they aggregated three or more physiological parameters. RESULTS: Seventeen studies (157,878 participants) of predictive accuracy were included (16 in ambulance service and 1 in nursing home). AUCs ranged from 0.50 (CI not reported) to 0.89 (95%CI 0.82, 0.96). AUCs were generally higher (>0.80) for prediction of mortality within short time frames or for combination outcomes that included mortality and ICU admission. Few patients with low scores died at any time point. Patients with high scores were at risk of deterioration. Results were less clear for intermediate thresholds (≥4 or 5). Five studies were judged at low or unclear risk of bias, all others were judged at high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Very low and high EWS are able to discriminate between patients who are not likely and those who are likely to deteriorate in the pre-hospital setting. No study compared outcomes pre- and post-implementation of EWS so there is no evidence on whether patient outcomes differ between pre-hospital settings that do and do not use EWS. Further studies are required to address this question and to evaluate EWS in pre-hospital settings
Recommended from our members
Evaluation of the Collaborative Use of an Evidence-Based Care Bundle in Emergency Laparotomy
YesIMPORTANCE Patients undergoing emergency laparotomy have high mortality, but few
studies exist to improve outcomes for these patients.
OBJECTIVE To assess whether a collaborative approach to implement a 6-point care bundle
is associated with reduction in mortality and length of stay and improvement in the delivery
of standards of care across a group of hospitals.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Emergency Laparotomy Collaborative (ELC) was a
UK-based prospective quality improvement study of the implementation of a care bundle
provided to patients requiring emergency laparotomy between October 1, 2015, and
September 30, 2017. Participants were 28 National Health Service hospitals and emergency
surgical patients who were treated at these hospitals and whose data were entered into the
National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) database. Post-ELC implementation
outcomes were compared with baseline data from July 1, 2014, to September 30, 2015.
Data entry and collection were performed through the NELA.
INTERVENTIONS A 6-point, evidence-based care bundle was used. The bundle included
prompt measurement of blood lactate levels, early review and treatment for sepsis, transfer
to the operating room within defined time goals after the decision to operate, use of
goal-directed fluid therapy, postoperative admission to an intensive care unit, and
multidisciplinary involvement of senior clinicians in the decision and delivery of perioperative
care. Change management and leadership coaching were provided to ELC leadership teams.
MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, both crude
and Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enumeration of Mortality
and morbidity (P-POSSUM) risk-adjusted, and length of stay. Secondary outcomes were the
changes after implementation of the separate metrics in the care bundle.
RESULTS A total of 28 hospitals participated in the ELC and completed the project.
The baseline group included 5562 patients (2937 female [52.8%] and a mean [range] age of
65.3 [18.0-114.0] years), whereas the post-ELC group had 9247 patients (4911 female [53.1%]
and a mean [range] age of 65.0 [18.0-99.0] years). Unadjusted mortality rate decreased from
9.8% at baseline to 8.3% in year 2 of the project, and so did risk-adjusted mortality from a
baseline of 5.3% to 4.5% post-ELC. Mean length of stay decreased from 20.1 days during year
1 to 18.9 days during year 2. Significant changes in 5 of the 6 metrics in the care bundle were
achieved.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A collaborative approach using a quality improvement
methodology and a care bundle appeared to be effective in reducing mortality and length
of stay in emergency laparotomy, suggesting that hospitals should adopt such an approach
to see better patient outcomes and care delivery performance.This study was funded by The Health Foundation, United Kingdom, as part of a Scaling Up Award
Development of a core information set for colorectal cancer surgery: a consensus study
Objective ‘Core information sets’ (CISs) represent baseline information, agreed by patients and professionals, to stimulate individualised patient-centred discussions. This study developed a CIS for use before colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery.
Design Three phase consensus study: (1) Systematic literature reviews and patient interviews to identify potential information of importance to patients, (2) UK national Delphi survey of patients and professionals to rate the importance of the information, (3) international consensus meeting to agree on the final CIS.
Setting UK CRC centres.
Participants Purposive sampling was conducted to ensure CRC centre representation based upon geographical region and caseload volume. Responses were received from 63/81 (78%) centres (90 professionals). Adult patients who had undergone CRC surgery were eligible, and purposive sampling was conducted to ensure representation based on age, sex and cancer location (rectum, left and right colon). Responses were received from 97/267 (35%) patients with a wide age range (29–87), equal sex ratio and cancer location. Attendees of the international Tripartite Colorectal Conference were eligible for the consensus meeting.
Outcomes Phase 1: Information of potential importance to patients was extracted verbatim and operationalised into a Delphi questionnaire. Phase 2: Patients and professionals rated the importance information on a 9-point Likert scale, and resurveyed following group feedback. Information rated of low importance were discarded using predefined criteria. Phase 3: A modified nominal group technique was used to gain final consensus in separate consensus meetings with patients and professionals.
Results Data sources identified 1216 pieces of information that informed a 98-item questionnaire. Analysis led to 50 and 23 information domains being retained after the first and second surveys, respectively. The final CIS included 11 concepts including specific surgical complications, short and long-term survival, disease recurrence, stoma and quality of life issues.
Conclusions This study has established a CIS for professionals to discuss with patients before CRC surgery
Synthesis and summary of patient-reported outcome measures to inform the development of a core outcome set in colorectal cancer surgery
AIM: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (PROMs) are standard measures in the assessment of colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment, but the range and complexity of available PROMs may be hindering the synthesis of evidence. This systematic review aimed to: (i) summarize PROMs in studies of CRC surgery and (ii) categorize PRO content to inform the future development of an agreed minimum 'core' outcome set to be measured in all trials. METHOD: All PROMs were identified from a systematic review of prospective CRC surgical studies. The type and frequency of PROMs in each study were summarized, and the number of items documented. All items were extracted and independently categorized by content by two researchers into 'health domains', and discrepancies were discussed with a patient and expert. Domain popularity and the distribution of items were summarized. RESULTS: Fifty-eight different PROMs were identified from the 104 included studies. There were 23 generic, four cancer-specific, 11 disease-specific and 16 symptom-specific questionnaires, and three ad hoc measures. The most frequently used PROM was the EORTC QLQ-C30 (50 studies), and most PROMs (n = 40, 69%) were used in only one study. Detailed examination of the 50 available measures identified 917 items, which were categorized into 51 domains. The domains comprising the most items were 'anxiety' (n = 85, 9.2%), 'fatigue' (n = 67, 7.3%) and 'physical function' (n = 63, 6.9%). No domains were included in all PROMs. CONCLUSION: There is major heterogeneity of PRO measurement and a wide variation in content assessed in the PROMs available for CRC. A core outcome set will improve PRO outcome measurement and reporting in CRC trials
Managing surgical demand when needs outstrip resource:qualitative investigation of colorectal cancer surgery provision in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic
Recommended from our members
Urinary Volatile Organic Compound Testing in Fast-Track Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer
Data Availability Statement: Deidentified VOC output could be shared (with no end date) subject to the approval of a proposal and completion of a data-sharing agreement and/or ethical approval.Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Colorectal symptoms are common but only infrequently represent serious pathology, including colorectal cancer (CRC). A large number of invasive tests are presently performed for reassurance. We investigated the feasibility of urinary volatile organic compound (VOC) testing as a potential triage tool in patients fast-tracked for assessment for possible CRC. A prospective, multicenter, observational feasibility study was performed across three sites. Patients referred to NHS fast-track pathways for potential CRC provided a urine sample that underwent Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS), Field Asymmetric Ion Mobility Spectrometry (FAIMS), and Selected Ion Flow Tube Mass Spectrometry (SIFT-MS) analysis. Patients underwent colonoscopy and/or CT colonography and were grouped as either CRC, adenomatous polyp(s), or controls to explore the diagnostic accuracy of VOC output data supported by an artificial neural network (ANN) model. 558 patients participated with 23 (4%) CRC diagnosed. 59% of colonoscopies and 86% of CT colonographies showed no abnormalities. Urinary VOC testing was feasible, acceptable to patients, and applicable within the clinical fast track pathway. GC-MS showed the highest clinical utility for CRC and polyp detection vs. controls (sensitivity = 0.878, specificity = 0.882, AUROC = 0.896) but it is labour intensive. Urinary VOC testing and analysis are feasible within NHS fast-track CRC pathways. Clinically meaningful differences between patients with cancer, polyps, or no pathology were identified suggesting VOC analysis may have future utility as a triage tool.National Institute for Health Research, Research for Patient Benefit Scheme grant number PB-PG-0416-20022
Core Outcomes for Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Consensus Study
Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of worldwide morbidity and mortality. Surgical treatment is common, and there is a great need to improve the delivery of such care. The gold standard for evaluating surgery is within well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, the impact of RCTs is diminished by a lack of coordinated outcome measurement and reporting. A solution to these issues is to develop an agreed standard “core” set of outcomes to be measured in all trials to facilitate cross-study comparisons, meta-analysis, and minimize outcome reporting bias. This study defines a core outcome set for CRC surgery. Methods and Findings: The scope of this COS includes clinical effectiveness trials of surgical interventions for colorectal cancer. Excluded were nonsurgical oncological interventions. Potential outcomes of importance to patients and professionals were identified through systematic literature reviews and patient interviews. All outcomes were transcribed verbatim and categorized into domains by two independent researchers. This informed a questionnaire survey that asked stakeholders (patients and professionals) from United Kingdom CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain. Respondents were resurveyed following group feedback (Delphi methods). Outcomes rated as less important were discarded after each survey round according to predefined criteria, and remaining outcomes were considered at three consensus meetings; two involving international professionals and a separate one with patients. A modified nominal group technique was used to gain the final consensus. Data sources identified 1,216 outcomes of CRC surgery that informed a 91 domain questionnaire. First round questionnaires were returned from 63 out of 81 (78%) centers, including 90 professionals, and 97 out of 267 (35%) patients. Second round response rates were high for all stakeholders (>80%). Analysis of responses lead to 45 and 23 outcome domains being retained after the first and second surveys, respectively. Consensus meetings generated agreement on a 12 domain COS. This constituted five perioperative outcome domains (including anastomotic leak), four quality of life outcome domains (including fecal urgency and incontinence), and three oncological outcome domains (including long-term survival). Conclusion: This study used robust consensus methodology to develop a core outcome set for use in colorectal cancer surgical trials. It is now necessary to validate the use of this set in research practice
Urinary Volatile Organic Compound Testing in Fast-Track Patients with Suspected Colorectal Cancer
Colorectal symptoms are common but only infrequently represent serious pathology, including colorectal cancer (CRC). A large number of invasive tests are presently performed for reassurance. We investigated the feasibility of urinary volatile organic compound (VOC) testing as a potential triage tool in patients fast-tracked for assessment for possible CRC. A prospective, multicenter, observational feasibility study was performed across three sites. Patients referred to NHS fast-track pathways for potential CRC provided a urine sample that underwent Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS), Field Asymmetric Ion Mobility Spectrometry (FAIMS), and Selected Ion Flow Tube Mass Spectrometry (SIFT-MS) analysis. Patients underwent colonoscopy and/or CT colonography and were grouped as either CRC, adenomatous polyp(s), or controls to explore the diagnostic accuracy of VOC output data supported by an artificial neural network (ANN) model. 558 patients participated with 23 (4%) CRC diagnosed. 59% of colonoscopies and 86% of CT colonographies showed no abnormalities. Urinary VOC testing was feasible, acceptable to patients, and applicable within the clinical fast track pathway. GC-MS showed the highest clinical utility for CRC and polyp detection vs. controls (sensitivity = 0.878, specificity = 0.882, AUROC = 0.896) but it is labour intensive. Urinary VOC testing and analysis are feasible within NHS fast-track CRC pathways. Clinically meaningful differences between patients with cancer, polyps, or no pathology were identified suggesting VOC analysis may have future utility as a triage tool