EXOGEN ultrasound bone healing system for long bone fractures with non-union or delayed healing: a NICE medical technology guidance

Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.A routine part of the process for developing National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) medical technologies guidance is a submission of clinical and economic evidence by the technology manufacturer. The Birmingham and Brunel Consortium External Assessment Centre (EAC; a consortium of the University of Birmingham and Brunel University) independently appraised the submission on the EXOGEN bone healing system for long bone fractures with non-union or delayed healing. This article is an overview of the original evidence submitted, the EAC’s findings, and the final NICE guidance issued.The Birmingham and Brunel Consortium is funded by NICE to act as an External Assessment Centre for the Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme

No man’s land: information needs and resources of men with metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer

The majority of men treated for prostate cancer will eventually develop castrate resistant disease (CRPC) with metastases (mCRPC). There are several options for further treatment: chemotherapy, third-line hormone therapy, radium, immunotherapy and palliation. Current ASCO guidelines for survivors of prostate cancer recommend that an individual’s information needs at all stages of disease are assessed, and that patients are provided with or referred to the appropriate sources for information and support. Earlier reviews have highlighted the dearth of such services and we wished to see if the situation had improved more recently. Unfortunately we conclude that there is still a lack of good quality congruent information easily accessible specifically for men with mCRPC and insufficient data regarding the risks, harms and benefits of different management plans. More research providing a clear evidence base about treatment consequences using patient reported outcome measures is required

Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study

Background: There is evidence that cancer survivors are at increased risk of second primary cancers. Changes in the prevalence of risk factors and diagnostic techniques may have affected more recent risks.<p></p> Methods: We examined the incidence of second primary cancer among adults in the West of Scotland, UK, diagnosed with cancer between 2000 and 2004 (n = 57,393). We used National Cancer Institute Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results and International Agency for Research on Cancer definitions of multiple primary cancers and estimated indirectly standardised incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).<p></p> Results: There was a high incidence of cancer during the first 60 days following diagnosis (SIR = 2.36, 95% CI = 2.12 to 2.63). When this period was excluded the risk was not raised, but it was high for some patient groups; in particular women aged <50 years with breast cancer (SIR = 2.13, 95% CI = 1.58 to 2.78), patients with bladder (SIR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.19 to 1.67) and head & neck (SIR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.67 to 2.21) cancer. Head & neck cancer patients had increased risks of lung cancer (SIR = 3.75, 95% CI = 3.01 to 4.62), oesophageal (SIR = 4.62, 95% CI = 2.73 to 7.29) and other head & neck tumours (SIR = 6.10, 95% CI = 4.17 to 8.61). Patients with bladder cancer had raised risks of lung (SIR = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.62 to 2.88) and prostate (SIR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.72 to 3.30) cancer.<p></p> Conclusions: Relative risks of second primary cancers may be smaller than previously reported. Premenopausal women with breast cancer and patients with malignant melanomas, bladder and head & neck cancers may benefit from increased surveillance and advice to avoid known risk factors

Was There Shortening of the Interval Between Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer in Southern Netherlands Between 2005 and 2008?

Background: The Dutch Cancer Society proposed that the interval between diagnosis and start of treatment should be less than 15 working days. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the interval from diagnosis to treatment for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) shortened between 2005 and 2008 in hospitals in southern Netherlands. Methods: Patients with CRC diagnosed in six hospitals in southern Netherlands during January to December in 2005 (n = 445) and January to July in 2008 (n = 353) were included. The time between diagnosis and start of treatment was assessed, and the proportion of patients treated within the recommended time (70 years and those with stage I disease. Substantial variation was seen among hospitals. Conclusions: Time to treatment for patients with CRC in southern Netherlands did not shorten between 2005 and 2008. The time to treatment should be reduced to meet the advice of the Dutch Cancer Society

Life Expectancy in a Large Cohort of Type 2 Diabetes Patients Treated in Primary Care (ZODIAC-10)

Background: Most longitudinal studies showed increased relative mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus until now. As a result of major changes in treatment regimes over the past years, with more stringent goals for metabolic control and cardiovascular risk management, improvement of life expectancy should be expected. In our study, we aimed to assess present-day life expectancy of type 2 diabetes patients in an ongoing cohort study. Methodology and Principal Findings: We included 973 primary care type 2 diabetes patients in a prospective cohort study, who were all participating in a shared care project in The Netherlands. Vital status was assessed from May 2001 till May 2007. Main outcome measurement was life expectancy assessed by transforming actual survival time to standardised survival time allowing adjustment for the baseline mortality rate of the general population. At baseline, mean age was 66 years, mean HbA(1c) 7.0%. During a median follow-up of 5.4 years, 165 patients died (78 from cardiovascular causes), and 17 patients were lost to follow-up. There were no differences in life expectancy in subjects with type 2 diabetes compared to life expectancy in the general population. In multivariate Cox regression analyses, concentrating on the endpoints 'all-cause' and cardiovascular mortality, a history of cardiovascular disease: hazard ratio (HR) 1.71 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-2.37), and HR 2.59 (95% CI 1.56-4.28); and albuminuria: HR 1.72 (95% CI 1.26-2.35), and HR 1.83 (95% CI 1.17-2.89), respectively, were significant predictors, whereas smoking, HbA(1c), systolic blood pressure and diabetes duration were not. Conclusions: This study shows a normal life expectancy in a cohort of subjects with type 2 diabetes patients in primary care when compared to the general population. A history of cardiovascular disease and albuminuria, however, increased the risk of a reduction of life expectancy. These results show that, in a shared care environment, a normal life expectancy is achievable in type 2 diabetes patients

Impacts of carbohydrate-restricted diets on micronutrient intakes and status: a systematic review

A systematic review of published evidence on micronutrient intake/status with carbohydrate‐restricted diets (CRD) was conducted in Web of Science, Medline, Embase, Scopus, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to October 2018. We identified 10 studies: seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (“Atkins”‐style, n = 5; “Paleolithic” diets, n = 2), two Atkins‐style noncontrolled trials and one cross‐sectional study. Prescribed carbohydrate varied 4% to 34% of energy intake. Only one noncontrolled trial prescribed multivitamin supplements. Dietary intakes/status were reported over 2 to 104 weeks, with weight losses from 2 to 9 kg. No diagnoses of deficiency were reported. Intakes of thiamine, folate, magnesium, calcium, iron, and iodine all decreased significantly (−10% to −70% from baseline) with any CRD types. Atkins diet trials (n = 6; 4%‐34%E carbohydrate) showed inconsistent changes in vitamin A, E, and β‐carotene intakes, while a single “Paleolithic” diet trial (28%E carbohydrate) reported increases in these micronutrients. One other “Paleolithic” diet (30%E carbohydrate) reported a rise in moderate iodine deficiency from 15% to 73% after 6 months. In conclusion, few studies have assessed the impacts of CRD on micronutrients. Studies with different designs point towards reductions in several vitamins and minerals, with potential risk of micronutrient inadequacies. Trial reporting standards are expected to include analysis of micronutrient intake/status. Micronutrients in foods and/or supplements should be considered when designing, prescribing or following CRDs

Documentation of preventive screening interventions by general practitioners: a retrospective chart audit

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Screening and early diagnosis has been shown to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with certain conditions such as cervical cancer. The role of general practitioners in promoting primary prevention of diseases is particularly important given that they have frequent contact with a large proportion of the population. This study assessed the extent to which general practitioners documented recommended preventive screening interventions among eligible patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We used a retrospective chart audit to assess patient visits to primary care clinics in Calgary, Canada from 2002-2004. We included fee for service physicians who practiced ≥ 2 days per week at their current location and excluded those whose primary practice was at walk-in clinics, community health centers, hospitals or emergency rooms. We included charts of patients who during the study period were age 35 years or older and had at least 2 visits to a clinic. We randomly selected and reviewed charts (N = 600) from 12 primary care clinics and abstracted information on 6 conditions recommended for preventive screening. Opportunities for preventive screening were determined based on recommendations of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, the American College of Physicians, and the Canadian Cancer Society. Our main outcome measures included cancer screening (mammography and pap smears), immunization (influenza and pneumococcal), and risk factor assessment (cholesterol measurement and smoking cessation consultation).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Patient visits to GP clinics present opportunities for preventive screening. However, we found that documentation of interventions was low, ranging from 40.3% (cholesterol measurement) to 0.9% (pneumococcal vaccination) within 1 year, and from 67.4% to 1.8% within the prior 3 years.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Documentation of preventive screening interventions by general practitioners was relatively low compared to the number of patients eligible for preventive screening. Some physicians opt to screen for PSA and DRE which is not recommended by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive HealthCare.</p

Trial outcomes and information for clinical decision-making: a comparative study of opinions of health professionals

Background: Trials are robust sources of data for clinical practice, however, trial outcomes may not reflect what is important to communicate for decision making. The study compared clinicians’ views of outcomes to include in a core outcome set for colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery, with what clinicians considered important information for clinical practice (core information). Methods: Potential outcomes/information domains were identified through systematic literature reviews, reviews of hospital information leaflets and interviews with patients. These were organized into 6 categories, and used to design a questionnaire survey that asked surgeons and nurses from a sample of CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain as an outcome or as information on a 9-point Likert scale. Respondents were re-surveyed (round 2) following group feedback (Delphi methods). Comparisons were made by calculating the difference in mean scores between the outcomes and information domains, and paired t-tests were used to explore the difference between mean scores of the 6 outcome/information categories. Results: Data sources identified 1216 outcomes/information of CRC surgery that informed a 94 item questionnaire. First round questionnaires were returned from 63/81 (78%) of centers. Clinicians rated 76/94 (84%) domains of higher importance to measure in trials than to information to communicate to patients in Round 1. This was reduced to 24/47 (51%) in Round 2. The greatest difference was evident in domains about survival, which was rated much more highly as a trial outcome than important piece of information for decision-making (mean difference 2.3, 95% CI 1.9-2.8, p<0.0001). Specific complications and quality-of-life domains were rated similarly (mean difference 0.18, 95% CI -0.1-0.4, p=0.2 and 0.2, 95% CI -0.1-0.5, p=0.2 respectively). Conclusions: Whilst clinicians want to measure key outcomes in trials, they rate these as less important to communicate in decision-making with patients. This discrepancy needs to be explored and addressed to maximize the impact of trials on clinical practice

Impact of organised programs on colorectal cancer screening

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to decrease CRC mortality. Organised mass screening programs are being implemented in France. Its perception in the general population and by general practitioners is not well known.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two nationwide observational telephone surveys were conducted in early 2005. First among a representative sample of subjects living in France and aged between 50 and 74 years that covered both geographical departments with and without implemented screening services. Second among General Practionners (Gps). Descriptive and multiple logistic regression was carried out.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Twenty-five percent of the persons(N = 1509) reported having undergone at least one CRC screening, 18% of the 600 interviewed GPs reported recommending a screening test for CRC systematically to their patients aged 50–74 years. The odds ratio (OR) of having undergone a screening test using FOBT was 3.91 (95% CI: 2.49–6.16) for those living in organised departments (referent group living in departments without organised screening), almost twice as high as impact educational level (OR = 2.03; 95% CI: 1.19–3.47).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>CRC screening is improved in geographical departments where it is organised by health authorities. In France, an organised screening programs decrease inequalities for CRC screening.</p