Perspectives on care and communication involving incurably ill Turkish and Moroccan patients, relatives and professionals: a systematic literature review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Our aim was to obtain a clearer picture of the relevant care experiences and care perceptions of incurably ill Turkish and Moroccan patients, their relatives and professional care providers, as well as of communication and decision-making patterns at the end of life. The ultimate objective is to improve palliative care for Turkish and Moroccan immigrants in the Netherlands, by taking account of socio-cultural factors in the guidelines for palliative care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A systematic literature review was undertaken. The data sources were seventeen national and international literature databases, four Dutch journals dedicated to palliative care and 37 websites of relevant national and international organizations. All the references found were checked to see whether they met the structured inclusion criteria. Inclusion was limited to publications dealing with primary empirical research on the relationship between socio-cultural factors and the health or care situation of Turkish or Moroccan patients with an oncological or incurable disease. The selection was made by first reading the titles and abstracts and subsequently the full texts. The process of deciding which studies to include was carried out by two reviewers independently. A generic appraisal instrument was applied to assess the methodological quality.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Fifty-seven studies were found that reported findings for the countries of origin (mainly Turkey) and the immigrant host countries (mainly the Netherlands). The central themes were experiences and perceptions of family care, professional care, end-of-life care and communication. Family care is considered a duty, even when such care becomes a severe burden for the main female family caregiver in particular. Professional hospital care is preferred by many of the patients and relatives because they are looking for a cure and security. End-of-life care is strongly influenced by the continuing hope for recovery. Relatives are often quite influential in end-of-life decisions, such as the decision to withdraw or withhold treatments. The diagnosis, prognosis and end-of-life decisions are seldom discussed with the patient, and communication about pain and mental problems is often limited. Language barriers and the dominance of the family may exacerbate communication problems.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This review confirms the view that family members of patients with a Turkish or Moroccan background have a central role in care, communication and decision making at the end of life. This, in combination with their continuing hope for the patient’s recovery may inhibit open communication between patients, relatives and professionals as partners in palliative care. This implies that organizations and professionals involved in palliative care should take patients’ socio-cultural characteristics into account and incorporate cultural sensitivity into care standards and care practices<it>.</it></p

An international multicenter propensity-score matched and coarsened-exact matched analysis comparing robotic versus laparoscopic partial liver resections of the anterolateral segments

Background: Robotic liver resections (RLR) may have the ability to address some of the drawbacks of laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) but few studies have done a head-to-head comparison of the outcomes after anterolateral segment resections by the two techniques. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted of 3202 patients who underwent minimally invasive LR of the anterolateral liver segments at 26 international centres from 2005 to 2020. Two thousand six hundred and six cases met study criteria of which there were 358 RLR and 1868 LLR cases. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups using a 1:3 Propensity Score Matched (PSM) and 1:1 Coarsened Exact Matched (CEM) analysis. Results: Patients matched after 1:3 PSM (261 RLR vs 783 LLR) and 1:1 CEM (296 RLR vs 296 LLR) revealed no significant differences in length of stay, readmission rates, morbidity, mortality, and involvement of or close oncological margins. RLR surgeries were associated with significantly less blood loss (50 mL vs 100 ml, P <.001) and lower rates of open conversion on both PSM (1.5% vs 6.8%, P =.003) and CEM (1.4% vs 6.4%, P =.004) compared to LLR. Though PSM analysis showed RLR to have a longer operating time than LLR (170 minutes vs 160 minutes, P =.036), this difference proved to be insignificant on CEM (167 minutes vs 163 minutes, P =.575). Conclusion: This multicentre international combined PSM and CEM study showed that both RLR and LLR have equivalent perioperative outcomes when performed in selected patients at high-volume centres. The robotic approach was associated with significantly lower blood loss and allowed more surgeries to be completed in a minimally invasive fashion

An international multicentre propensity score matched analysis comparing between robotic versus laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy

Background: Left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) is one of the most commonly performed minimally invasive liver resections. While laparoscopic (L)-LLS is a well-established technique, over traditional open resection, it remains controversial if robotic (R)-LLS provides any advantages of L-LLS. Methods: A post hoc analysis of 997 patients from 21 international centres undergoing L-LLS or R-LLS from 2006 to 2020 was conducted. A total of 886 cases (214 R-LLS, 672 L-LLS) met study criteria. 1:1 and 1:2 propensity score matched (PSM) comparison was performed between R-LLS & L-LLS. Further subset analysis by Iwate difficulty was also performed. Outcomes measured include operating time, blood loss, open conversion, readmission rates, morbidity and mortality. Results: Comparison between R-LLS and L-LLS after PSM 1:2 demonstrated statistically significantly lower open conversion rate in R-LLS than L-LLS (0.6% versus 5%, p = 0.009) and median blood loss was also statistically significantly lower in R-LLS at 50 (80) versus 100 (170) in L-LLS (p = 0.011) after PSM 1:1 although there was no difference in the blood transfusion rate. Pringle manoeuvre was also found to be used more frequently in R-LLS, with 53(24.8%) cases versus to 84(12.5%) L-LLS cases (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the other key perioperative outcomes such as operating time, length of stay, postoperative morbidity, major morbidity and 90-day mortality between both groups. Conclusion: R-LLS was associated with similar key perioperative outcomes compared to L-LLS. It was also associated with significantly lower blood loss and open conversion rates compared to L-LLS

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Left and Extended Left Hepatectomy: An International Multicenter Study Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Background: Controversies exist among liver surgeons regarding clinical outcomes of the laparoscopic versus the robotic approach for major complex hepatectomies. The authors therefore designed a study to examine and compare the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic left hepatectomy or extended left hepatectomy (L-LH/L-ELH) versus robotic left hepatectomy or extended left hepatectomy (R-LH/R-ELH) using a large international multicenter collaborative database. Methods: An international multicenter retrospective analysis of 580 patients undergoing L-LH/L-ELH or R-LH/R-ELH at 25 specialized hepatobiliary centers worldwide was undertaken. Propensity score-matching (PSM) was used at a 1:1 nearest-neighbor ratio according to 15 perioperative variables, including demographics, tumor characteristics, Child-Pugh score, presence of portal hypertension, multiple resections, histologic diagnosis, and Iwate difficulty grade. Results: Before the PSM, 190 (32 %) patients underwent R-LH/R-ELH, and 390 (68 %) patients underwent L-LH/L-ELH. After the matching, 164 patients were identified in each arm without significant differences in demographics, preoperative variables, medical history, tumor pathology, tumor characteristics, or Iwate score. Regarding intra- and postoperative outcomes, the rebotic approach had significantly less estimated blood loss (EBL) (100 ml [IQR 200 ml] vs 200 ml [IQR 235 ml]; p = 0.029), fewer conversions to open operations (n = 4 [2.4 %] vs n = 13, [7.9 %]; p = 0.043), and a shorter hospital stay (6 days [IQR 3 days] vs 7 days [IQR 3.3 days]; p = 0.009). Conclusion: Both techniques are safe and feasible in major hepatic resections. Compared with L-LH/L-ELH, R-LH/R-ELH is associated with less EBL, fewer conversions to open operations, and a shorter hospital stay