Adverse health effects after breast cancer up to 14 years after diagnosis

BACKGROUND: The number of breast cancer survivors increases, but information about long-term adverse health effects in breast cancer survivors is sparse. We aimed to get an overview of the health effects for which survivors visit their general practitioner up to 14 years after diagnosis. METHODS: We retrieved data on 11,671 women diagnosed with breast cancer in 2000–2016 and 23,242 age and sex matched controls from the PSCCR-Breast Cancer, a database containing data about cancer diagnosis, treatment and primary healthcare. We built Cox regression models for 685 health effects, with time until the health effect as the outcome and survivor/control and cancer treatment as predictors. Models were built separately for four age groups (aged 18/44, 45/59, 60/74 and 75/89) and two follow-up periods (1/4 and 5/14 years after diagnosis). RESULTS: 229 health effects occurred statistically significantly more often in survivors than in controls (p < 0.05). Health effects varied by age, time since diagnosis and treatment, but coughing, respiratory and urinary infections, fatigue, sleep problems, osteoporosis and lymphedema were statistically significantly increased in breast cancer survivors. Osteoporosis and chest symptoms were associated with hormone therapy; respiratory and skin infections with chemotherapy and lymphedema and skin infections with axillary dissection. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer survivors may experience numerous adverse health effects up to 14 years after diagnosis. Insight in individual risks may assist healthcare professionals in managing patient expectations and improve monitoring, detection and treatment of adverse health effects

Healthy elderly and influenza vaccination

In many countries, those at risk for complications due to influenza are invited for influenza vaccination, to prevent serious consequences for themselves and those around them. However, vaccination rates are decreasing. The first invitation for vaccination may provide an opportunity to convey ample information about the (dis)advantages of vaccination. We aimed to identify subgroups less likely to be vaccinated after their first invitation. Using data from 87 general practices participating in NIVEL Primary Care Database, we selected persons invited for vaccination for the first time because of their 60th birthday. Of 3.238 included persons, 78% were not vaccinated after their first invitation and in the vast majority (84%) this decision remained consistent over the next years. Men and those with fewer GP contacts were less likely to be vaccinated. This latter group is not easily reached by the GP, so maybe other ways should be considered to convey information about influenza vaccination

Erratum: Corrigendum to “Health care utilization of patients with multiple chronic diseases in The Netherlands: Differences and underlying factors” (European Journal of Internal Medicine (2015) 26(3) (190–196) (S0953620515000412) (10.1016/j.ejim.2015.02.006))

The authors regret that the printed version of the above article contained a number of errors. A revised, correct and final version has been published online under the same title, with the following authors: Petra Hopman, Marianne J. Heins, Joke Korevaar, Mieke Rijken and François G. Schellevis. The printed version follows. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused

Opportunities and obstacles in linking large health care registries: the primary secondary cancer care registry - breast cancer

Background: The growing volume of health data provides new opportunities for medical research. By using existing registries, large populations can be studied over a long period of time. Patient-level linkage of registries leads to even more detailed and extended information per patient, but brings challenges regarding responsibilities, privacy and security, and quality of data linkage. In this paper we describe how we dealt with these challenges when creating the Primary Secondary Cancer Care Registry (PSCCR)- Breast Cancer. Methods: The PSCCR – Breast Cancer was created by linking two existing registries containing data on 1) diagnosis, tumour and treatment characteristics of all Dutch breast cancer patients (NCR), and 2) consultations and diagnoses from primary care electronic health records of about 10% of Dutch GP practices (Nivel-PCD). The existing registry governance structures and privacy regulations were incorporated in those of the new registry. Privacy and security risks were reassessed. Data were restricted to females and linked using postal code and date of birth. The breast cancer diagnosis was verified in both registries and for a subsample of 44 patients with the GP as well. Results: A collaboration agreement was signed in which the organisations retained data responsibility and accountability for ‘their’ registry. A Trusted Third Party performed the record linkage. Ten percent of the patients with breast cancer could be linked to the primary care registry, as was expected based on the coverage of Nivel-PCD, and finally 7 % could be included. The breast cancer diagnosis was verified by the GP in 42 of the 44 patients. Conclusions: We developed and validated a procedure for patient-level linkage of health data registries without a unique identifier, while preserving the integrity and privacy of the original registries. The method described may help researchers wishing to link existing health data registries

How transitions in dementia care trajectories affect health problems in partners:A longitudinal analysis with linked health and administrative data

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the prevalence of health problems in cohabiting partners of people with dementia differs between the year before and the year after three transitions: the diagnosis of dementia, institutionalization and the death of the person with dementia. METHODS: Individuals with dementia and their partners were identified on the basis of data in the electronic health records (EHRs) of 451 Dutch general practices. EHRs were also the data source on their health problems, which were linked to the Dutch population registry and health administration data with demographic characteristics, date of institutionalization and date of death. Differences in the prevalence of sixteen groups of health problems and of specific health problems in partners during the year before and the year after the three transitions were examined using generalized estimating equation (GEE). RESULTS: 1110 partners of persons with dementia were identified. Problems related to the illness and/or loss of the person with dementia, were significantly more prevalent in the year after the dementia diagnosis (32% vs 17%) and in the year after the death of the person with dementia (59% vs 41%) than in the years before. Unspecified health problems were more prevalent in the year after the diagnosis than in the year before (30% vs 22%). After institutionalization, an increase was found in digestive problems and urological problems (30% vs 18% and 24% vs 17%). DISCUSSION: Transitions during the dementia care trajectory, namely the diagnosis, institutionalization and death of the person with dementia, significantly impact the cohabiting partner's health

How transitions in dementia care trajectories affect health problems in partners: A longitudinal analysis with linked health and administrative data

Objectives To evaluate whether the prevalence of health problems in cohabiting partners of people with dementia differs between the year before and the year after 3 transitions: the diagnosis of dementia, institutionalization, and the death of the person with dementia. Methods Individuals with dementia and their partners were identified on the basis of data in the electronic health records (EHRs) of 451 Dutch general practices. EHRs were also the data source on their health problems, which were linked to the Dutch population registry and health administration data with demographic characteristics, date of institutionalization, and date of death. Differences in the prevalence of 16 groups of health problems and of specific health problems in partners during the year before and the year after the 3 transitions were examined using a generalized estimating equation. Results About 1,110 partners of persons with dementia were identified. Problems related to the illness and/or loss of the person with dementia were significantly more prevalent in the year after the dementia diagnosis (32% vs. 17%) and in the year after the death of the person with dementia (59% vs. 41%) than in the years before. Unspecified health problems were more prevalent in the year after the diagnosis than in the year before (30% vs. 22%). After institutionalization, an increase was found in digestive problems and urological problems (30% vs. 18% and 24% vs. 17%). Discussion Transitions during the dementia care trajectory, namely, the diagnosis, institutionalization, and death of the person with dementia, significantly affect the cohabiting partner’s health

Availability and effectiveness of decision aids for supporting shared decision making in patients with advanced colorectal and lung cancer : Results from a systematic review

INTRODUCTION: Shared decision making is not always commonplace in advanced colorectal or lung cancer care. Decision aids (DAs) might be helpful. This review aimed (a) to provide an overview of DAs for patients with advanced colorectal or lung cancer and assess their availability; and (b) to assess their effectiveness if possible. METHODS: A systematic literature search (PubMed/EMBASE/PsycINFO/CINAHL) and Internet and expert searches were carried out to identify relevant DAs. Data from the DAs included were extracted and the quality of studies, evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and effectiveness (International Patient Decision Aid Standards) of DAs were determined. RESULTS: Ten of the 12 DAs included (four colorectal cancer, four lung cancer and four generic) are still available. Most (9/12) were applicable throughout the disease pathway and usable for all decisions, or to the decision for supportive care with/without anti-cancer therapy. Seven studies tested effectiveness. Effects on patient outcomes varied, but were generally weakly positive (e.g., DAs improved patient satisfaction) with low evidence. Study quality was fair to good. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of readily available DAs that have been demonstrated to be effective in advanced colorectal or lung cancer. Rigorous testing of the effects of currently available and future DAs, to improve patient outcomes, is urgently needed