Dataset Information

Frontiers in Gastrointestinal Oncology: Advances in Multi-Disciplinary Patient Care.

ABSTRACT: Cancers of the digestive system remain highly lethal; therefore, the care of patients with malignant diseases of the digestive tract requires the expertise of providers from multiple health disciplines. Progress has been made to advance the understanding of epidemiology and genetics, diagnostic and screening evaluation, treatment modalities, and supportive care for patients with gastrointestinal cancers. At the Multi-Disciplinary Patient Care in Gastrointestinal Oncology conference at the Hershey Country Club in Hershey, Pennsylvania on 29 September 2017, the faculty members of the Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center presented a variety of topics that focused on this oncological specialty. In this continuing medical education-certified conference, updates on the population sciences including health disparities and resistance training were presented. Progress made in various diagnostic evaluation and screening procedures was outlined. New developments in therapeutic modalities in surgical, radiation, and medical oncology were discussed. Cancer genetic testing and counseling and the supportive roles of music and arts in health and cancer were demonstrated. In summary, this disease-focused medical conference highlighted the new frontiers in gastrointestinal oncology, and showcase the multi-disciplinary care provided at the Penn State Cancer Institute.

SUBMITTER: Yee NS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6027458 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Frontiers in Gastrointestinal Oncology: Advances in Multi-Disciplinary Patient Care.

Yee Nelson S NS Lengerich Eugene J EJ Schmitz Kathryn H KH Maranki Jennifer L JL Gusani Niraj J NJ Tchelebi Leila L Mackley Heath B HB Krok Karen L KL Baker Maria J MJ Boer Claire de C Yee Julian D JD

Biomedicines 20180601 2

Cancers of the digestive system remain highly lethal; therefore, the care of patients with malignant diseases of the digestive tract requires the expertise of providers from multiple health disciplines. Progress has been made to advance the understanding of epidemiology and genetics, diagnostic and screening evaluation, treatment modalities, and supportive care for patients with gastrointestinal cancers. At the Multi-Disciplinary Patient Care in Gastrointestinal Oncology conference at the Hershe ...[more]

PMID: 29865163

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesFistulas, the preferred form of hemodialysis access, are difficult to establish and maintain. We examined the effect of a multidisciplinary vascular access team, including nurses, surgeons, and radiologists, on the probability of using a fistula catheter-free, and rates of access-related procedures in incident patients receiving hemodialysis.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe examined vascular access outcomes in the first year of hemodialysis treatment before (2004-2005, preteam period) and after the implementation of an access team (2006-2008, early-team period; 2009-2011, late-team period) in the Calgary Health Region, Canada. We used logistic regression to study the probability of fistula creation and the probability of catheter-free fistula use, and negative binomial regression to study access-related procedure rates.ResultsWe included 609 adults (mean age, 65 [±15] years; 61% men; 54% with diabetes). By the end of the first year of hemodialysis, 102 participants received a fistula in the preteam period (70%), 196 (78%) in the early-team period (odds ratios versus preteam, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.92 to 2.35), and 139 (66%) in the late-team period (0.85; 0.54 to 1.35). Access team implementation did not affect the probability of catheter-free use of the fistula (odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 1.43, for the early; and 0.89; 0.52 to 1.53, for the late team versus preteam period). Participants underwent an average of 4-5 total access-related procedures during the first year of hemodialysis, with higher rates in women and in people with comorbidities. Catheter-related procedure rates were similar before and after team implementation; relative to the preteam period, fistula-related procedure rates were 40% (20%-60%) and 30% (10%-50%) higher in the early-team and late-team periods, respectively.ConclusionIntroduction of a multidisciplinary access team did not increase the probability of catheter-free fistula use, but resulted in higher rates of fistula-related procedures.

Project description:BackgroundCare pathways (CPWs) are complex interventions that have the potential to reduce treatment errors and optimize patient outcomes by translating evidence into local practice. To design an optimal implementation strategy, potential barriers to and facilitators of implementation must be considered. The objective of this systematic review is to identify barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of CPWs in primary care (PC).MethodsA systematic search via Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and MEDLINE via PubMed supplemented by hand searches and citation tracing was carried out. We considered articles reporting on CPWs targeting patients at least 65?years of age in outpatient settings that were written in the English or German language and were published between 2007 and 2019. We considered (non-)randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series studies (main project reports) as well as associated process evaluation reports of either methodology. Two independent researchers performed the study selection; the data extraction and critical appraisal were duplicated until the point of perfect agreement between the two reviewers. Due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, a narrative synthesis was performed.ResultsFourteen studies (seven main project reports and seven process evaluation reports) of the identified 8154 records in the search update were included in the synthesis. The structure and content of the interventions as well as the quality of evidence of the studies varied. The identified barriers and facilitators were classified using the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions framework. The identified barriers were inadequate staffing, insufficient education, lack of financial compensation, low motivation and lack of time. Adequate skills and knowledge through training activities for health professionals, good multi-disciplinary communication and individual tailored interventions were identified as facilitators.ConclusionsIn the implementation of CPWs in PC, a multitude of barriers and facilitators must be considered, and most of them can be modified through the careful design of intervention and implementation strategies. Furthermore, process evaluations must become a standard component of implementing CPWs to enable other projects to build upon previous experience.Trial registrationPROSPERO 2018 CRD42018087689.

Project description:BackgroundPolypharmacy and inappropriate medications may be a modifiable risk factor for Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD). Medication therapy management (MTM) interventions may mitigate medication-induced cognitive dysfunction and delay onset of symptomatic impairment. The objective of the current study is to describe an MTM protocol for a patient-centered team intervention (pharmacist and non-pharmacist clinician) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) directed at delaying the symptomatic onset of ADRD.MethodsCommunity dwelling adults 65 + years, non-demented, using ≥ 1 potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) were enrolled in an RCT to evaluate the effect of an MTM intervention on improving medication appropriateness and cognition (NCT02849639). The MTM intervention involved a three-step process: (1) pharmacist identified potential medication-related problems (MRPs) and made initial recommendations for prescribed and over-the-counter medications, vitamins, and supplements; (2) study team reviewed all initial recommendations together with the participants, allowing for revisions prior to the finalized recommendations; (3) participant responses to final recommendations were recorded. Here, we describe initial recommendations, changes during team engagement, and participant responses to final recommendations.ResultsAmong the 90 participants, a mean 6.7 ± 3.6 MRPs per participant were reported. Of the 259 initial MTM recommendations made for the treatment group participants (N = 46), 40% percent underwent revisions in the second step. Participants reported willingness to adopt 46% of final recommendations and expressed need for additional primary care input in response to 38% of final recommendations. Willingness to adopt final recommendations was highest when therapeutic switches were offered and/or with anticholinergic medications.ConclusionThe evaluation of modifications to MTM recommendations demonstrated that pharmacists' initial MTM recommendations often changed following the participation in the multidisciplinary decision-making process that incorporated patient preferences. The team was encouraged to see a correlation between engaging patients and a positive overall response towards participant acceptance of final MTM recommendations.Trial registrationStudy registration number: clinicaltrial.gov NCT02849639 registered on 29/07/2016.

Project description:ObjectivesPressures on healthcare systems due to COVID-19 has impacted patients without COVID-19 with surgery disproportionally affected. This study aims to understand the impact on the initial management of patients with brain tumours by measuring changes to normal multidisciplinary team (MDT) decision making.DesignA prospective survey performed in UK neurosurgical units performed from 23 March 2020 until 24 April 2020.SettingRegional neurosurgical units outside London (as the pandemic was more advanced at time of study).ParticipantsRepresentatives from all units were invited to collect data on new patients discussed at their MDT meetings during the study period. Each unit decided if management decision for each patient had changed due to COVID-19.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcome measures included number of patients where the decision to undergo surgery changed compared with standard management usually offered by that MDT. Secondary outcome measures included changes in surgical extent, numbers referred to MDT, number of patients denied surgery not receiving any treatment and reasons for any variation across the UK.Results18 units (75%) provided information from 80 MDT meetings that discussed 1221 patients. 10.7% of patients had their management changed-the majority (68%) did not undergo surgery and more than half of this group not undergoing surgery had no active treatment. There was marked variation across the UK (0%-28% change in management). Units that did not change management could maintain capacity with dedicated oncology lists. Low volume units were less affected.ConclusionCOVID-19 has had an impact on patients requiring surgery for malignant brain tumours, with patients receiving different treatments-most commonly not receiving surgery or any treatment at all. The variations show dedicated cancer operating lists may mitigate these pressures.Study registrationThis study was registered with the Royal College of Surgeons of England's COVID-19 Research Group (https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/coronavirus/rcs-covid-research-group/).

Dataset Information

Frontiers in Gastrointestinal Oncology: Advances in Multi-Disciplinary Patient Care.

Publications

Frontiers in Gastrointestinal Oncology: Advances in Multi-Disciplinary Patient Care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets