Development of a Core Outcome Set for the research and assessment of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction

Developing a core outcome set for nutrition care in adult outpatients with irritable bowel syndrome (COS-RD-IBS study)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a frequent disorder thought to be caused by a disturbance of the gut-brain axis. Nutrition interventions are an essential pillar of its treatment. However, there is no consensus on which outcomes should be applied to assess the effectiveness of nutrition care in IBS. Standardized outcome sets, or "core outcome sets" (COS), have been proposed to harmonize outcomes in clinical research and practice. This project aims to develop a COS for dietitian-provided nutrition care in adults with IBS or food intolerances with intestinal symptoms, to be implemented in routine outpatient practice.

METHODS

A comprehensive outcomes list was developed based on quantitative and qualitative studies, COS and guidelines on IBS, and important outcomes named by participants. Health service users, dietitians, gastroenterologists, and health care decision makers rated the outcomes in two Delphi survey rounds on their importance and ranked them in a third round. Data was analyzed by panel to account for the different views and sample sizes.

RESULTS

A total of 192 participants registered for the Delphi process. The following 14 outcomes reached consensus in all panels after two rounds: perception of symptom triggering foods/nutrients, intake of trigger foods/nutrients, practicability of diet, adherence, digestive symptoms overall, abdominal pain, abdominal bloating, stool consistency, stool frequency, physical functioning related QoL, nutrition related QoL, social functioning related QoL, empowerment of self-care.

CONCLUSIONS

The Delphi process yielded in a 14 outcomes COS, which exceeds what is typically considered feasible in routine nutrition care. Further work is needed to refine the COS and to identify standardized measurement tools for each outcome.

Difficulties and Disparities in Colorectal Cancer End-of-Life Care: A Patient's Story

Patients with advanced colorectal cancer nearing the end of life require a multidisciplinary approach to address the unique challenges they face. Using a case vignette, we outline the various stages of a patient's journey with advanced rectal cancer and the common obstacles to their care as they interface with the medical system. We highlight how Black persons might be vulnerable to differences in screening, treatment, procedural interventions, end-of-life care, and health care decision-making. The article also addresses how health inequities and barriers relating to concordant treatment goals can impact the relationship between patient and surgeon. This vignette illustrates the importance of ensuring a team approach to treatment and the value of early involvement of palliative medicine for patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

Palliative surgery: state of the science and future directions

Palliative surgical procedures are operations that aim to alleviate symptoms in a patient with serious, life-limiting illness. They are common, particularly within the field of surgical oncology. However, few high-quality studies have attempted to measure the durability of improvements in symptoms and quality of life after palliative surgery. Furthermore, many of the studies that do exist are outdated and employ highly inconsistent definitions of palliative surgery. Consequently, the paucity of robust and reliable evidence on the benefits, risks, and trade-offs of palliative surgery hampers clinical decision-making for patients and their surgeons. The evidence for palliative surgery suggests that, with effective communication about goals of care and careful patient selection, palliative surgery can provide symptomatic relief and reduce healthcare burdens for certain seriously ill patients.

Exploring pathways to optimise care in malignant bowel obstruction (EPOC): Protocol for a three-phase critical realist approach to theory-led intervention development for shared decision-making

INTRODUCTION

Malignant bowel obstruction is a distressing complication of cancer, causing pain, nausea and vomiting, and often has a poor prognosis. Severe and rapidly developing symptoms, a lack of robust clinical guidelines and the need for multidisciplinary input make treatment decision-making challenging. Sharing decision-making with people with malignant bowel obstruction and their caregivers can be difficult, and inconsistent communication creates serious deficiencies in care by amplifying patients' distress and uncertainty. Little attention has been paid to the implicit influences on this process-for example, the role of discipline-related norms and the beliefs of decision-makers. This study will explore how these processes work and develop interventions to improve shared decision-making.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Exploring Pathways to Optimise Care (EPOC) is a three-phase study set within a critical realist framework: (i) realist review, to develop explanatory theory describing collaborative decision-making in the management of malignant bowel obstruction; (ii) an in-depth interview study using modified grounded theory to explore the active ingredients of this collaboration in practice settings; and (iii) the presentation to stakeholders (practitioners, patients and caregivers) of integrated results from Phase I (theory developed from the literature) and Phase II (theory developed from current practice) as a basis for intervention mapping. We aim to produce recommendations to address the challenges, and to develop a set of tools to (i) aid interaction around shared decision-making and (ii) aid interprofessional interaction around the management of this condition. Registration details: The realist review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022308251).