Value of routine follow-up for recurrence detection after treatment with curative intent for laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of routine follow-up after treatment of primary laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) remain disputed. Guidelines worldwide are consensus-based, and evidence for specific subgroups is lacking. This study evaluates routine LSCC follow-up including flexible endoscopy for detecting locoregional recurrence (LRR).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of 413 LSCC patients treated between 2006 and 2012 was analysed. The cumulative risk of LRR was calculated. Routine follow-up was evaluated by follow-up visit (routine or interval) at which LRR was detected, LRR treatment intent, and overall survival (OS). Analyses were stratified by early (I-II) and advanced (III-IV) TNM-stage.

RESULTS

There were 263 (64 %) patients with early-stage and 132 (32 %) patients with advanced-stage LSCC. One-, two- and five-year cumulative risks for LRR after early-stage LSCC were 8 %, 18 %, and 26 %. For advanced-stage LSCC, cumulative risks of LRR were 20 %, 30 %, and 35 %. Of all 69 LRRs after early-stage LSCC, 72 % were routine-detected, 81 % were symptomatic, and 90 % received curative-intent treatment. Of all 45 LRRs following advanced-stage LSCC, 42 % were routine-detected, 84 % were symptomatic, and 62 % received curative-intent treatment. Five-year OS of early-stage LSCC with routine-detected LRR was 70 %, and 72 % for interval-detection (log-rank-p = 0.91). Five-year OS of advanced-stage LSCC with routine-detected LRR was 37 %, and 18 % for interval-detection (log-rank-p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Routine follow-up for detecting asymptomatic recurrences seems redundant for early-stage LSCC. After advanced-stage LSCC, no asymptomatic recurrences were detected beyond one year posttreatment despite regular follow-up. Emphasis should be on other follow-up aspects, such as psychosocial support, especially after one year posttreatment.

Toward implementation of an evidence-based intervention for fear of cancer recurrence: Feasibility in real-world psycho-oncology practice

OBJECTIVE

Few evidence-based interventions addressing high levels of fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) have been implemented. Understanding how these might be implemented is crucial to bridge the research-practice gap. This study investigated the feasibility of implementing the blended Survivors' Worries of Recurrent Disease (SWORD) intervention in real-world psycho-oncology practice.

METHODS

SWORD was offered for 15 months (2021-2022) as the standard care for clinical FCR in a university hospital, a general hospital, and psycho-oncological center. We evaluated using a mixed-methods design six feasibility outcomes based on Bowen's framework: demand, limited effectiveness, degree of execution, acceptability, practicality, and integration. Anonymous data were collected for all oncology patients on referral. Study participants completed questionnaires before and after treatment, including the Cancer Worry Scale (CWS-6) as the primary measure of effectiveness. Qualitative data included interviews with patients and psychologists, and field notes.

RESULTS

Regarding demand, 81 of 644 patients referred (13%) were eligible for SWORD. The uptake of SWORD was 79% (n = 63/80) and the completion rate 73% (n = 46/63). SWORD was effective in reducing FCR (p < 0.001, ηp2  = 0.694). Regarding execution, a variability in the length, planning and number of treatment sessions was found between different settings. Adherence to the treatment manual's content was high (89%). Regarding acceptability, most patients were satisfied with SWORD (average 8.2/10) and psychologists valued the blended format. Psychologists reported SWORD was practical to deliver given their knowledge and skills. Although differences between settings were found, SWORD integrated well into practice. Referral for FCR and a reluctance to contract new eHealth providers were barriers for implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite differences between healthcare settings, the implementation of SWORD was evaluated well. The feasibility of SWORD in different settings should inform a national implementation strategy.

Therapeutic drug monitoring to personalize dosing of imatinib, sunitinib, and pazopanib: A mixed methods study on barriers and facilitators

BACKGROUND

Personalized dosing based on measurement of individual drug levels and adjusting the dose accordingly can improve efficacy and decrease unnecessary toxicity of oncological treatment. For imatinib, sunitinib, and pazopanib, this therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)-guided dosing is, however, not routinely used, despite accumulating evidence favoring individualized dosing. Therefore, we aimed to identify and quantify (potential) barriers and facilitators in TDM-guided dosing for imatinib, sunitinib, and pazopanib.

METHODS

We performed a mixed methods study among all stakeholders involved: patients, healthcare professionals (HCPs), pharmaceutical companies, and health insurance companies. During the first qualitative part of this study, we performed semi-structured individual interviews and one focus group interview to identify all (potential) barriers and facilitators, and during the second quantitative part of this study, we used a web-based survey to quantify these findings. The interviews addressed the six domains of the implementation of change model of Grol and Wensing: (1) the innovation itself; (2) the HCP; (3) the patient; (4) social context; (5) organizational context; and (6) finances, law, and governance.

RESULTS

In the qualitative study, we interviewed 20 patients, 18 HCPs and 10 representatives of pharmaceutical and health insurance companies and identified 72 barriers and 90 facilitators. In the quantitative study, the survey was responded by 66 HCPs and 58 patients. Important barriers were on the domain of the HCP, such as a lack of experience with TDM (36.4%), on the domain of the patient, such as lack of awareness of TDM (39.7%), and the processing time for measurement and interpretation of the TDM result (40.9%) (organizational domain). Important facilitators were education of HCPs (95.5%), education of patients (87.9%) and facilitating an overview of when and where TDM measurements are being performed (86.4%).

CONCLUSION

We identified and quantified important barriers and facilitators for the implementation of TDM-guided dosing for imatinib, sunitinib, and pazopanib. Based on our results, the implementation strategy should mainly focus on educating both HCPs and patients and on the organizational aspect of TDM.

Measuring chronic myeloid leukaemia TKI-related toxic effects in the real world: a systematic review and critical assessment of content validity of patient-reported outcome measures

Insight into real-world treatment-related toxic effects reported by patients has the potential to improve care, benchmark trials, and fill knowledge gaps, especially in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia, which is treated in the majority of patients continually with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The aim of our systematic review was to investigate the content validity of instruments that elicit TKI-related toxic effects reported by patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia in the real world. We searched PubMed and Embase from Jan 1, 2017 to Oct 21, 2022. Studies on instruments used in or developed for patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia that assess a patient's symptoms were eligible. Content validity was assessed according to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN): none of the six identified instruments were rated as sufficient. Five instruments (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire for chronic myeloid leukaemia with 24 items [EORTC QLQ-CML24], EORTC symptom set, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukaemia [FACT-LEU], haematological malignancies patient-reported outcomes [HM-PRO], and MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for chronic myeloid leukaemia [MDASI-CML]) were rated as inconsistent due to not being evaluated by professionals post-development, having very few patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia involved, or missing key symptoms. Moderate-quality to very low-quality evidence underpinned these ratings. The two EORTC instruments were the only ones not to miss key toxic effects (eg, muscle cramps). However, their relevance was rated as inconsistent: the QLQ-CML24 includes questions on health-related quality-of-life, whereas the symptom set includes items sourced from solid cancer treatments. This Review shows the need for an instrument with sufficient content validity to measure toxic effects from TKI treatment in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia. Until then, stakeholders can make an informed choice from currently used instruments with our assessment.

Improvement, Implementation, and Evaluation of the CMyLife Digital Care Platform: Participatory Action Research Approach

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of a continuously evolving eHealth tool in terms of improvement and implementation in daily practice is unclear. The CMyLife digital care platform provides patient-centered care by empowering patients with chronic myeloid leukemia, with a focus on making medication compliance insightful, discussable, and optimal, and achieving optimal control of the biomarker BCR-ABL1.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate to what extent the participatory action research approach is suitable for the improvement and scientific evaluation of eHealth innovations in daily clinical practice (measured by user experiences) combined with the promotion of patient empowerment.

METHODS

The study used iterative cycles of planning, action, and reflection, whereby participants' experiences (patients, health care providers, the CMyLife team, and app suppliers) with the platform determined next actions. Co-design workshops were the foundation of this cyclic process. Moreover, patients filled in 2 sets of questionnaires for assessing experiences with CMyLife, the actual use of the platform, and the influence of the platform after 3 and at least 6 months. Data collected during the workshops were analyzed using content analysis, which is often used for making a practical guide to action. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the study population in terms of information related to chronic myeloid leukemia and sociodemographics, and to describe experiences with the CMyLife digital care platform and the actual use of this platform.

RESULTS

The co-design workshops provided insights that contributed to the improvement, implementation, and evaluation of CMyLife and empowered patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (for example, simplification of language, and improvement of the user friendliness of functionalities). The results of the questionnaires indicated that (1) the platform improved information provision on chronic myeloid leukemia in 67% (33/49) of patients, (2) the use of the medication app improved medication compliance in 42% (16/38) of patients, (3) the use of the guideline app improved guideline adherence in 44% (11/25) of patients, and (4) the use of the platform caused patients to feel more empowered.

CONCLUSIONS

A participatory action research approach is suited to scientifically evaluate digital care platforms in daily clinical practice in terms of improvement, implementation, and patient empowerment. Systematic iterative evaluation of users' needs and wishes is needed to keep care centered on patients and keep the innovation up-to-date and valuable for users.

Pathologists' first opinions on barriers and facilitators of computational pathology adoption in oncological pathology: an international study

Computational pathology (CPath) algorithms detect, segment or classify cancer in whole slide images, approaching or even exceeding the accuracy of pathologists. Challenges have to be overcome before these algorithms can be used in practice. We therefore aim to explore international perspectives on the future role of CPath in oncological pathology by focusing on opinions and first experiences regarding barriers and facilitators. We conducted an international explorative eSurvey and semi-structured interviews with pathologists utilizing an implementation framework to classify potential influencing factors. The eSurvey results showed remarkable variation in opinions regarding attitude, understandability and validation of CPath. Interview results showed that barriers focused on the quality of available evidence, while most facilitators concerned strengths of CPath. A lack of consensus was present for multiple factors, such as the determination of sufficient validation using CPath, the preferred function of CPath within the digital workflow and the timing of CPath introduction in pathology education. The diversity in opinions illustrates variety in influencing factors in CPath adoption. A next step would be to quantitatively determine important factors for adoption and initiate validation studies. Both should include clear case descriptions and be conducted among a more homogenous panel of pathologists based on sub specialization.

Evaluation of a remote monitoring app in head and neck cancer follow-up care

BACKGROUND

A remote monitoring app was developed for head and neck cancer (HNC) follow-up during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This mixed-methods study provides insight in the usability and patients' experiences with the app to develop recommendations for future use.

METHODS

Patients were invited to participate if they were treated for HNC, used the app at least once and were in clinical follow-up. A subset was selected for semi-structured interviews through purposive sampling considering gender and age. This study was conducted between September 2021-May 2022 at a Dutch university medical center.

RESULTS

135 of the 216 invited patients completed the questionnaire, resulting in a total mHealth usability score of 4.72 (± 1.13) out of 7. Thirteen semi-structured interviews revealed 12 barriers and 11 facilitators. Most of them occurred at the level of the app itself. For example, patients received no feedback when all their answers were normal. The app made patients feel more responsible over their follow-up, but could not fulfill the need for personal contact with the attending physician. Patients felt that the app could replace some of the outpatient follow-up visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Our app is user-friendly, makes patients feel more in control and remote monitoring can reduce the frequency of outpatient follow-up visits. The barriers that emerged must be resolved before the app can be used in regular HNC follow-up. Future studies should investigate the appropriate ratio of remote monitoring to outpatient follow-up visits and the cost-effectiveness of remote monitoring in oncology care on a larger scale.

TUBectomy with delayed oophorectomy as an alternative to risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in high-risk women to assess the safety of prevention: the TUBA-WISP II study protocol

BACKGROUND

Risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy has gained interest for individuals at high risk for tubo-ovarian cancer as there is compelling evidence that especially high-grade serous carcinoma originates in the fallopian tubes. Two studies have demonstrated a positive effect of salpingectomy on menopause-related quality of life and sexual health compared with standard risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy is non-inferior to the current standard salpingo-oophorectomy for the prevention of tubo-ovarian cancer among individuals at high inherited risk.

STUDY HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesize that postponement of oophorectomy after salpingectomy, to the age of 40-45 (BRCA1) or 45-50 (BRCA2) years, compared with the current standard salpingo-oophorectomy at age 35-40 (BRCA1) or 40-45 (BRCA2) years, is non-inferior in regard to tubo-ovarian cancer risk.

TRIAL DESIGN

In this international prospective preference trial, participants will choose between the novel salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy and the current standard salpingo-oophorectomy. Salpingectomy can be performed after the completion of childbearing and between the age of 25 and 40 (BRCA1), 25 and 45 (BRCA2), or 25 and 50 (BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers) years. Subsequent oophorectomy is recommended at a maximum delay of 5 years beyond the upper limit of the current guideline age for salpingo-oophorectomy. The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline age, which is also the recommended age for salpingo-oophorectomy within the study, is 35-40 years for BRCA1, 40-45 years for BRCA2, and 45-50 years for BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers.

MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Premenopausal individuals with a documented class IV or V germline pathogenic variant in the BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, RAD51C, or RAD51D gene who have completed childbearing are eligible for participation. Participants may have a personal history of a non-ovarian malignancy.

PRIMARY ENDPOINT

The primary outcome is the cumulative tubo-ovarian cancer incidence at the target age: 46 years for BRCA1 and 51 years for BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers.

SAMPLE SIZE

The sample size to ensure sufficient power to test non-inferiority of salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy compared with salpingo-oophorectomy requires 1500 BRCA1 and 1500 BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers.

ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS

Participant recruitment is expected to be completed at the end of 2026 (total recruitment period of 5 years). The primary outcome is expected to be available in 2036 (minimal follow-up period of 10 years).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04294927.

Perceived barriers and facilitators to health behaviors in European childhood cancer survivors: A qualitative PanCareFollowUp study

BACKGROUND

Healthy behaviors, that is, engaging in regular physical activities, maintaining a healthy diet, limiting alcohol consumption, and avoiding tobacco and drug use, decrease the risk of developing late adverse health conditions in childhood cancer survivors. However, childhood cancer survivors may experience barriers to adopting and maintaining healthy behaviors. This study aimed to assess these barriers and facilitators to health behavior adoption and maintenance in childhood cancer survivors.

METHODS

A focus group ( n  = 12) and semi-structured telephone interviews ( n  = 20) were conducted with a selected sample of European and Dutch childhood cancer survivors, respectively. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to inform the topic guide and analysis. Inductive thematic analysis was applied to identify categories relating to barriers and facilitators of health behavior adoption and maintenance, after which they were deductively mapped onto the TDF.

RESULTS

Ten TDF domains were identified in the data of which "Knowledge," "Beliefs about consequences," "Environmental context and resources," and "Social influences" were most commonly reported. Childhood cancer survivors expressed a need for knowledge on the importance of healthy behaviors, possibly provided by healthcare professionals. They indicated physical and long-term benefits of healthy behaviors, available professional support, and a supporting and health-consciously minded work and social environment to be facilitators. Barriers were mostly related to a lack of available time and an unhealthy environment. Lastly, (social) media was perceived as both a barrier and a facilitator to healthy behaviors.

CONCLUSION

This study has identified education and available professional support in health behaviors and the relevance of healthy behaviors for childhood cancer survivors as key opportunities for stimulating health behavior adoption in childhood cancer survivors. Incorporating health behavior support and interventions for this population should therefore be a high priority.

Consensus based recommendations for the diagnosis of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma: an international Delphi study

AIM

Reliably diagnosing or safely excluding serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC), a precursor lesion of tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC), is crucial for individual patient care, for better understanding the oncogenesis of HGSC, and for safely investigating novel strategies to prevent tubo-ovarian carcinoma. To optimize STIC diagnosis and increase its reproducibility, we set up a three-round Delphi study.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In round 1, an international expert panel of 34 gynecologic pathologists, from 11 countries, was assembled to provide input regarding STIC diagnosis, which was used to develop a set of statements. In round 2, the panel rated their level of agreement with those statements on a 9-point Likert scale. In round 3, statements without previous consensus were rated again by the panel while anonymously disclosing the responses of the other panel members. Finally, each expert was asked to approve or disapprove the complete set of consensus statements. The panel indicated their level of agreement with 64 statements. A total of 27 statements (42%) reached consensus after three rounds. These statements reflect the entire diagnostic work-up for pathologists, regarding processing and macroscopy (three statements); microscopy (eight statements); immunohistochemistry (nine statements); interpretation and reporting (four statements); and miscellaneous (three statements). The final set of consensus statements was approved by 85%.

CONCLUSION

This study provides an overview of current clinical practice regarding STIC diagnosis amongst expert gynecopathologists. The experts' consensus statements form the basis for a set of recommendations, which may help towards more consistent STIC diagnosis.

Effectiveness of digital care platform CMyLife for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: results of a patient-preference trial

BACKGROUND

Two most important factors determining treatment success in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) are adequate medication compliance and molecular monitoring albeit still being suboptimal. The CMyLife platform is an eHealth innovation, co-created with and for CML patients, aiming to improve their care, leading to an increased quality of life and the opportunity of hospital-free care.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effectiveness of CMyLife in terms of information provision, patient empowerment, medication compliance, molecular monitoring, and quality of life.

METHODS

Effectiveness of CMyLife was explored using a patient-preference trial. Upon completion of the baseline questionnaire, participants actively used (intervention group) or did not actively use (questionnaire group) the CMyLife platform for at least 6 months, after which they completed the post-intervention questionnaire. Scores between the intervention group and the questionnaire group were compared with regard to the within-subject change between baseline and post-measurement using Generalized Estimating Equation models.

RESULTS

At baseline, 33 patients were enrolled in the questionnaire group and 75 in the intervention group. Online health information knowledge improved significantly when actively using CMyLife and patients felt more empowered. No significant improvements were found regarding medication compliance and molecular monitoring, which were already outstanding. Self-reported effectiveness showed that patients experienced that using CMyLife improved their medication compliance and helped them to oversee their molecular monitoring. Patients using CMyLife reported more symptoms but were better able to manage these.

CONCLUSIONS

Since hospital-free care has shown to be feasible in time of the COVID-19 pandemic, eHealth-based innovations such as CMyLife could be a solution to maintain the quality of care and make current oncological health care services more sustainable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04595955 , 22/10/2020.

Cancer treatments touch a wide range of values that count for patients and other stakeholders: What are the implications for decision-making?

BACKGROUND

Cancer rates and expenditures are increasing, resulting in debates on the exact value of this care. Perspectives on what exactly constitutes worthwhile values differ. This study aims to explore all values-elements regarding new oncological treatments for patients with cancer and all stakeholders involved and to assess their implications in different decision-making procedures.

METHOD

Thirty-one individual in-depth interviews were conducted with different stakeholders to identify values within oncology. A focus group with seven experts was performed to explore its possible implications in decision-making procedures.

RESULTS

The overarching themes of values identified were impact on daily life and future, costs for patients and loved ones, quality of life, impact on loved ones, societal impact and quality of treatments. The expert panel revealed that the extended exploration of values that matter to patients is deemed useful in patient-level decision-making, information provision, patient empowerment and support during and after treatment. For national reimbursement decisions, implications for the broad range of values seems less clear.

CONCLUSION

Clinical values are not the only ones that matter to oncological patients and the stakeholders in the field. We found a much broader range of values. Proper recognition of values that count might add to patient-level decision-making, but implications for reimbursement decisions are less clear. The results could be useful to guide clinicians and policymakers when it comes to decision-making in oncology. Making more explicit which values counts for whom guarantees a more systematic approach to decision-making on all levels.

Healthcare professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators of health behavior support provision: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) have an increased risk of developing chronic health conditions. Evidence suggests that poor health behaviors further increase health risks. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in survivorship care have a key role in providing health behavior support (HBS) but can feel limited in their ability to do so. This study aims to explore European HCPs perceived facilitators and barriers to providing HBS to CCSs.

METHODS

Five focus groups with 30 HCPs from survivorship care clinics across Europe were conducted. Topic guides were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to capture domains that may influence provision of HBS. Focus groups were analyzed with thematic analysis. Transcripts were inductively coded, after which axial coding was applied to organize codes into categories. Finally, categories were mapped onto the TDF domains.

RESULTS

Nine TDF domains were identified in the data. The most commonly reported TDF domains were "Knowledge", "Skills", and "Environmental context and resources". HCPs indicated that their lack of knowledge of the association between late effects and health behaviors, besides time restrictions, were barriers to HBS. Facilitators for HBS included possession of skills needed to pass on health behavior information, good clinic organization, and an established network of HCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified education and training of HCPs as key opportunities to improve HBS. Survivorship care clinics should work towards establishing well-integrated structured care with internal and external networks including HBS being part of routine care. Proper understanding of facilitators and barriers should lead to better survivorship care for CCSs.

A systematic review and multilevel regression analysis reveals the comorbidity prevalence in cancer

Comorbidities can have major implications for cancer care, as they might impact the timing of cancer diagnosis, compromise optimal care, affect treatment outcomes, and increase healthcare costs. Thus, it is important to comprehensively evaluate cancer comorbidities and examine trends over time. Here, we performed a systematic literature review on the prevalence and types of comorbidities for the five most common forms of cancer. Observational studies from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries published between 1990 and 2020 in English or Dutch that used routinely collected data from a representative population were included. The search yielded 3,070 articles of which 161 were eligible for data analyses. Multilevel analyses were performed to evaluate determinants of variation in comorbidity prevalence and trends over time. The weighted average comorbidity prevalence was 33.4%, and comorbidities were the most common in lung cancer (46.7%) and colorectal cancer (40.0%), followed by prostate (28.5%), melanoma (28.3%), and breast (22.4%). The most common types of comorbidities were hypertension (29.7%), pulmonary diseases (15.9%), and diabetes (13.5%). After adjusting for gender, type of comorbidity index, age, data source (patient records versus claims), and country, a significant increase in comorbidities of 0.54% per year was observed. Overall, a large and increasing proportion of the oncological population is dealing with comorbidities, which could be used to inform and adapt treatment options to improve health outcomes and reduce healthcare costs.

Evaluating the capacity of the distress thermometer to detect high fear of cancer recurrence

OBJECTIVES

Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is common and burdensome to patients, but often remains undetected. Oncology professionals report need for tools to improve FCR detection in routine care. Oncology care guidelines recommend the Distress Thermometer (DT) for distress screening, but it has not been validated for FCR. This study evaluated the capacity of the DT and accompanying problem list to detect FCR.

METHODS

Amalgamated data of two studies with 149 breast cancer and 74 colorectal cancer survivors were used. We evaluated the Dutch DT including the DT score, problem list fears item and emotional domain score using Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses. The Dutch Cancer Worry Scale-6 (CWS-6) was used as reference measure, with validated cut-off scores ≥10 and ≥12 for high FCR. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values were calculated.

RESULTS

The DT score showed poor performance in discriminating between low and high FCR. The recommended cut-off ≥4 had low sensitivity (65% for CWS-6≥10; 72% for CWS-6 ≥12) and specificity (67% and 58%). No other cut-off had an acceptable combination of sensitivity and specificity. The fears item had low sensitivity (29% and 44.9%) and high specificity (95% and 94%). The emotional domain score had fair performance in discriminating between low and high FCR but there was no cut-off with acceptable sensitivity and specificity.

CONCLUSION

The DT as currently recommended in oncology care guidelines is not suitable to effectively detect FCR in routine care. To improve patients access to psychosocial care, it should be investigated how FCR-specific measures can be integrated in oncology practice.

Adherence to quality indicators in chronic myeloid leukemia care: results from a population-based study in The Netherlands

Suboptimal guideline adherence in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) care is associated with worse treatment outcomes. Current study focused on adherence to seven quality indicators (QIs) based on the European Leukemia Network guideline (one diagnostic, one therapeutic, and five monitoring indicators). Data were obtained from population-based registries in the Netherlands of 405 newly diagnosed chronic phase CML patients between January 2008 and April 2013. Compliance rates regarding diagnostic and therapeutic indicator were 83% and 78%, respectively. Monitoring indicators rates were lower: 21-27% for indicators concerning the first year and 58% and 62% for the second and third year, respectively. Noncompliance occurred mostly due to non-timely monitoring. Twenty cases did not comply with any indicator, 6% complied with all indicators. After adjustment for age, overall survival rates did not differ significantly between the groups. Adherence to guideline-based QIs was suboptimal. This demonstrates the evidence-practice gap, shows room for improvement and underscores the need for real-world data.

First step in implementation of opportunistic salpingectomy for prevention of ovarian cancer: Current care and its determinants

INTRODUCTION

Opportunistic salpingectomy (OS) refers to additional removal of the fallopian tubes during abdominal surgery performed for another medical indication, as prevention for ovarian cancer. As OS has been inconsistently implemented, its clinical practice varies worldwide. To reduce this variation, insight is required into current clinical practice and its determinants. Therefore, the study aim was to determine the implementation of counseling and performance of OS between 2015 and 2018, and its patient, surgical, physician, and hospital characteristics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective study using electronic medical records from six different Dutch hospitals: two academic, two large teaching, and two non-teaching hospitals. Patients were considered eligible for OS if they underwent elective non-obstetric abdominal surgery for a gynecological indication from January 2015 through December 2018. Primary outcomes were uptake of counseling and performance of OS. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify characteristics associated with OS.

RESULTS

A total of 3214 patients underwent elective non-obstetric abdominal surgery for a gynecological indication and were eligible for OS. Counseling on OS increased significantly from 2.9% in 2015 to 29.4% in 2018. In this period, 440 patients were counseled on OS, of which 95.9% chose OS. Performance of OS increased significantly from 6.9% in 2015 to 44.5% in 2018. Counseling for and performance of OS were more likely in patients who had surgery by laparoscopic approach, were counseled by a gynecological resident, or had more than three contact moments before surgery. Additionally, OS was less likely in patients who had vaginal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the uptake of OS increased from 2015 to 2018, the majority of patients who were eligible for OS were not counseled and did not undergo OS. Its clinical practice varies on patient, surgery, and physician characteristics. Therefore, an implementation strategy tailored to associated determinants is recommended.

Individualised follow-up for head and neck cancer-design of a prospective cohort study to assess its feasibility

INTRODUCTION

It is a common practice for many cancer types to monitor patients after treatment to detect new disease manifestations early. For head and neck cancer (HNC), however, long-term routine follow-up is up for debate for several reasons. The benefits of prolonged routine follow-up on survival have not been proven. Also, cancer follow-up is putting increasing pressure on healthcare resources due to rising incidence and survival rates. Therefore, this study investigates a novel follow-up approach among HNC patients, giving them the opportunity to choose their own follow-up programme.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

HNC patients are offered a decision-aided choice between standardised or individualised follow-up after 1.5 years of uncomplicated guideline-prescribed follow-up. Standardised follow-up entails continuing the 5-year guideline-prescribed schedule. Individualised follow-up means the patient only attends the outpatient clinic on their own initiative in case of physical symptoms or supportive care needs. Patients are educated on self-examination and when a control visit is necessary. The primary outcome measure is the feasibility of offering patients this choice. Secondary outcome measures are quality of life, costs, productivity loss and detection of new disease.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We believe that it is essential to let patients determine their follow-up programme based on their own values and preferences. If this choice is feasible, it can be implemented and investigated in other HNC care centres.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05386225.

Person-centred online lifestyle coaching in childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors: protocol of the multicentre PanCareFollowUp lifestyle intervention feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Physical inactivity and unhealthy dietary habits are known to be disadvantageous for the development of late adverse effects in survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer. To make interventions, aimed at improving lifestyle, fit into the daily life of survivors, interventions should be designed and delivered in a person-centred way with a limited time burden. As part of the European PanCareFollowUp project, an eHealth intervention was developed to support sustainable changes to physical activity levels and/or diet of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors. This feasibility study aims to gain insight into the feasibility and potential effect sizes of the PanCareFollowUp lifestyle intervention.

METHODS

The PanCareFollowUp lifestyle intervention consists of person-centred 3-6 screen-to-screen sessions with a certified lifestyle coach. The intervention will be evaluated with a single-arm pre-post feasibility study conducted at two survivorship care clinics in the Netherlands. A total of 60 participants who are (i) diagnosed with cancer <25 years, (ii) ≥ 5 years post-treatment, (iii) aged 16-55 years, and (iv) have a low physical activity level and/or unhealthy dietary intake manifested by overweight will be recruited. Using reports, hospital records, and questionnaires for survivors, coaches, and late effect doctors, feasibility will be based on (i) adherence to intervention, (ii) acceptability, (iii) practicality, (iv) integration/implementation, (v) demand, and (vi) attrition. The potential effect sizes of the intervention will be explored by determining the percentage of survivors that reach the personalized lifestyle goals that were set with the coach. Physical activity level, dietary intake, BMI, general self-efficacy, self-management, and motivation level will be assessed at three time points with questionnaires, reports, and/or an accelerometer.

DISCUSSION

Data of this study will be gathered to assess the feasibility and potential effect sizes. This will allow for further intervention refinement as needed as well as to inform a future large-scale intervention study and a manual for implementation at other centres.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP) number: NL8932 (ICTRP Search Portal (who.int)). Registered on September 29, 2020.

The effect of opportunistic salpingectomy for primary prevention of ovarian cancer on ovarian reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Opportunistic salpingectomy (OS) is an attractive method for primary prevention of ovarian cancer. Although OS has not been associated with a higher complication rate, it may be associated with earlier onset of menopause.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of OS on both age at menopause and ovarian reserve.

METHODS

A search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, Embase and MEDLINE databases from inception until March 2022. We included randomized clinical trials and cohort studies investigating the effect of OS on onset of menopause and/or ovarian reserve through change in anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), antral follicle count (AFC), estradiol (E2), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH). Data was extracted independently by two researchers. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate the pooled effect of OS on ovarian reserve.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 1047 studies. No studies were found investigating the effect of OS on age of menopause. Fifteen studies were included in the meta-analysis on ovarian reserve. Meta-analyses did not result in statistically significant differences in mean change in AMH (MD -0.07 ng/ml, 95%CI -0.18;0.05), AFC (MD 0.20 n, 95 % CI -4.91;5.30), E2 (MD 3.97 pg/ml, 95%CI -0.92;8.86), FSH (MD 0.33mIU/ml, 95%CI -0.15;0.81) and LH (MD 0.03mIU/ml; 95%CI -0.47;0.53).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that OS does not result in a significant reduction of ovarian reserve in the short term. Further research is essential to confirm the absence of major effects of OS on menopausal onset since clear evidence on this subject is lacking. Registration number PROSPERO CRD42021260966.

Evaluating the feasibility, effectiveness and costs of implementing person-centred follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors in four European countries: the PanCareFollowUp Care prospective cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Long-term survival after childhood cancer often comes at the expense of late, adverse health conditions. However, survivorship care is frequently not available for adult survivors in Europe. The PanCareFollowUp Consortium therefore developed the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention, an innovative person-centred survivorship care model based on experiences in the Netherlands. This paper describes the protocol of the prospective cohort study (Care Study) to evaluate the feasibility and the health economic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes of implementing PanCareFollowUp Care as usual care in four European countries.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this prospective, longitudinal cohort study with at least 6 months of follow-up, 800 childhood cancer survivors will receive the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention across four study sites in Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy and Sweden, representing different healthcare systems. The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be evaluated according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework. Clinical and research data are collected through questionnaires, a clinic visit for multiple medical assessments and a follow-up call. The primary outcome is empowerment, assessed with the Health Education Impact Questionnaire. A central data centre will perform quality checks, data cleaning and data validation, and provide support in data analysis. Multilevel models will be used for repeated outcome measures, with subgroup analysis, for example, by study site, attained age, sex or diagnosis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will be conducted in accordance with the guidelines of Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol has been reviewed and approved by all relevant ethics committees. The evidence and insights gained by this study will be summarised in a Replication Manual, also including the tools required to implement the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention in other countries. This Replication Manual will become freely available through PanCare and will be disseminated through policy and press releases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Netherlands Trial Register (NL8918; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8918).

Barriers and facilitators for implementation of the SWORD evidence-based psychological intervention for fear of cancer recurrence in three different healthcare settings

Purpose

Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) interventions are effective, but few are implemented. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators for implementing the evidence-based blended SWORD intervention in routine psycho-oncological care.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews with 19 cancer survivors and 18 professionals from three healthcare settings assessed barriers and facilitators in six domains as described by the determinant frameworks of Grol and Flottorp: (1) innovation, (2) professionals, (3) patients, (4) social context, (5) organization, and (6) economic and political context.

Results

In the innovation domain, there were few barriers. Facilitators included high reliability, accessibility, and relevance of SWORD. In the professional domain, physicians and nurses barriers were lack of self-efficacy, knowledge, and skills to address FCR whereas psychologists had sufficient knowledge and skills, but some were critical towards protocolized treatments, cognitive behavioral therapy, or eHealth. Patient domain barriers included lack of FCR awareness, negative expectations of psychotherapy, and unwillingness/inability to actively engage in treatment. A social context domain barrier was poor communication between different healthcare professionals. Organization domain barriers included inadequate referral structures to psychological services, limited capacity, and complex legal procedures. Economic and political context domain barriers included lack of a national implementation structure for evidence-based psycho-oncological interventions and eHealth platform costs.

Conclusions

Implementation strategies should be targeted at patient, professional, organizational and economic and political domains. Identified barriers and facilitators are relevant to other researchers in psycho-oncology that aim to bridge the research-practice gap.

Implications for cancer survivors

This study contributes to the implementation of evidence-based psychological interventions for cancer survivors, who can benefit from these services.

Cyclic workflow to improve implementation of learning points from morbidity and mortality meetings

BACKGROUND

Morbidity and mortality meetings (M&MMs) are organized in most hospital departments with an educational purpose to learn from adverse events (AEs) to improve patient care. M&MMs often lack effectiveness due to unsuccessful systematic follow-up of areas of improvement. This can have an effect on improving patient safety and care. Therefore, a new strategy that focuses on implementing areas of improvement into daily practice is necessary. The study aim is to see if we could improve the implementation of meeting outcomes from the M&MM by using a cyclic workflow, and which factors are important to achieve its implementation.

METHODS

This prospective study took place at the department of gynecologic oncology of a university hospital. Research was conducted with a participatory action research (PAR) approach using 10 consecutive M&MMs in 2019 and 2020. The cyclical workflow consisted of an action list based on the PDCA-cycle, a check of the implementation of areas for improvement at the next M&MM and regular monitoring of tasks. Each M&MM was observed and each professional with an assigned task was interviewed and gave their informed consent. Thematic content analysis was performed with the program Atlas.ti 8.4.20.

RESULTS

Out of the 39 tasks that resulted from 10 M&MMs, 37 (94.8%) followed all the steps in the PDCA-cycle and were implemented. In total, 16 interviews were conducted with consultants, nurses, registrars and residents. Five main factors were important to achieve follow-up of areas for improvement: organizational culture, motivation, commitment, communication to mobilize employees and skills. Repetition of the cyclic workflow at the M&MM and an external person who reminded professionals of their assigned task(s) was important to change habits and motivate professionals.

CONCLUSION

Cyclical tools can support the implementation of areas for improvement to optimize the M&MM. A M&MM with an organizational culture where attendees can discuss openly and freely may motivate attendees to take on tasks successfully. A positive stimulant to reach commitment of professionals is team participation. Integrating new habits of reflection may lead to a deeper level of learning from the PDCA-cycle and of the M&MM. Creating a learning environment outside of the M&MM may support professionals to take on actions and engage in improvement practices. Future research may focus on including a comparative analysis to show a success rate of the implementation of learning points from the M&MM more clearly.

Quality of integrated female oncofertility care is suboptimal: A patient-reported measurement

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines recommend to inform female cancer patients about their infertility risks due to cancer treatment. Unfortunately, it seems that guideline adherence is suboptimal. In order to improve quality of integrated female oncofertility care, a systematic assessment of current practice is necessary.

METHODS

A multicenter cross-sectional survey study in which a set of systematically developed quality indicators was processed, was conducted among female cancer patients (diagnosed in 2016/2017). These indicators represented all domains in oncofertility care; risk communication, referral, counseling, and decision-making. Indicator scores were calculated, and determinants were assessed by multilevel multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-one out of 344 female cancer patients participated. Eight out of 11 indicators scored below 90% adherence. Of all patients, 72.7% was informed about their infertility, 51.2% was offered a referral, with 18.8% all aspects were discussed in counseling, and 35.5% received written and/or digital information. Patient's age, strength of wish to conceive, time before cancer treatment, and type of healthcare provider significantly influenced the scores of three indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

Current quality of female oncofertility care is far from optimal. Therefore, improvement is needed. To achieve this, improvement strategies that are tailored to the identified determinants and to guideline-specific barriers should be developed.

Nationwide implementation of a multifaceted tailored strategy to improve uptake of standardized structured reporting in pathology: an effect and process evaluation

Background

Implementation strategies are aimed at improving guideline adherence. Both effect and process evaluations are conducted to provide insights into the success or failure of these strategies. In our study, we evaluate the nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting (SSR) in pathology.

Methods

An interrupted time series analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of a previously developed implementation strategy, which consisted of various digitally available elements, on SSR in pathology laboratories. A segmented regression analysis was performed to analyze the change in mean SSR percentages directly after the strategy introduction for pathology reporting and specific subcategories. In addition, we analyzed the change in trend in the weekly percentages after strategy introduction, also for subgroups of tumor groups, retrieval methods, and type of laboratory. The change in SSR use after the strategy introduction was determined for all pathology laboratories. We further conducted a process evaluation in which the exposure to the strategy elements was determined. Experiences of the users with all strategy elements and the remaining barriers and potential strategy elements were evaluated through an eSurvey. We also tested whether exposure to a specific element and a combination of elements resulted in a higher uptake of SSR after strategy introduction.

Results

There was a significant increase in an average use of SSR after the strategy introduction for reporting of gastrointestinal (p=.018) and urological (p=.003) oncological diagnoses. A significant increase was present for all oncological resections as a group (p=.007). Thirty-three out of 42 pathology laboratories increased SSR use after the strategy introduction. The “Feedback button”, an option within the templates for SSR to provide feedback to the provider and one of the elements of the implementation strategy, was most frequently used by the SSR users, and effectiveness results showed that it increased average SSR use after the strategy introduction. Barriers were still present for SSR implementation.

Conclusions

Nationwide SSR implementation improved for specific tumor groups and retrieval methods. The next step will be to further improve the use of SSR and, simultaneously, to further develop potential benefits of high SSR use, focusing on re-using discrete pathology data. In this way, we can facilitate proper treatment decisions in oncology.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-022-01224-5.

Evidence-Based Selection, Development, and Testing of a Tailored Strategy to Improve Standardized Structured Reporting in Pathology

CONTEXT.—

Standardized structured reporting (SSR) among pathologists results in more complete diagnoses and, subsequently, improved treatment decisions and patient outcomes. Therefore, SSR templates' usage is advocated in oncology guidelines. However, actual SSR usage varies widely. Previous studies have shown multiple impeding and facilitating factors regarding SSR implementation.

OBJECTIVE.—

To select, develop, and test an evidence-based multifaceted strategy, tailored to the impeding and facilitating factors to improve SSR implementation in oncologic pathology.

DESIGN.—

Six strategy elements to increase the use of SSR were selected on the basis of a barrier and facilitator analysis, literature review, and consecutive discussions with a nationwide expert panel and project team. In collaboration with a professional organization for developing SSR templates (PALGA), we developed elements and combined them in 1 multifaceted strategy and subsequently tested effectiveness and feasibility.

RESULTS.—

The 6 strategy elements were as follows: (1) renewed Web site including SSR information; (2) e-learning including SSR instructions; (3) communication manual describing communication about SSR; (4) improved feedback process, including use of the "Feedback Button" within SSR templates and "Frequently Asked Questions" on the Web site; (5) information sheet on SSR updates within SSR templates; and (6) monthly telephone conversations to discuss audit and feedback information regarding local SSR usage. A significant change (12.4%) in SSR usage among test laboratories was noticed. After the first test, e-learning and the "Feedback Button" were deemed most feasible and effective. However, awareness of all elements could be increased.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Next step will be to optimize the tailored strategy, to distribute it to all Dutch pathology laboratories, and to evaluate effectiveness and feasibility in a nationwide setting.

Roles of general practitioners in shared decision-making for patients with cancer: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

The shared decision-making (SDM) process for the treatment of pancreatic and oesophageal cancer primarily takes place with healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the hospital setting. This study aims to explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on their possible roles during this SDM process, their added value and their requirements for involvement in SDM.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 GPs about their views on SDM for patients with cancer. The interviews were analysed by two researchers using an inductive open coding approach.

RESULTS

Five potential roles in SDM were described by the interviewed GPs, of which the role as 'coach' of the patient was mentioned by all. GPs see their main added value as their long-standing relationship with the patient. To be able to participate optimally in SDM, GPs indicated that they need to be kept up to date during the patient's care process and should receive enough medical information about treatment options and contextual information.

CONCLUSION

GPs see different potential roles for themselves when involved in SDM. Hospital HCPs that want to facilitate GP involvement should take the initiative, provide the GPs with enough and timely information and must be easy to consult.

Disclosing Adverse Events in Clinical Practice: The Delicate Act of Being Open

Practicing a "safe" disclosure of adverse events remains challenging for healthcare professionals. In addition, knowledge on how to deliver a disclosure is still limited. This review focuses on how disclosure communication may be practiced based on the perspectives of patients and healthcare professionals. Empirical studies conducted between September 2008 and October 2019 were included from the databases PubMed, Web of Science and Psychinfo. After full text analysis and quality appraisal this scoping review included a total of 23 studies out of 2537 studies. As a first step, the needs of patients and the challenges of healthcare professionals with the practice of providing an effective disclosure were extracted from the empirical literature. Based on these findings, the review demonstrates that specific disclosure communication strategies on the level of interpersonal skills, organization, and supportive factors may facilitate healthcare professionals to provide optimal disclosure of adverse events. These may be relevant to provide patients with a tailored approach that accompanies their preferences for information and recognition. In conclusion, healthcare professionals may need training in interpersonal (verbal and nonverbal) communication skills. Furthermore, it is important to develop an open (organizational) culture that supports the communication of adverse events and disclosure as a standard practice.

The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: A European harmonised approach to person-centred guideline-based survivorship care after childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer

BACKGROUND

Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care, although endorsed, is not available for the majority of adult survivors of childhood, adolescence and young adult (CAYA) cancer. Barriers to implementation include lack of time, knowledge, personnel and funding. Sustainable solutions are urgently needed to address the needs of CAYA cancer survivors to improve the quality of life and reduce the burden of late effects on survivors, health care systems and society. The European Union-funded PanCareFollowUp project, initiated by the Pan-European Network for Care of Survivors after Childhood and Adolescent Cancer, was established to facilitate the implementation of person-centred survivorship care across Europe.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention was co-developed with survivors as part of the PanCareFollowUp project. It is a person-centred approach to survivorship care, supported by guidelines and with flexibility to adapt to local health care settings. The Care Intervention consists of three steps: (1) previsit completion of a Survivor Questionnaire (by the survivor) and Treatment Summary (by the health care provider [HCP]), (2) a clinic visit including shared decision-making, and (3) a follow-up call to finalise the individualised Survivorship Care Plan.

RESULTS

We developed the key components of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: a PanCareFollowUp Survivor Questionnaire, Treatment Summary template, Survivorship Care Plan template, and educational materials for HCPs and survivors. Wide implementation of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be supported with a freely distributed Replication Manual on completion of the PanCareFollowUp project.

CONCLUSIONS

The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will support the implementation of person-centred, guideline-based LTFU care in different health care settings across Europe to improve survivors' health and well-being.

Cancer worry among BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers choosing surgery to prevent tubal/ovarian cancer: course over time and associated factors

Objective

High cancer risks, as applicable to BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers, can induce significant cancer concerns. We examined the degree of cancer worry and the course of this worry among BRCA1/2-PV carriers undergoing surgery to prevent ovarian cancer, and identified factors associated with high cancer worry.

Methods

Cancer worry was evaluated as part of the multicentre, prospective TUBA-study (NCT02321228) in which BRCA1/2-PV carriers choose either novel risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy or standard risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. The Cancer Worry Scale was obtained before and 3 and 12 months after surgery. Cancer worry patterns were analysed using latent class growth analysis and associated factors were identified with regression analysis.

Results

Of all 577 BRCA1/2-PV carriers, 320 (57%) had high (≥ 14) cancer worry pre-surgery, and 54% had lower worry 12 months post-surgery than pre-surgery. Based on patterns over time, BRCA1/2-PV carriers could be classified into three groups: persistently low cancer worry (56%), persistently high cancer worry (6%), and fluctuating, mostly declining, cancer worry (37%). Factors associated with persistently high cancer concerns were age below 35 (BRCA1) or 40 (BRCA2), unemployment, previous breast cancer, lower education and a more recent BRCA1/2-PV diagnosis.

Conclusions

Some degree of cancer worry is considered normal, and most BRCA1/2-PV carriers have declining cancer worry after gynaecological risk-reducing surgery. However, a subset of these BRCA1/2-PV carriers has persisting major cancer concerns up to 1 year after surgery. They should be identified and potentially offered additional support.

Clinical trial registration

The TUBA-study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov since December 11th, 2014. Registration number: NCT02321228.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-021-06726-4.

Improving Interdisciplinary Communication: Barriers and Facilitators for Implementation of Standardized Structured Reporting in Oncology

BACKGROUND

Standardized structured reporting (SSR) improves quality of diagnostic cancer reporting and interdisciplinary communication in multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings, resulting in more adequate treatment decisions and better health outcomes. However, use of SSR varies widely among pathologists, but might be encouraged by MDT members (MDTMs). Our objectives were to identify barriers and facilitators (influencing factors) for SSR implementation in oncologic pathology from the perspective of MDTMs and their determinants.

METHODS

In a multimethod design, we identified influencing factors for SSR implementation related to MDT meetings, using 5 domains: (1) innovation factors, (2) individual professional factors, (3) social setting factors, (4) organizational factors, and (5) political and legal factors. Four focus groups with MDTMs in urologic, gynecologic, and gastroenterologic oncology were conducted. We used an eSurvey among MDTMs to quantify the qualitative findings and to analyze determinants affecting these influencing factors.

RESULTS

Twenty-three MDTMs practicing in 9 oncology-related disciplines participated in the focus groups and yielded 28 barriers and 28 facilitators in all domains. The eSurvey yielded 211 responses. Main barriers related to lack of readability of SSR: difficulties with capturing nuances (66%) and formulation of the conclusion (43%); lack of transparency in the development (50%) and feedback processes of SSR templates (38%); and lack of information exchange about SSR between pathologists and other MDTMs (45%). Main facilitators were encouragement of pathologists' SSR use by MDTMs (90%) and expanding the recommendation of SSR use in national guidelines (80%). Oncology-related medical discipline and MDT type were the most relevant determinants for SSR implementation barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Although SSR makes diagnostic reports more complete, this study shows important barriers in implementing SSR in oncologic pathology. The next step is to use these factors for developing and testing implementation tools to improve SSR implementation.

Effect of Digital Care Platforms on Quality of Care for Oncological Patients and Barriers and Facilitators for Their Implementation: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Oncological health care services are challenged by the increasing number of cancer survivors, long-term follow-up care, and fragmentation of care. Digital care platforms are potential tools to deliver affordable, patient-centered oncological care. Previous reviews evaluated only one feature of a digital care platform or did not evaluate the effect on enhancement of information, self-efficacy, continuity of care, or patient- and health care provider-reported experiences. Additionally, they have not focused on the barriers and facilitators for implementation of a digital care platform in oncological care.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to collect the best available evidence of the effect of a digital care platform on quality of care parameters such as enhancement of available information, self-efficacy, continuity of care, and patient- and health care provider-reported experiences. Additionally, barriers and facilitators for implementation of digital care platforms were analyzed.

METHODS

The PubMed (Medline), Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for the period from January 2000 to May 2020 for studies assessing the effect of a digital care platform on the predefined outcome parameters in oncological patients and studies describing barriers and facilitators for implementation. Synthesis of the results was performed qualitatively. Barriers and facilitators were categorized according to the framework of Grol and Wensing. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for critical appraisal of the studies.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included for final analysis, comprising 8 clinical studies on the effectiveness of the digital care platform and 13 studies describing barriers and facilitators. Usage of a digital care platform appeared to enhance the availability of information and self-efficacy. There were no data available on the effect of a digital care platform on the continuity of care. However, based on focus group interviews, digital care platforms could potentially improve continuity of care by optimizing the exchange of patient information across institutes. Patient-reported experiences such as satisfaction with the platform were considerably positive. Most barriers for implementation were identified at the professional level, such as the concern for increased workload and unattended release of medical information to patients. Most facilitators were found at the patient and innovation levels, such as improved patient-doctor communication and patient empowerment. There were few barriers and facilitators mentioned at the economic and political levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of digital care platforms is associated with better quality of care through enhancement of availability of information and increased self-efficacy for oncological patients. The numerous facilitators identified at the patient level illustrate that patients are positive toward a digital care platform. However, despite these favorable results, robust evidence concerning the effectiveness of digital care platforms, especially from high-quality studies, is still lacking. Future studies should therefore aim to further investigate the effectiveness of digital care platforms, and the barriers and facilitators to their implementation at the economic and political levels.

Evaluation of a patient decision aid for BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers choosing an ovarian cancer prevention strategy

OBJECTIVE

Risk-reducing surgery is advised to BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers around the age of 40 years to reduce ovarian cancer risk. In the TUBA-study, a multicenter preference study (NCT02321228), BRCA1/2-PV carriers are offered a choice: the standard strategy of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy or the novel strategy of risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy. We evaluated feasibility and effectiveness of a patient decision aid for this choice.

METHODS

Premenopausal BRCA1/2-PV carriers were counselled for risk-reducing surgical options in the TUBA-study; the first cohort was counselled without and the second cohort with decision aid. Evaluation was performed using digital questionnaires for participating women and their healthcare professionals. Outcome measures included actual choice, feasibility (usage and experiences) and effectiveness (knowledge, cancer worry, decisional conflict, decisional regret and self-estimated influence on decision).

RESULTS

283 women were counselled without and 282 women with decision aid. The novel strategy was chosen less frequently in women without compared with women with decision aid (67% vs 78%, p = 0.004). The decision aid was graded with an 8 out of 10 by both women and professionals, and 78% of the women would recommend this decision aid to others. Users of the decision aid reported increased knowledge about the options and increased insight in personal values. Knowledge on cancer risk, decisional conflict, decisional regret and cancer worry were similar in both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the patient decision aid for risk-reducing surgery is feasible, effective and highly appreciated among BRCA1/2-PV carriers facing the decision between salpingo-oophorectomy or salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy.

Association of Salpingectomy With Delayed Oophorectomy Versus Salpingo-oophorectomy With Quality of Life in BRCA1/2 Pathogenic Variant Carriers: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

Importance

Most women with a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant undergo premature menopause with potential short- and long-term morbidity due to the current method of ovarian carcinoma prevention: risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO). Because the fallopian tubes play a key role in ovarian cancer pathogenesis, salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy may be a novel risk-reducing strategy with benefits of delaying menopause.

Objective

To compare menopause-related quality of life after risk-reducing salpingectomy (RRS) with delayed oophorectomy with RRSO in carriers of the BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A multicenter nonrandomized controlled preference trial (TUBA study), with patient recruitment between January 16, 2015, and November 7, 2019, and follow-up at 3 and 12 months after surgery was conducted in all Dutch university hospitals and a few large general hospitals. In the Netherlands, RRSO is predominantly performed in these hospitals. Patients at the clinical genetics or gynecology department between the ages of 25 and 40 years (BRCA1) or 25 to 45 years (BRCA2) who were premenopausal, had completed childbearing, and were undergoing no current treatment for cancer were eligible.

Interventions

Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy at currently recommended age or RRS after completed childbearing with delayed oophorectomy. After RRSO was performed, hormone replacement therapy was recommended for women without contraindications.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Menopause-related quality of life as assessed by the Greene Climacteric Scale, with a higher scale sum (range, 0-63) representing more climacteric symptoms. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, sexual functioning and distress, cancer worry, decisional regret, and surgical outcomes.

Results

A total of 577 women (mean [SD] age, 37.2 [3.5] years) were enrolled: 297 (51.5%) were pathogenic BRCA1 variant carriers and 280 (48.5%) were BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. At the time of analysis, 394 patients had undergone RRS and 154 had undergone RRSO. Without hormone replacement therapy, the adjusted mean increase from the baseline score on the Greene Climacteric Scale was 6.7 (95% CI, 5.0-8.4; P < .001) points higher during 1 year after RRSO than after RRS. After RRSO with hormone replacement therapy, the difference was 3.6 points (95% CI, 2.3-4.8; P < .001) compared with RRS.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this nonrandomized controlled trial suggest that patients have better menopause-related quality of life after RRS than after RRSO, regardless of hormone replacement therapy. An international follow-up study is currently evaluating the oncologic safety of this therapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02321228.

Patients' and professionals' perspectives on implementation of opportunistic salpingectomy: a mixed-method study

BACKGROUND

To prevent ovarian cancer, several international societies have issued guidelines which recommend to discuss opportunistic salpingectomy with women undergoing pelvic surgery after completion of childbearing. The opportunistic salpingectomy refers to the additional removal of Fallopian tubes during pelvic surgery for another indication to reduce the risk of developing ovarian cancer. These recommendations emphasize the importance of counselling on benefits and risks of opportunistic salpingectomy but offer no guidance on their implementation in daily practice. The lack of a tailored implementation strategy has resulted in a wide variation in current practice. To reduce this practice variation, we identified influencing factors on implementing opportunistic salpingectomy from patients' and professionals' perspectives.

METHODS

We conducted a mixed-method study between 2019 and 2020 throughout the Netherlands. In a qualitative phase, we conducted interviews with gynecologic patients (N = 11) and their professionals (N = 20) to explore barriers and facilitators, using an interview guide. In the quantitative phase, we quantified these barriers and facilitators among patients who underwent a hysterectomy or sterilization and were counselled on the opportunistic salpingectomy (N = 77), and members of the Dutch Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (N = 204), using questionnaires. For both phases, barriers and facilitators were classified into the following domains: innovation, patient, healthcare professional, social setting, organization, and economic and political context.

RESULTS

For patients, main barriers were lack of knowledge about: the existence of the opportunistic salpingectomy (45%), size of the surgery (44%) and its associated possible disadvantages (37%). In addition, patients attributed their reluctance to concerns about the removal of healthy organs (46%). For professionals, main barriers were: patients' lack of knowledge of the size of surgery (85%) and its associated possible disadvantages (77%), the gap in evidence on long term risks and benefits (43%), the lack of feasibility in certain patients and during vaginal surgery (66%). Both patients (41%) and professionals (67%) identified the need for counselling material as facilitator.

CONCLUSION

To reduce the variety in care regarding opportunistic salpingectomy, consensus and uniform counselling is needed. Including the opportunistic salpingectomy in gynecological guidelines and a decision aid for counselling could serve as tools to facilitate implementation.

The European multistakeholder PanCareFollowUp project: novel, person-centred survivorship care to improve care quality, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and accessibility for cancer survivors and caregivers

BACKGROUND

The majority of childhood cancer survivors are at risk of treatment-related adverse health outcomes. Survivorship care to mitigate these late effects is endorsed, but it is not available for many adult survivors of childhood cancer in Europe. The PanCareFollowUp project was initiated to improve their health and quality of life (QoL) by facilitating person-centred survivorship care.

METHODS

The PanCareFollowUp consortium was established in 2018, consisting of 14 project partners from ten European countries, including survivor representatives. The consortium will develop two PanCareFollowUp Interventions, including a person-centred guideline-based model of care (Care Intervention) and eHealth lifestyle coaching (Lifestyle Intervention). Their development will be informed by several qualitative studies and systematic reviews on barriers and facilitators for implementation and needs and preferences of healthcare providers (HCPs) and survivors. Implementation of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention as usual care will be evaluated prospectively among 800 survivors from Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy and Sweden for survivor empowerment, detection of adverse health conditions, satisfaction among survivors and HCPs, cost-effectiveness and feasibility. The feasibility of the PanCareFollowUp Lifestyle Intervention will be evaluated in the Netherlands among 60 survivors.

RESULTS

Replication manuals, allowing for replication of the PanCareFollowUp Care and Lifestyle Intervention, will be published and made freely available after the project. Moreover, results of the corresponding studies are expected within the next five years.

CONCLUSIONS

The PanCareFollowUp project is a novel European collaboration aiming to improve the health and QoL of all survivors across Europe by developing and prospectively evaluating the person-centred PanCareFollowUp Care and Lifestyle Interventions.

Development and testing of a tailored online fertility preservation decision aid for female cancer patients

Background

Decision making regarding future fertility can be very difficult for female cancer patients. To support patients in decision making, fertility preservation decision aids (DAs) are being developed. However, to make a well‐informed decision, patients need personalized information tailored to their cancer type and treatment. Tailored cancer‐specific DAs are not available yet.

Methods

Our DA was systematically developed by a multidisciplinary steering group (n = 21) in an iterative process of draft development, three rounds of alpha testing, and revisions. The drafts were based on current guidelines, literature, and patients' and professionals' needs.

Results

In total, 24 cancer‐specific DAs were developed. In alpha testing, cancer survivors and professionals considered the DA very helpful in decision making, and scored an 8.5 (scale 1–10). In particular, the cancer‐specific information and the tool for recognizing personal values were of great value. Revisions were made to increase readability, personalization, usability, and be more careful in giving any false hope.

Conclusions

A fertility preservation DA containing cancer‐specific information is important in the daily care of female cancer patients and should be broadly available. Our final Dutch version is highly appraised, valid, and usable in decision making. After evaluating its effectiveness with newly diagnosed patients, the DA can be translated and adjusted according to (inter)national guidelines.

Openness to new perspectives created by patient participation at the morbidity and mortality meeting

OBJECTIVES

Morbidity and mortality meetings (M&MMs) at surgical departments may improve when patients participate, leading to different learning points. A gynecological oncology department invited patients to join their M&MMs. The practical constraints and experiences important from the perspective of patients and their healthcare professionals were evaluated.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and professionals who attended M&MMs at a gynecological oncology department between 2016 and 2018. The interviews were transcribed and coded and thematic content analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Eight patients and 17 healthcare professionals participated. Eleven themes related to interpersonal dynamics. The five shared themes are: patient-doctor relationship, language, openness of communication, learning and personal impact. All participants suggested maintaining the new practical design of the M&MMs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and healthcare professionals valued patient participation in the M&MMs. Patient participation is possible when professionals are open to discussing and learning from adverse events (AEs). In this setting, patients feel that they are taken seriously and gain a better understanding of the course of an AE.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Involving patients in M&MMs led to new insights, better understanding, and improved processing of AEs. Collaborating with patients and using their feedback seems to be effective when developing innovations in healthcare.

Determinants of adherence to physical cancer rehabilitation guidelines among cancer patients and cancer centers: a cross-sectional observational study

PURPOSE

To tailor implementation strategies that maximize adherence to physical cancer rehabilitation (PCR) guidelines, greater knowledge concerning determinants of adherence to those guidelines is needed. To this end, we assessed the determinants of adherence to PCR guidelines in the patient and cancer center.

METHODS

We investigated adherence variation of PCR guideline-based indicators regarding [1] screening with the Distress Thermometer (DT), [2] information provision concerning physical activity (PA) and physical cancer rehabilitation programs (PCRPs), [3] advice to take part in PA and PCRPs, [4] referral to PCRPs, [5] participation in PCRPs, and [6] PA uptake (PAU) in nine cancer centers. Furthermore, we assessed patient and cancer center characteristics as possible determinants of adherence. Regression analyses were used to determine associations between guideline adherence and patient and cancer center characteristics. In these analyses, we assumed the patient (level 1) nested within the cancer center (level 2).

RESULTS

Nine hundred and ninety-nine patients diagnosed with cancer between January 2014 and June 2015 were included. Of the 999 patients included in the study, 468 (47%) received screening with the DT and 427 (44%) received information provision concerning PA and PCRPs. Subsequently, 550 (56%) patients were advised to take part in PA and PCRPs, which resulted in 174 (18%) official referrals. Ultimately, 280 (29%) patients participated in PCRPs, and 446 (45%) started PAU. Screening with the DT was significantly associated with information provision concerning PA and PCRPs (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.47-2.71), advice to take part in PA and PCRPs (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.31-2.45), referral to PCRPs (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.18-2.78), participation in PCRPs (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.43-2.91), and PAU (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.25-2.29). Younger age, male gender, breast cancer as the tumor type, ≥2 cancer treatments, post-cancer treatment weight gain/loss, employment, and fatigue were determinants of guideline adherence. Less variation in scores of the indicators between the different cancer centers was found. This variation between centers was too low to detect any association between center characteristics with the indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of PCR guidelines is in need of improvement. We found determinants at the patient level associated with guideline-based PCR care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Implementation strategies that deal with the determinants of adherence to PCR guidelines might improve the implementation of PCR guidelines and the quality of life of cancer survivors.

Impact of optimizing diagnostic workup and reducing the time to treatment in head and neck cancer

Background

Timely and efficient diagnostic workup of patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) is challenging. This observational study describes the implementation of an optimized multidisciplinary oncological diagnostic workup for patients with HNC and its impact on diagnostic and treatment intervals, survival, costs, and patient satisfaction.

Methods

All patients with newly diagnosed HNC who underwent staging and treatment at the Radboud University Medical Center were included. Conventional workup (CW) in 2009 was compared with the fast‐track, multidisciplinary, integrated care program, that is, optimized workup (OW), as implemented in 2014.

Results

The study included 486 patients with HNC (218 with CW and 268 with OW). The time‐to‐treatment interval was significantly lower in the OW cohort than the CW cohort (21 vs 34 days; P < .0001). The 3‐year overall survival rate was 12% higher after OW (72% in the CW cohort vs 84% in the OW cohort; P = .002). After correction for confounders, the 3‐year risk of death remained significantly lower in the OW cohort (hazard ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.14‐2.63; P = .010). Total diagnostic costs were comparable in the 2 cohorts. The general satisfaction score, as measured with the Consumer Quality Index for Oncological Care, was significantly better in a matched OW group than the CW group (9.1 vs 8.5; P = .007).

Conclusions

After the implementation of a fast‐track, multidisciplinary, integrated care program, the time‐to‐treatment interval was significantly reduced. Overall survival and patient satisfaction increased significantly, whereas costs did not change. This demonstrates the impact and improved quality of care achieved by efficiently organizing the diagnostic phase of HNC management.

After the implementation of a fast‐track, multidisciplinary, integrated care program for patients with head and neck cancer, this study shows a significant reduction in the time‐to‐diagnosis and time‐to‐treatment intervals, a significant increase in 3‐year overall survival, and an increase in patient satisfaction without increased diagnostic costs. This demonstrates the impact and improved quality of care achieved by efficiently organizing the diagnostic phase of head and neck cancer management.

Filling the gaps of patient information and comprehension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review describes the gaps in cancer patient information and comprehension and provides examples of interventions aimed at filling the gaps.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite the technologically advanced era, unmet information needs remain a challenge in current cancer care, even though the beneficial effects of adequate information provision are well described.It starts with the basics of patient-physician communication and information exchange. Barriers are described both patient and physician-specific. For patients to comprehend and recall information correctly, information provision should be tailored to the specific patient in content, as well as in readability level. Tailored content based on bidirectional and iterative information exchange (i.e., patients reported outcomes, followed by specific/personalized feedback) is of focus in the current development of interventions aimed at meeting the gaps. However, the effects of such interventions are not overwhelming and the explanation could be multifactorial.

SUMMARY

Unmet informational needs are still a gap in current cancer care. The effect of eHealth interventions is not yet well established. Key is to educate patients and (future) healthcare professionals in eHealth. Future research should focus on identifying what kind of interventions are able to fill the gaps.

Key recommendations for high-quality female oncofertility care based on international clinical practice guidelines

RESEARCH QUESTION

Which guideline-based key recommendations can be selected for high-quality female oncofertility care?

DESIGN

The Delphi method was used to select a set of key recommendations for female oncofertility care. First, recommendations from (inter)national clinical practice guidelines were selected in four domains: risk communication, referral, counselling and decision-making. Thereafter, they were scored, per domain, on their importance for high-quality oncofertility care by a multidisciplinary, oncofertility expert panel, consisting of patients, referrers and counsellors, in two Delphi rounds. Finally, the selected key recommendations were presented for approval in a third round. Differences in perspectives between subgroups of the expert panel were analysed.

RESULTS

A panel of 86 experts was asked to select key recommendations for high-quality oncofertility care. Eleven key recommendations were selected. Key recommendations in the domains risk communication and referral focused on information provision and offering referral to a reproductive specialist to female cancer patients. With the counselling domain, key recommendations focused on all aspects of counselling, including different methods, safety, pros and cons. In the decision-making domain, key recommendations focused on shared decision-making and supporting the decision with written information. The final set of key recommendations was approved by 91% of the experts. Differences in perspectives were found between subgroups. Patients found recommendations on decision-making and information provision more important.

CONCLUSION

A set of 11 key recommendations for high-quality female oncofertility care was selected by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The involvement of the perspectives of patients, referrers and counsellors led to this valid, acceptable and credible set of key recommendations.

Nurse-led video-coaching interventions in childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer survivors (REVIVER): a protocol for mixed methods feasibility research

Background

Successful cancer treatment can lead to cancer survivors being predisposed to an increased lifelong risk of adverse late health effects. Therefore, high-quality cancer survivorship care to earlier detect and treat late effects or to preserve survivor’s health is essential. Nevertheless, this care needs to be sustainable and cost-effective as well. We developed three different screen-to-screen nurse-led eHealth interventions for survivors of childhood, adolescent and young adult-onset cancer, collectively called the REVIVER interventions. Elaborating on person-centred care principles with content based on cognitive behavioural therapy modules and/or motivational interviewing techniques, these interventions aim to empower and coach survivors to improve (1) symptoms of cancer-related fatigue, (2) self-efficacy and self-management or (3) lifestyle. With the REVIVER study, we aim to evaluate the interventions’ feasibility and gain insights into the potential effectiveness.

Methods

The REVIVER study involves a mixed methods design, including (1) interviews till data saturation with cancer survivors who completed the interventions as well as with all involved medical professionals, (2) reviews of nurses reports and (3) a single-group, pre-post evaluation among cancer survivors. Eligible survivors are survivors of childhood, adolescent and young adult-onset cancer who are referred to one of the interventions, in complete remission of cancer, 16–44 years old at enrolment, completed treatment at least 5 years ago and have access to a device with Internet options. We will assess feasibility in terms of demand, adherence, acceptability, practicality and integration/implementation. Health-related quality of life, as primary outcome of the potential effectiveness evaluation, will be assessed at three different time points: prior to the intervention; immediately following the intervention and 6 months post-intervention. Secondary outcome measures include changes in level of fatigue, self-efficacy, self-management and lifestyle.

Discussion

This is the first study to evaluate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of eHealth nurse-led interventions elaborating on person-centred care, using cognitive behavioural therapy and/or motivational interviewing techniques as an innovative and promising approach for providing CAYA cancer survivorship care. If the interventions prove to be feasible and potential effective, a randomized controlled trial will be conducted to test the (cost)-effectiveness.

Variation in Integrated Head and Neck Cancer Care: Impact of Patient and Hospital Characteristics

Background: Monitoring and effectively improving oncologic integrated care requires dashboard information based on quality registrations. The dashboard includes evidence-based quality indicators (QIs) that measure quality of care. This study aimed to assess the quality of current integrated head and neck cancer care with QIs, the variation between Dutch hospitals, and the influence of patient and hospital characteristics. Methods: Previously, 39 QIs were developed with input from medical specialists, allied health professionals, and patients' perspectives. QI scores were calculated with data from 1,667 curatively treated patients in 8 hospitals. QIs with a sample size of >400 patients were included to calculate reliable QI scores. We used multilevel analysis to explain the variation. Results: Current care varied from 29% for the QI about a case manager being present to discuss the treatment plan to 100% for the QI about the availability of a treatment plan. Variation between hospitals was small for the QI about patients discussed in multidisciplinary team meetings (adherence: 95%, range 88%-98%), but large for the QI about malnutrition screening (adherence: 50%, range 2%-100%). Higher QI scores were associated with lower performance status, advanced tumor stage, and tumor in the oral cavity or oropharynx at the patient level, and with more curatively treated patients (volume) at hospital level. Conclusions: Although the quality registration was only recently launched, it already visualizes hospital variation in current care. Four determinants were found to be influential: tumor stage, performance status, tumor site, and volume. More data are needed to assure stable results for use in quality improvement.

Implementation of the three good questions-A feasibility study in Dutch hospital departments

Objectives

To determine the feasibility of pragmatic implementation strategies for three good questions (in Dutch: Drie Goede Vragen; 3GV. What are my options; what are the risks and benefits related to these options; and what does this mean for my situation?) to increase shared decision‐making (SDM) efforts in Dutch secondary care, and identify barriers and facilitators of implementation.

Methods

Convergent mixed‐method design: pre‐post surveys with patients attending one of six clinical departments in a Dutch Hospital, post‐intervention interviews with patients and health‐care professionals. Primary outcomes: feasibility (reach, use of 3GV). Secondary outcomes: SDM, experiences with 3GV and decision making. Interviews focused on barriers and facilitators of 3GV use. Interviews were content coded and categorized into determinants of behaviour change.

Results

35% of the respondents who had heard of 3GV (52%) used all three questions. 3GV use did not lead to more SDM (SDMQ9 M = Δ0.3;SE = 2.2) but patients felt empowered to decide (88%) and to SDM (86%). Barriers were as follows: time investment, other SDM projects and perception that the need to use 3GV differs per patient/consultation. Respondents preferred to use 3GV as they saw fit for the consultation, instead of literally asking them. Facilitators: easy, accessible information materials that can be flexibly used.

Conclusion

Implementation of 3GV seemed feasible, although influenced by contextual characteristics (eg type of decisions, patients, on‐going interventions). 3GV contributed to important elements of SDM, and respondents were willing to apply them in a way that suited their situation.

Practice implications

We recommend continuation of current and new implementation strategies to enable 3GV implementation in secondary care.

Implementing physical activity programs for patients with cancer in current practice: patients' experienced barriers and facilitators

Purpose

The present study aimed to identify patients’ experienced barriers and facilitators in implementing physical activity programs for patients with cancer.

Methods

We interviewed 34 patients in focus-group-interviews from three different hospital-types. We included patients with cancer who were either receiving curative treatment or had recently completed it. Barriers and facilitators were explored in six domains: (1) physical activity programs, (2) patients, (3) healthcare professionals (HCPs), (4) social setting, (5) organization, and (6) law and governance.

Results

We found 12 barriers and 1 facilitator that affect the implementation of physical activity programs. In the domain of physical activity programs, the barrier was physical activity programs not being tailored to the patient’s needs. In the domain of patients, lacking responsibility for one’s own health was a barrier. Knowledge and skills for physical activity programs and non-commitment of HCPs impeded implementation in the domain of HCPs. Barriers in the domain of organization included inconvenient place, time of day, and point in the health treatment schedule for offering the physical activity programs, inadequate capacity, inaccessibility of contact persons, lack of information about physical activity programs, non-involvement of the general practitioner in the cancer care process, and poor communication between secondary and primary HCPs. Insufficient insurance-coverage of physical activity programs was a barrier in the domain of law and governance. In the domain of physical activity programs, contact with peers facilitated implementation. We found no barriers or facilitators at the social setting.

Conclusions

Factors affecting the implementation of physical activity programs occurred in various domains. Most of the barriers occurred in the domain of organization.

Implications for Cancer survivors

An implementation strategy that deals with the barriers might improve the implementation of physical activity programs and quality of life of cancer survivors.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11764-019-00789-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Quality of Care for Knee Osteoarthritis in Primary Care: A Patient's Perspective

OBJECTIVE

To describe the quality of osteoarthritis care in general practice from a patient's perspective and to identify novel associations between process quality indicators and patient-reported outcome and experience measures.

METHODS

For this study, 235 individuals with knee osteoarthritis completed a survey based on both process and outcome indicators. Process indicators were extracted from international guidelines and included the domains: diagnosis, self-management, treatment, and follow-up. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and RAND 36-item Short Form health survey (SF-36) were used to assess patient-reported outcomes. Patient-reported experience with care was evaluated with the European Task Force on Patient Evaluations of General Practice Care (EUROPEP) instrument. A series of multilevel regression analyses were then performed to analyze determinants at the patient level (i.e., age, sex, body mass index, and education) and associations between process and outcome indicators.

RESULTS

Overall, low adherence to the process indicators was observed (38%), particularly on informing patients about the importance of weight loss (24% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 19-31]) or referring them for physical therapy (41% [95% CI 33-49]). Patients described their quality of life as moderate, with an overall score of 63% and 35% on the SF-36 and WOMAC surveys, respectively. Regarding the determinants, patients with a higher education level were better informed (odds ratio [OR] 3.4; P = 0.0003). Associations between process and outcome indicators were scarce, with the exception of patient satisfaction with care and use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (OR 2.9; P = 0.0014).

CONCLUSION

Patients with knee osteoarthritis receive suboptimal conservative management. They report a moderate quality of life. This study confirms the evidence suggesting that NSAIDs are the backbone of osteoarthritis pain management but also adds evidence from a patient's perspective.

Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study

Standardized structured reporting (SSR) enables high-quality pathology reporting, but implementing SSR is slow. The objective of this study is to identify both barriers and facilitators that pathologists encounter in SSR, in order to develop tailored implementation tools to increase SSR usage. We used a mixed method design: a focus group interview helped to identify barriers and facilitators in SSR. The findings were classified into the following domains: innovation, individual professional, social setting, organization, and economic and political context. We used a web-based survey among Dutch pathologists to quantify the findings. Ten pathologists participated in the focus group interview, and 97 pathologists completed the survey. The results of both showed that pathologists perceive barriers related to SSR itself. Particularly its incompatibility caused lack of nuance (73%, n = 97) in the standardized structured pathology report. Regarding the individual professional, knowledge about available SSR-templates was lacking (28%, n = 97), and only 44% (n = 94) of the respondents agreed that using SSR facilitates the most accurate diagnosis. Related to social setting, support from the multidisciplinary team members was lacking (45%, n = 94). At organization level, SSR leads to extra work (52%, n = 94) because of its incompatibility with other information systems (38%, n = 93). Main facilitators of SSR were incorporation of speech recognition (54%, n = 94) and improvement in communication during multidisciplinary team meetings (69%, n = 94). Both barriers and facilitators existed in various domains. These factors can be used to develop implementation tools to encourage SSR usage.