RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Multidisciplinary Meetings (MDM) are recommended in routine lung cancer care, however its broader impacts demand further evaluation. We assessed the drivers and impacts of MDM presentation in the Victorian Lung Cancer Registry (VLCR). METHODS: We examined the effect of MDM presentation on receipt of treatment and survival in VLCR patients diagnosed between 2011 and 2020. We compared patient characteristics, drivers of MDM discussion and survival between the two groups. RESULTS: Of 9,628 patients, 5,900 (61.3%) were discussed at MDM, 3,728 (38.7%) were not. In the non-MDM group, a lower proportion received surgery (22.1% vs. 31.2%), radiotherapy (34.2% vs. 44.4%) and chemotherapy (44.7% vs. 49.0%). Patients were less likely to be discussed if ≥80 years (OR 0.73, p < 0.001), of ECOG performance status (PS) 4 (OR 0.23, p < 0.001), clinical stage IV (OR 0.34, p < 0.001) or referred from regional (OR 0.52, p < 0.001) or private hospital (OR 0.18, p < 0.001). MDM-presented patients had better median survival (1.70 vs 0.75 years, p < 0.001) and lower adjusted mortality risk (HR 0.75; 0.71-0.80, p < 0.001), a protective effect consistent across all hospital types. Undocumented PS, histopathology and clinical stage were associated with lower likelihood of MDM discussion and worse mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In the VLCR, being male, ≥80 years, of poorer PS, advanced clinical stage and poor clinical characterisation significantly disadvantaged patients in relation to MDM discussion. MDM-discussed patients were more likely to undergo treatment and had a 25% lower risk of mortality. This study supports the use of MDMs in lung cancer and identifies areas of inequity to be addressed.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Pulmonares , Radioterapia (Especialidade) , Humanos , Comunicação Interdisciplinar , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/terapia , Masculino , Sistema de Registros , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a profound and prolonged impact on healthcare services and healthcare workers. AIMS: The Australian COVID-19 Frontline Healthcare Workers Study aimed to investigate the severity and prevalence of mental health issues, as well as the social, workplace and financial disruptions experienced by Australian healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A nationwide, voluntary, anonymous, single timepoint, online survey was conducted between 27 August and 23 October 2020. Individuals self-identifying as frontline healthcare workers in secondary or primary care were invited to participate. Participants were recruited through health organisations, professional associations or colleges, universities, government contacts and national media. Demographics, home and work situation, health and psychological well-being data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 9518 survey responses were received; of the 9518 participants, 7846 (82.4%) participants reported complete data. With regard to age, 4110 (52.4%) participants were younger than 40 years; 6344 (80.9%) participants were women. Participants were nurses (n=3088, 39.4%), doctors (n=2436, 31.1%), allied health staff (n=1314, 16.7%) or in other roles (n=523, 6.7%). In addition, 1250 (15.9%) participants worked in primary care. Objectively measured mental health symptoms were common: mild to severe anxiety (n=4694, 59.8%), moderate to severe burnout (n=5458, 70.9%) and mild to severe depression (n=4495, 57.3%). Participants were highly resilient (mean (SD)=3.2 (0.66)). Predictors for worse outcomes on all scales included female gender; younger age; pre-existing psychiatric condition; experiencing relationship problems; nursing, allied health or other roles; frontline area; being worried about being blamed by colleagues and working with patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic is associated with significant mental health symptoms in frontline healthcare workers. Crisis preparedness together with policies and practices addressing psychological well-being are needed.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The Australian COVID-19 Frontline Healthcare Workers Study investigated coping strategies and help-seeking behaviours, and their relationship to mental health symptoms experienced by Australian healthcare workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Australian HCWs were invited to participate a nationwide, voluntary, anonymous, single time-point, online survey between 27th August and 23rd October 2020. Complete responses on demographics, home and work situation, and measures of health and psychological wellbeing were received from 7846 participants. RESULTS: The most commonly reported adaptive coping strategies were maintaining exercise (44.9%) and social connections (31.7%). Over a quarter of HCWs (26.3%) reported increased alcohol use which was associated with a history of poor mental health and worse personal relationships. Few used psychological wellbeing apps or sought professional help; those who did were more likely to be suffering from moderate to severe symptoms of mental illness. People living in Victoria, in regional areas, and those with children at home were significantly less likely to report adaptive coping strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Personal, social, and workplace predictors of coping strategies and help-seeking behaviour during the pandemic were identified. Use of maladaptive coping strategies and low rates of professional help-seeking indicate an urgent need to understand the effectiveness of, and the barriers and enablers of accessing, different coping strategies.
Assuntos
Adaptação Psicológica , COVID-19 , Pessoal de Saúde , Pandemias , Angústia Psicológica , Adulto , Austrália/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/psicologia , COVID-19/terapia , Feminino , Pessoal de Saúde/psicologia , Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Comportamento de Busca de Ajuda , Humanos , Masculino , Transtornos Mentais/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Inquéritos e Questionários , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Providing psychological support to people living with terminal illness is a fundamental part of hospice care. Recent research on delivery of psychological services in hospices in the United Kingdom (UK) on a national level, including inequalities or variation in practice, is limited. A nationwide survey will highlight any differences in provision and in doing so help focus future research and inform best practice both within the UK, and internationally. The specific objectives of this survey are to (1) chart the types of psychological support available to adult patients in hospices in the UK in line with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence model; (2) explore how services are organised; and (3) gather service perspectives on adequacy of care, and facilitators and barriers to appropriate practice. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey emailed to adult hospices in the UK in November-December 2019. One staff member involved in the delivery and/or organisation of psychological support was invited to participate per hospice. Of 193 invited hospices, 116 took part. RESULTS: Sixteen percent rated their hospice psychological service as wholly adequate. The majority reported that services can access specialist professionals, but many relied on external referrals. Barriers to best practice included funding and staff capacity; facilitators included clear referral structures, audit and appropriate needs and outcome assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Access to psychological professionals has improved since the last survey 15 years ago, but the majority of responders felt their overall service was not wholly adequate. Basic emotional support is largely felt to be sufficient, but our results indicate a need for improvements in access to more specialist care. Partnerships with external mental health services may be key. Our findings highlight core facilitators and barriers to providing good psychological care at the end of life that should be considered by services both within the UK and on an international level.
Assuntos
Cuidados Paliativos na Terminalidade da Vida , Hospitais para Doentes Terminais , Adulto , Estudos Transversais , Humanos , Cuidados Paliativos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Reino UnidoRESUMO
At least 10% of patients with cancer have pain that is refractory to systemic analgesics. For most of these patients, interventional techniques may be of benefit but are often not considered or are difficult to access. Of these techniques, spinal analgesia is most commonly used in Australia and the United Kingdom, and neurosurgical procedures, such as open cordotomy with sectioning of the spinothalamic tract, are rarely used. We describe a case illustrating the successful use of bilateral open thoracic cordotomy in a patient with refractory mixed nociceptive and neuropathic pain secondary to a lumbosacral tumor. We discuss the various interventional options and review the recent literature regarding the use of both percutaneous and open cordotomy for cancer pain.