Recommendations to Improve Management of Incidental Pulmonary Nodules in Canada: Expert Panel Consensus.

Introduction: Incidental pulmonary nodules (IPN) are common radiologic findings, yet management of IPNs is inconsistent across Canada. This study aims to improve IPN management based on multidisciplinary expert consensus and provides recommendations to overcome patient and system-level barriers. Methods: A modified Delphi consensus technique was conducted. Multidisciplinary experts with extensive experience in lung nodule management in Canada were recruited to participate in the panel. A survey was administered in 3 rounds, using a 5-point Likert scale to determine the level of agreement (1 = extremely agree, 5 = extremely disagree). Results: Eleven experts agreed to participate in the panel; 10 completed all 3 rounds. Consensus was achieved for 183/217 (84.3%) statements. Panellists agreed that radiology reports should include a standardized summary of findings and follow-up recommendations for all nodule sizes (ie, <6, 6-8, and >8 mm). There was strong consensus regarding the importance of an automated system for patient follow-up and that leadership support for organizational change at the administrative level is of utmost importance in improving IPN management. There was no consensus on the need for standardized national referral pathways, development of new guidelines, or establishing a uniform picture archiving and communication system. Conclusion: Canadian IPN experts agree that improved IPN management should include standardized radiology reporting of IPNs, standardized and automated follow-up of patients with IPNs, guideline adherence and implementation, and leadership support for organizational change. Future research should focus on the implementation and long-term effectiveness of these recommendations in clinical practice.

Improving Access to Care, Patient Costs, and Environmental Impact Through a Community Outreach Lung Cancer Rapid Assessment Clinic.

PURPOSE: In Southeastern Ontario, increased patient distance from the regional lung cancer diagnostic assessment program (LDAP) is associated with a lower likelihood of patient care via LDAP while receiving care via LDAP is associated with improved survival. We implemented an LDAP outreach clinic to provide specialist assessment for patients with suspected lung cancer at a regional community hospital and assessed the impact on timeliness and accessibility of care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Kingston Health Sciences Centre LDAP team engaged with community hospital partners to develop and launch the LDAP outreach clinic. We performed a retrospective chart review of LDAP patients (N = 1,070) before (August-November 2021; n = 234) and after implementation of the outreach clinic (November 2021-October 2022; n = 836). Descriptive data are reported as No. (%). Unpaired t tests and statistical process control charts assess for significance. A cost analysis of out-of-pocket patient costs related to travel and parking is presented in 2022 Canadian dollars (CAD). RESULTS: Compared with a 3-month matched time period before (August-October 2021) and after outreach clinic (August-October 2022), the mean time from referral to assessment and time from referral to diagnosis decreased from 20.3 to 14.4 days (P = .0019) and 40.0 to 28.9 days (P = .0007), respectively. Over 12 months, the total patient travel was reduced by 8,856 km, which combined with parking cost-savings, resulted in patient out-of-pocket savings of CAD $5,755.60 (CAD $47.60/patient). Accounting for physician travel, the total travel saved was 5,688 km, corresponding to reduced CO2 emissions by 1.9 tCO2. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a lung cancer outreach clinic led to improved timeliness of care, patient cost-savings, and reduced carbon footprint while serving patients in their community.

Incidental pulmonary nodule management in Canada: exploring current state through a narrative literature review and expert interviews.

Background and Objective: Incidental pulmonary nodules (IPNs) are common and increasingly detected with the overall rise of radiologic imaging. Effective IPN management is necessary to ensure lung cancer is not missed. This study aims to describe the current landscape of IPN management in Canada, understand barriers to optimal IPN management, and identify opportunities for improvement. Methods: We performed a narrative literature review by searching biomedical electronic databases for relevant articles published between January 1, 2010, and November 22, 2023. To validate and complement the identified literature, we conducted structured interviews with multidisciplinary experts involved in the pathway of patients with IPNs across Canada. Interviews between December 2021 and May 2022 were audiovisual recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Key Content and Findings: A total of 1,299 records were identified, of which 37 studies were included for analysis. Most studies were conducted in Canada and the United States and highlighted variability in radiology reporting of IPNs and patient management, and limited adherence to recommended follow-up imaging. Twenty experts were interviewed, including radiologists, respirologists, thoracic surgeons, primary care physicians, medical oncologists, and an epidemiologist. Three themes emerged from the interviews, supported by the literature, including: variability in radiology reporting of IPNs, suboptimal communication, and variability in guideline adherence and patient management. Conclusions: Despite general awareness of guidelines, there is inconsistency and lack of standardization in the management of patients with IPNs in Canada. Multidisciplinary expert consensus is recommended to help overcome the communication and operational barriers to a safe and cost-effective approach to this common clinical issue.

Anaerobic Antibiotic Coverage in Aspiration Pneumonia and the Associated Benefits and Harms: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics with extended anaerobic coverage are used commonly to treat aspiration pneumonia, which is not recommended by current guidelines. RESEARCH QUESTION: In patients admitted to hospital for community-acquired aspiration pneumonia, does a difference exist between antibiotic therapy with limited anaerobic coverage (LAC) vs antibiotic therapy with extended anaerobic coverage (EAC) in terms of in-hospital mortality and risk of Clostridioides difficile colitis? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study across 18 hospitals in Ontario, Canada, from January 1, 2015, to January 1, 2022. Patients were included if the physician diagnosed aspiration pneumonia and prescribed guideline-concordant first-line community-acquired pneumonia parenteral antibiotic therapy to the patient within 48 h of admission. Patients then were categorized into the LAC group if they received ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, or levofloxacin. Patients were categorized into the EAC group if they received amoxicillin-clavulanate, moxifloxacin, or any of ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, or levofloxacin in combination with clindamycin or metronidazole. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included incident C difficile colitis occurring after admission. Overlap weighting of propensity scores was used to balance baseline prognostic factors. RESULTS: The LAC and EAC groups included 2,683 and 1,316 patients, respectively. In hospital, 814 patients (30.3%) and 422 patients (32.1%) in the LAC and EAC groups died, respectively. C difficile colitis occurred in five or fewer patients (≤ 0.2%) and 11 to 15 patients (0.8%-1.1%) in the LAC and EAC groups, respectively. After overlap weighting of propensity scores, the adjusted risk difference of EAC minus LAC was 1.6% (95% CI, -1.7% to 4.9%) for in-hospital mortality and 1.0% (95% CI, 0.3%-1.7%) for C difficile colitis. INTERPRETATION: Extended anaerobic coverage likely is unnecessary in aspiration pneumonia because it is associated with no additional mortality benefit, only an increased risk of C difficile colitis.

Comparative Effectiveness of First-Line and Alternative Antibiotic Regimens in Hospitalized Patients With Nonsevere Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There are several antibiotic regimens to treat community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). RESEARCH QUESTION: In patients hospitalized to a non-ICU ward setting with CAP, is there a difference between first-line and alternative antibiotic regimens (ß-lactam plus macrolide [BL+M], ß-lactam [BL] alone, respiratory fluoroquinolone [FQ], or ß-lactam plus doxycycline [BL+D]) in terms of in-hospital mortality? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients admitted with CAP at 19 Canadian hospitals from 2015 to 2021. Taking a target trial approach, patients were categorized into the four antibiotic groups based on the initial antibiotic treatment within 48 h of admission. Patients with severe CAP requiring ICU admission in the first 48 h were excluded. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome included time to being discharged alive. Propensity score and overlap weighting were used to balance covariates. RESULTS: Of 23,512 patients, 9,340 patients (39.7%) received BL+M, 9,146 (38.9%) received BL, 4,510 (19.2%) received FQ, and 516 (2.2%) received BL+D. The number of in-hospital deaths was 703 (7.5%) for the BL+M group, 888 (9.7%) for the BL group, 302 (6.7%) for the FQ group, and 31 (6.0%) for the BL+D group. The adjusted risk difference for in-hospital mortality when compared with BL+M was 1.5% (95% CI, -0.3% to 3.3%) for BL, -0.9% (95% CI, -2.9% to 1.1%) for FQ, and -1.9% (95% CI, -4.8% to 0.9%) for BL+D. Compared with BL+M, the subdistribution hazard ratio for being discharged alive was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84-0.96) for BL, 1.07 (95% CI, 0.99-1.16) for FQ, and 1.04 (95% CI, 0.93-1.17) for BL+D. INTERPRETATION: BL+M, FQ, and BL+D had similar outcomes and can be considered effective regimens for nonsevere CAP. Compared with BL+M, BL was associated with longer time to discharge and the CI for mortality cannot exclude a small but clinically important increase in risk.

Implementing Next-Generation Sequencing Process Changes to Increase Capacity and Improve Timeliness of Molecular Biomarker Profiling for Lung Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Faced with expansion of molecular tumor biomarker profiling, the molecular genetics laboratory at Kingston Health Science Centre experienced significant pressures to maintain the provincially mandated 2-week turnaround time (TAT) for lung cancer (LC) patients. We used quality improvement methodology to identify opportunities for improved efficiencies and report the impact of the initiative. METHODS: We set a target of reducing average TAT from accessioning to clinical molecular lab report for LC patients. Process measures included percentage of cases reaching TAT within target and number of cases. We developed a value stream map and used lean methodology to identify baseline inefficiencies. Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles were implemented to streamline, standardize, and automate laboratory workflows. Statistical process control (SPC) charts assessed for significance by special cause variation. RESULTS: A total of 257 LC cases were included (39 baseline January-May 2021; 218 post-expansion of testing June 2021). The average time for baseline TAT was 12.8 days, peaking at 23.4 days after expansion of testing, and improved to 13.9 days following improvement interventions, demonstrating statistical significance by special cause variation (nonrandom variation) on SPC charts. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of standardized manual and automated laboratory processes improved timeliness of biomarker reporting despite the increasing volume of testing at our center.

Survival outcomes and predicting intracranial metastasis in stage III non-small cell lung cancer treated with definitive chemoradiation: Real-world data from a tertiary cancer center.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Around 30% of patients with non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are diagnosed with stage III disease at presentation, of which about 50% are treated with definitive chemoradiation (CRT). Around 65-80% of patients will eventually develop intracranial metastases (IM), though associated risk factors are not clearly described. We report survival outcomes and risk factors for development of IM in a cohort of patients with stage III NSCLC treated with CRT at a tertiary cancer center. MATERIALS/METHODS: We identified 195 patients with stage III NSCLC treated with CRT from January 2010 to May 2021. Multivariable logistic regression was used to generate odds ratios for covariates associated with development of IM. Kaplan-Meier analysis with the Log Rank test was used for unadjusted time-to-event analyses. P-value for statistical significance was set at < 0.05 with a two-sided test. RESULTS: Out of 195 patients, 108 (55.4%) had stage IIIA disease and 103 (52.8%) had adenocarcinoma histology. The median age and follow-up (in months) was 67 (IQR 60-74) and 21 (IQR 12-43), respectively. The dose of radiation was 60 Gy in 30 fractions for148 patients (75.9%). Of the 77 patients who received treatment since immunotherapy was available and standard at our cancer center, 45 (58.4%) received at least one cycle. During follow-up, 84 patients (43.1%) developed any metastasis, and 33 (16.9%) developed IM (either alone or with extracranial metastasis). 150 patients (76.9%) experienced a treatment delay (interval between diagnosis and treatment > 4 weeks). Factors associated with developing any metastasis included higher overall stage at diagnosis (p = 0.013) and higher prescribed dose (p = 0.022). Factors associated with developing IM included higher ratio of involved over sampled lymph nodes (p = 0.001) and receipt of pre-CRT systemic or radiotherapy for any reason (p = 0.034). On multivariate logistical regression, treatment delay (OR 3.9, p = 0.036) and overall stage at diagnosis (IIIA vs. IIIB/IIIC) (OR 2.8, p = 0.02) predicted development of IM. These findings were sustained on sensitivity analysis using different delay intervals. Median OS was not reached for the overall cohort, and was 43.1 months for patients with IM and 40.3 months in those with extracranial-only metastasis (p = 0.968). In patients with any metastasis, median OS was longer (p = 0.003) for those who experienced a treatment delay (48.4 months) compared to those that did not (12.2 months), likely due to expedited diagnosis and treatment in patients with a higher symptom burden secondary to more advanced disease. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stage III NSCLC treated with definitive CRT, the risk of IM appears to increase with overall stage at diagnosis and, importantly, may be associated with experiencing a treatment delay (> 4 weeks). Metastatic disease of any kind remains the primary life-limiting prognostic factor in these patients with advanced lung cancer. In patients with metastatic disease, treatment delay was associated with better survival. Patients who experience a treatment delay and those initially diagnosed at a more advanced overall stage may warrant more frequent surveillance for early diagnosis and treatment of IM. Healthcare system stakeholders should strive to mitigate treatment delay in patients with locally NSCLC to reduce the risk of IM. Further research is needed to better understand factors associated with survival, treatment delay, and the development of IM after CRT in the immunotherapy era.

Improving Access and Timeliness of Early Palliative Care Specialist Assessment for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer in a Rapid Assessment Clinic.

Background: Integrating palliative care in the management of patients with lung cancer improves quality of life, patient satisfaction, and overall survival. However, few patients receive timely palliative care consultation. The Lung Diagnostic Assessment Program (LDAP) in Southeastern Ontario is a multidisciplinary rapid assessment clinic that expedites the diagnosis and management of patients with suspected lung cancer. Objectives: We sought to increase the percentage of LDAP patients with stage IV lung cancer receiving palliative care consultation within three months of diagnosis. Design: We integrated a palliative care specialist in LDAP to facilitate in-person, same-visit consultation for patients with a new lung cancer diagnosis. Setting/Subjects: Five hundred fifty patients in a Canadian academic center (154 initial baseline, 104 COVID baseline, 292 post-palliative care integration). Measurements: Baseline data were established using retrospective chart review (February-June 2020 and December 2020-March 2021 due to COVID-19 pandemic). Data were collected prospectively to assess improvement (March-August 2021). Statistical Process Control charts assessed for special cause variation; chi-square tests assessed for differences between groups. Results: The percentage of patients with stage IV lung cancer seen by palliative care within three months increased from 21.8% (12/55) during early-COVID baseline to 49.2% (32/65) after palliative care integration (p < 0.006). Palliative care integration in LDAP reduced mean time from referral to consultation from 24.8 to 12.3 days, including same-day consultation for 15/32 (46.8%) patients with stage IV disease. Conclusions: Integrating palliative care specialists into LDAP improved the timeliness of palliative care assessment for patients with stage IV lung cancer.

Characterizing Variability in Lung Cancer Outcomes and Influence of a Lung Diagnostic Assessment Program in Southeastern Ontario, Canada.

INTRODUCTION: Regional variability in lung cancer (LC) outcomes exists across Canada, including in the province of Ontario. The Lung Diagnostic Assessment Program (LDAP) in southeastern (SE) Ontario is a rapid-assessment clinic that expedites the management of patients with suspected LC. We evaluated the association of LDAP management with LC outcomes, including survival, and characterized the variability in LC outcomes across SE Ontario. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study by identifying patients with newly diagnosed LC through the Ontario Cancer Registry (January 2017-December 2019) and linked to the LDAP database to identify LDAP-managed patients. Descriptive data were collected. Using a Cox model approach, we compared 2-year survival for patients managed through LDAP vs. non-LDAP. RESULTS: We identified 1832 patients, 1742 of whom met the inclusion criteria (47% LDAP-managed and 53% non-LDAP). LDAP management was associated with a lower probability of dying at 2 years (HR 0.76 vs. non-LDAP, p < 0.0001). Increasing distance from the LDAP was associated with a lower likelihood of LDAP management (OR 0.78 for every 20 km increase, p < 0.0001). LDAP-managed patients were more likely to receive specialist assessment and undergo treatments. CONCLUSIONS: In SE Ontario, initial diagnostic care provided via LDAP was independently associated with improved survival in patients with LC.

Malignant Superior Vena Cava Syndrome: A Scoping Review.

Malignant superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS) is a clinical problem that results from the obstruction of blood flow in the superior vena cava by an underlying malignancy. This may occur due to external compression, neoplastic invasion of the vessel wall, or internal obstruction with bland or tumor thrombus. Although symptoms are typically mild, SVCS can cause neurologic, hemodynamic, and respiratory compromise. Classic management options include supportive measures, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, surgery, and endovascular stenting. New targeted therapeutics and techniques have also recently been developed, which may have a role in management. Nevertheless, few evidence-based guidelines exist to guide treatment of malignant SVCS, and these recommendations are typically restricted to individual disease sites. Furthermore, there are no recent systematic literature reviews that address this question. Here, we present a theoretical case to frame this clinical problem and synthesize updated evidence published in the past decade relating to the management of malignant SVCS through a comprehensive literature review.

Variation in opioid filling after same-day breast surgery in Ontario, Canada: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain management practices in breast surgery are variable, with recent evidence that approaches for minimizing or sparing opioids can be successfully implemented. We describe opioid filling and predictors of higher doses in patients undergoing same-day breast surgery in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: In this retrospective population-based cohort study, we used linked administrative health data to identify patients aged 18 years or older who underwent same-day breast surgery from 2012 to 2020. We categorized procedure types by increasing invasiveness of surgery: partial, with or without axillary intervention (P ± axilla); total, with or without axillary intervention (T ± axilla); radical, with or without axillary intervention (R ± axilla); and bilateral. The primary outcome was filling an opioid prescription within 7 or fewer days after surgery. Secondary outcomes were total oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) filled (mg, median and interquartile range [IQR]) and filling more than 1 prescription within 7 or fewer days after surgery. We estimated associations (adjusted risk ratios [RRs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) between study variables and outcomes in multivariable models. We used a random intercept for each unique prescriber to account for provider-level clustering. RESULTS: Of the 84 369 patients who underwent same-day breast surgery, 72% (n = 60 620) filled an opioid prescription. Median OMEs filled increased with invasiveness (P ± axilla = 135 [IQR 90-180] mg; T ± axilla = 135 [IQR 100-200] mg; R ± axilla = 150 [IQR 113-225] mg, bilateral surgery = 150 [IQR 113-225] mg; p < 0.0001). Factors associated with filling more than 1 opioid prescription were age 30-59 years (v. age 18-29 yr), increased invasiveness (RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.70-2.30 bilateral v. P ± axilla), Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2 versus 0-1 (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.34-1.69) and malignancy (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.26-1.53). INTERPRETATION: Most patients undergoing same-day breast surgery fill an opioid prescription within 7 days. Efforts are needed to identify patient groups where opioids may be successfully minimized or eliminated.

Integrating User Preferences for Asthma Tools and Clinical Guidelines Into Primary Care Electronic Medical Records: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a chronic respiratory disease that poses a substantial burden on individuals and the health care system. Despite published national guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma, considerable care gaps exist. Suboptimal adherence to asthma diagnosis and management guidelines contributes to poor patient outcomes. The integration of electronic tools (eTools) into electronic medical records (EMRs) represents a knowledge translation opportunity to support best practices. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine how best to integrate evidence-based asthma eTools into primary care EMRs across Ontario and Canada to improve adherence to guidelines as well as measure and monitor performance. METHODS: In total, 2 focus groups comprising physicians and allied health professionals who were considered experts in primary care, asthma, and EMRs were convened. One focus group also included a patient participant. Focus groups used a semistructured discussion-based format to consider the optimal methods for integrating asthma eTools into EMRs. Discussions were held on the web via Microsoft Teams (Microsoft Corp). The first focus group discussed integrating asthma indicators into EMRs using eTools, and participants completed a questionnaire evaluating the clarity, relevance, and feasibility of collecting asthma performance indicator data at the point of care. The second focus group addressed how to incorporate eTools for asthma into a primary care setting and included a questionnaire evaluating the perceived utility of various eTools. Focus group discussions were recorded and analyzed using thematic qualitative analysis. The responses to focus group questionnaires were assessed using descriptive quantitative analysis. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis of the 2 focus group discussions revealed 7 key themes: designing outcome-oriented tools, gaining stakeholder trust, facilitating open lines of communication, prioritizing the end user, striving for efficiency, ensuring adaptability, and developing within existing workflows. In addition, 24 asthma indicators were rated according to clarity, relevance, feasibility, and overall usefulness. In total, 5 asthma performance indicators were identified as the most relevant. These included smoking cessation support, monitoring using objective measures, the number of emergency department visits and hospitalizations, assessment of asthma control, and presence of an asthma action plan. The eTool questionnaire responses revealed that the Asthma Action Plan Wizard and Electronic Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire were perceived to be the most useful in primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians, allied health professionals, and patients consider that eTools for asthma care present a unique opportunity to improve adherence to best-practice guidelines in primary care and collect performance indicators. The strategies and themes identified in this study can be leveraged to overcome barriers associated with asthma eTool integration into primary care EMRs. The most beneficial indicators and eTools, along with the key themes identified, will guide future asthma eTool implementation.

Characterizing Regional Variability in Lung Cancer Outcomes across Ontario-A Population-Based Analysis.

Background: Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality. In Ontario, Canada, there are significant survival differences for patients with newly diagnosed LC across the 14 provincial regions. Methods: A population-based retrospective cohort study using ICES databases from 01/2007-12/2017 identified patients with newly diagnosed LC through the Ontario Cancer Registry and those with LC as the cause of death. Descriptive data included patient, disease, and system characteristics. The primary outcome was 5-year survival by region. Results: 178,202 patient records were identified; 101,263 met inclusion criteria. LC incidence varied by region (5.6-14.6/10,000), as did histologic subtype (adenocarcinoma: 27.3-46.1%). Five-year cancer-specific survival was impacted by age, rurality, pathologic subtype, stage at diagnosis, and income quintile. Timely care was inversely related to survival (fastest quintile: HR 3.22, p < 0.0001). Adjusted 5-year cancer-specific survival varied across regions (24.1%, HR 1.12; 34.0%, HR 0.89, p < 0.001). Conclusions: When adjusting for confounders, differences in survival by health region persisted, suggesting a complex interplay between patient, disease, and system factors. A single approach to improving patient care is likely to be ineffective across different systems. Quality improvement initiatives to improve patient outcomes require different approaches amongst health regions to address local disparities in care.

Middle Mediastinal Mass Compressing the Pulmonary Trunk in a Patient With a History of Breast Cancer.

CASE PRESENTATION: A 61-year-old White woman, nonsmoker, was referred to Respirology for evaluation of small pulmonary nodules discovered incidentally on surveillance imaging 3 years after breast cancer treatment. She had a remote left breast ductal carcinoma in situ treated with lumpectomy followed by radiation therapy, and recurrent stage 1 breast cancer (estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative) treated with mastectomy, axillary lymph node dissection, and reconstructive surgery, followed with adjuvant chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and letrozole maintenance. Her other medical conditions included compensated cirrhosis secondary to nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, OSA, restless legs syndrome, obesity, anxiety, and depression. She reported no dyspnea or constitutional symptoms.

Health Resource and Cost Savings Achieved in a Multidisciplinary Lung Cancer Clinic.

Background: Lung cancer (LC) care is resource and cost intensive. We launched a Multidisciplinary LC Clinic (MDC), where patients with a new LC diagnosis received concurrent oncology consultation, resulting in improved time to LC assessment and treatment. Here, we evaluate the impact of MDC on health resource utilization, patient and caregiver costs, and secondary patient benefits. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients in a rapid assessment clinic with a new LC diagnosis pre-MDC (September 2016-February 2017) and post-MDC implementation (February 2017-December 2018). Data are reported as means; unpaired t-tests and ANOVA were used to assess for significance. We also conducted a cost analysis. Resource utilization, out-of-pocket costs, procedure-related costs, and indirect costs were evaluated from the societal perspective and presented in 2019 Canadian dollars (CAD); multi-way worst/best case and threshold sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: We reviewed 428 patients (78 traditional model, 350 MDC). Patients in the MDC model required significantly fewer oncology visits from LC diagnosis to first LC treatment (1.62 vs. 2.68, p < 0.001), which was significant for patients with stage 1, 3, and 4 disease. Compared with the traditional model, there was no change in mean biopsies/patient (1.32 traditional vs. 1.17 MDC, p = 0.18) or staging investigations/patient (2.24 traditional vs. 2.02 MDC, p = 0.20). Post-MDC, there was an increase in invasive mediastinal staging for patients with stage 2/3 LC (15.0% vs. 60.0%, p < 0.001). Over 22 months, MDC resulted in savings of CAD 48,389 including CAD 24,167 CAD in direct patient out-of-pocket expenses. For the threshold analyses, MDC was estimated to cost CAD 25,708 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), considered to be below current willingness to pay thresholds (at CAD 80,000 per QALY). MDC also facilitated oncology assessment for 29 non-LC patients. Conclusions: An MDC led to a reduction in patient visits and direct patient and caregiver costs.

Providing Evidence-Based Care, Day and Night: A Quality Improvement Initiative to Improve Intensive Care Unit Patient Sleep Quality.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence-based guidelines recommend promoting sleep in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), yet many patients experience poor sleep quality. We sought to engage allied health staff and patient families to determine barriers to sleep promotion, to measure sleep quality for ICU patients, and to evaluate the improvement in sleep quality after implementation of nursing morning report protocol and a doorway poster. DESIGN: The study followed an interrupted time-series framework of quality improvement. Qualitative diagnostics included focus groups and interviews with patients, families, and allied health care workers, analyzed by qualitative descriptive analysis. Quantitative diagnostics included direct observation of nurses and patients overnight. Analysis of primary outcome data used statistical process control methodology. PATIENTS: Patients included were >18 years old, admitted overnight to a Canadian tertiary academic ICU, with a Richards Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) ≥-2. INTERVENTIONS: Sleep quality was measured using the Richards Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ). Two interventions were developed: sleep quality in morning nursing report, and a doorway poster. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 2332 patient nights across 7 consecutive months were included for analysis. Baseline sleep in the ICU was poor (mean RCSQ 53.7/100). Root cause-analysis identified the most prominent sleep barriers as nurse stigma associated with less active management of patients and lack of physician engagement. No significant improvement occurred over the sleep quality improvement initiative (mean RCSQ 59.5/100). Sleep quality was better among non-delirious patients compared with delirious patients (mean RCSQ 62.7 vs 53.3). CONCLUSION: The intervention of a nursing morning report protocol and sleep posters did not improve the quality of ICU patient sleep in this study. Structured interviews revealed potential sleep barriers to be addressed such as nursing stigma and inappropriate awakenings. Nursing stigma has not been previously linked to sleep quality.

Improving Timeliness of Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Staging Investigations Through Implementation of Standardized Triage Pathways.

PURPOSE: Timely care for patients with lung cancer (LC) is associated with improved clinical outcomes. In Southeastern Ontario, Canada, we identified delays in the diagnostic process for patients undergoing evaluation for suspected LC through a rapid assessment clinic. We developed improvement initiatives with an aim of reducing the time from referral to diagnosis. METHODS: A Standardized Triage Process (STP) was implemented for patients referred with suspected LC, including routine interdisciplinary triage, standardized pathways with preordered staging tests, and a new Small Nodule Clinic. We retrospectively analyzed all patients referred pre-STP (January to April 2018) and prospectively for improvement (May 2018 to March 2019). Process measures included STP compliance and time to completion of staging investigations (positron emission tomography [PET] and computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging of brain). Data are reported as means; significance was determined by special-cause variation using Statistical Process Control charts; unpaired t tests were compared between groups. RESULTS: We reviewed 833 referrals (207 baseline and 626 post-STP). STP compliance improved monthly to 99.4%. Post-STP, time from referral to PET decreased (from 38.5 to 15.7 days), time from referral to brain imaging decreased (from 33.4 to 13.1 days), and time from referral to diagnosis decreased (from 38.0 to 22.7 days), all demonstrating special-cause variation. Patients completing preordered staging tests experienced significantly faster care than those without preordered tests, including time to PET (23.0 v 35.9 days), computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging of brain (16.2 v 29.9 days), and diagnosis (39.9 v 28.1 days), all P < .001. CONCLUSION: An STP significantly improved timeliness of diagnosis and staging for patients with suspected LC undergoing evaluation in a rapid assessment clinic.

Improving Timeliness of Oncology Assessment and Cancer Treatment Through Implementation of a Multidisciplinary Lung Cancer Clinic.

PURPOSE: Timely lung cancer care has been associated with improved clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. We identified improvement opportunities in lung cancer management pathways at Kingston Health Sciences Centre. Quality improvement strategies led to the implementation of a multidisciplinary lung cancer clinic (MDC). METHODS: We set an outcome measure of decreasing the time from diagnosis to first cancer treatment by 10 days within 6 months of clinic implementation. We implemented a weekly MDC that involved respirologists, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists at which patients with new lung cancer diagnoses were offered concurrent oncology consultation. We used Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles to guide our improvement initiatives. A total of five Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles spanned 14 months and consisted of an MDC pilot clinic, large-scale MDC launching, debriefing meetings, and clinic expansion. Pre-MDC data were analyzed retrospectively to establish baseline and prospectively for improvement. Statistical Process Control XmR(i) charts were used to report data. RESULTS: Since MDC initiation, 128 patients have been seen in 34 MDC clinics (3.8 patients per clinic). Mean days from diagnosis to first oncology assessment decreased from 12.4 days to 3.9 days, and mean days from diagnosis to first cancer treatment decreased from 39.5 to 15.0 days, both of which demonstrated special cause variation. Time to assessment and treatment improved for patients with every stage of lung cancer and for both small-cell and non-small-cell subtypes. CONCLUSION: MDC shortens the time from lung cancer diagnosis to oncology assessment and treatment. Time to treatment improved more than time to oncology assessment, which suggests the improvement is related to benefits beyond faster oncology assessment.