Comparison of surgeon and pathologist total mesorectal excision grade after rectal cancer resection: A single institution analysis.

BACKGROUND: A Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Colorectal Cancer Project initiative sought to increase adoption of surgeon total mesorectal excision (TME) grading through standardized education and synoptic operative reporting. Our study aim was to assess initiative impact and level of agreement between surgeon and pathologist-determined TME grades. METHODS: This is a retrospective comparison of surgeon and pathologist TME grades before and after initiative implementation using a prospectively maintained enhanced recovery colorectal surgery database. RESULTS: There were 112 TMEs before, and 53 TMEs following initiative implementation. There was a significant increase in surgeon TME-grade reporting in the postinitiative period (25.0% pre- vs. 81.1% post-, p < 0.001). Pathologist TME-grade reporting was high in both time periods and there was no significant change (91.1% pre- vs. 88.7% post-, p = 0.84). Surgeon and pathologist agreement was 59.3% in the preinitiative period (Κ "minimal"   0.356) and 65.0% in the postinitiative period (Κ "moderate" = 0.605, p = 0.827). There was no significant association between clinical T-stage and surgeon or pathologist TME grade. CONCLUSION: Surgeon TME grading improves with education and synoptic operative reporting. There is only moderate agreement between surgeon and pathologist, a finding that requires further study. Organized regional initiatives are effective at implementing rectal cancer management quality improvement.

Short-Term Outcomes of COVID-19 Pandemic on Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Screening and Management.

Background To assess the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) screening, staging, and management in a single health care system. Materials and Methods From November 2015 to December 2020, a total of 1,547 NSCLC cases was reported at our institution including 1,329 cases pre-COVID-19 and 218 cases during COVID-19. Pre-COVID-19 was defined as November 2015 to February 2020, while during COVID-19 was March 2020 to December 2020. Data were collected from tumor registry and medical record review. Patients with mesothelioma, lymphoma, small cell, or mixed small cell cancer were excluded from the study. Results Both pre-COVID-19 and during COVID-19 cohorts had similar comorbidities including age (70 vs. 71 years), current smokers (35 vs. 32%), and chronic obstructive lung disease (32 vs. 28%). The number of low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening scans decreased by 25% during COVID-19 compared with pre-COVID-19 era. There were more cases of stage 1A NSCLC pre-COVID-19 (31 vs. 25%) and more stage 4 cancer during COVID-19 (42 vs. 33%); p = 0.01. The proportion of patients treated with radiotherapy was similar between pre-COVID-19 and during COVID-19 (49 vs. 50%), but fewer patients underwent surgery during COVID-19 (17 vs. 27%; p = 0.004). The median time to radiotherapy (67 days) and surgery (29 days) was similar between the groups. The unadjusted overall 6-month mortality after lung cancer diagnoses was higher during COVID-19 compared with pre-COVID-19 (28 vs. 22%; p = 0.04). Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in delayed lung cancer screening scans, and more patients had diagnosis of advanced NSCLC; however, short-term mortality was unchanged.

Screening for economic hardship for child welfare-involved families during the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid partnership response.

BACKGROUND: Pandemics have a wide range of economic, health and social consequences related to both the spread of a disease and efforts made by government leaders to contain it which may be particularly detrimental for the child welfare-involved population. This is because child welfare agencies serve some of the highest needs children and families. A significant proportion of these families face economic hardship, and as a result of containment measures for COVID-19, more families inevitably will. OBJECTIVE: Given the range of negative consequences related to the pandemic and the evolving supports available to families, child protection workers needed a clinical tool to guide and support work with families informed by an understanding of economic hardship. The objective of this paper is to report on the development and implementation strategy of a tool to be used for practice intervention during the pandemic. METHODS: Action research methodology was utilized in the creation of the clinical tool. The tool's development and implementation occurred through an academic/child welfare sector partnership involving child welfare agencies representing diverse regions and populations in Ontario, Canada. Factor analysis of representative child welfare data from the Ontario Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect 2018 (OIS-2018) on economic hardship was used to inform the development of questions on the clinical tool. RESULTS: The development and implementation strategy of the clinical tool are described, including the results from analyses of the OIS-2018. CONCLUSIONS: Future directions for the project are discussed, including considerations for using this tool beyond the pandemic.