A high level of fatigue among long-term survivors of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: results from the longitudinal population-based PROFILES registry in the south of the Netherlands.

The course of fatigue and quality of life in survivors of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is unknown. The aims of this study were, therefore, to assess fatigue and quality of life in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma following primary treatment, compare fatigue and quality of life in these patients with those of an age- and sex matched normative population to assess the severity of concerns and identify associations with fatigue of survivors who remained fatigued. The population-based Eindhoven Cancer Registry was used to select all patients diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma from 1999-2009. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and the Fatigue Assessment Scale were completed once by 824 survivors of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (80% response rate); 434 survivors completed these questionnaires again 1 year later. Survivors of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma reported more clinically relevant fatigue up till 10 years post-diagnosis compared to a normative population (P<0.001). Mean fatigue scores remained fairly stable over time (T1: x=28, SD=26; T2: x=30, SD=27, P=0.14): 22-28% of survivors reported deterioration, 19-23% reported improvement and 44-54% reported constant fatigue. Survivors who reported constant fatigue were more often diagnosed with stage IV disease and had more comorbid diseases. They were additionally more often female and divorced. Having comorbidities and being without a partner were also associated with constant fatigue in the normative population. In conclusion, six out of every ten responding non-Hodgkin's lymphoma survivors reported a high level of fatigue up till 10 years after diagnosis. Mean fatigue scores remained stable over time and survivors reporting constant fatigue more often had stage IV disease at diagnosis and comorbidities.

Combined student ratings and self-assessment provide useful feedback for clinical teachers.

Many evaluation instruments have been developed to provide feedback to physicians on their clinical teaching but written feedback alone is not always effective. We explored whether feedback effectiveness improved when teachers' self-assessment was added to written feedback based on student ratings. 37 physicians (10 residents, 27 attending physicians) from different specialties (Internal Medicine, Surgery, Obstetrics/Gynecology, Pediatrics, Neurology, Dermatology, Ophthalmology, ENT, and Psychiatry) were invited to fill out a self-assessment questionnaire on their teaching skills. Students completed an almost identical questionnaire to evaluate the same teachers based on their experiences during clerkships. After receiving written feedback incorporating their self-assessment and the student ratings, the teachers indicated their perceptions of the self-assessment exercise and the written feedback in a questionnaire (five-point Likert scale items) and next, in more detail, in semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 12 of the participating teachers. 25 physicians participated (67%). The results showed that self-assessment and student feedback were both perceived as useful (3.7, SD 1.0) but the latter was considered more effective. The physicians we interviewed considered the combination of self-assessment with student ratings more effective than either self-assessment or written feedback alone. Notably, discrepancies between student ratings and self-assessment were deemed a strong incentive for change. We conclude that self-assessment can be a useful tool to stimulate improvement of clinical teaching when it is combined with written feedback based on student ratings. Future research among larger groups is needed to confirm our findings and examine whether these combined tools actually lead to improved teaching.