RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) has been the backbone of the treatment of cancer associated thrombosis (CAT). Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have shown efficacy and safety not inferior to LMWH and guidelines included DOACs as an option for CAT treatment. Nevertheless, DOACs are still poorly prescribed in patients with cancer. The aim of this survey was to better understand prescription patterns of anticoagulants, in particular of DOACs, especially in gynecological cancers (GCs). METHODS: Our survey was made up of 21 questions, the last four questions addressed to medical doctors (MDs) involved in GCs. An invitation to complete the survey was sent by e-mail to 691 MITO (Multicentre Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynaecologic malignancies) and 2093 AIOM (Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica) members. RESULTS: Overall, 113 MDs completed the questionnaire, 69 involved in GCs. Most respondents (46, 41%) were aged 30-40 years old, worked in public hospitals (59, 52.2%), were medical oncologists (86, 76.1%). LMWH was the preferred choice for the treatment of CAT (104, 92%). However, 89 respondents (78.8%) prescribed or asked to prescribe a DOAC for CAT. The major concern about DOACs was the difficulty in verifying the therapeutic effect and the absence of antidotes in case of bleeding (37.9%). In patients with GCs, DOACs were used with niraparib, olaparib, rucaparib and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in less than 10 patients by 23%, 20%, 9% and 10.2% of respondents, respectively. CONCLUSION: The responders are aware of the Direct-acting oral anticoagulants option and would like to use them.
Assuntos
Neoplasias , Neoplasias Ovarianas , Trombose , Tromboembolia Venosa , Feminino , Humanos , Adulto , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Inibidores do Fator Xa/uso terapêutico , Tromboembolia Venosa/complicações , Tromboembolia Venosa/tratamento farmacológico , Tromboembolia Venosa/patologia , Administração Oral , Trombose/tratamento farmacológico , Trombose/etiologia , Neoplasias/complicações , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias/patologia , Neoplasias Ovarianas/tratamento farmacológico , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
Background: The Quality of Recovery questionnaire (QoR-15) is an English instrument for measuring quality of recovery in surgical patients, not yet translated and validated in Italian when the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Piemonte studies were planned. Objective: To produce the Italian version of the QoR-15 questionnaire, to evaluate its factorial structure and to assess the invariance between two types of surgery. Methods: The Italian version (QoR-15I) was obtained translating and adapting the original version to the Italian context. The validation was performed suppling the QoR-15I to 3,784 patients enrolled in two parallel stepped wedge cluster randomised trials (ERAS Colon-rectum Piemonte; ERAS Gyneco Piemonte). The factor structure and its invariance between types of surgery was tested using confirmatory bifactor model and multi-group analysis. Comparative fit index (CFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) fit indices and their changes between nested models were used to assess the factor structure and the invariance. Results: The bifactor model showed good fit (RMSEA = 0.049, CFI =0.957, SRMR = 0.036) and provided a general recovery factor and two specific factors for physical and mental recovery. Eighty-four percent of the common variance is attributable to the general factor, and thus the QoR-15I is sufficiently 'one-dimensional' with an adequate reliability (ωh = 0.70). The ωs values for the physical and mental recovery factors were 0.01 and 0.13, respectively. Multigroup analysis supported configural (RMSEA = 0.053, CFI = 0.950, SRMR = 0.035) and metric invariance (ΔRMSEA = -0.004; ΔCFI = -0.002; ΔSRMR = 0.014), whereas the intercept constraint was removed from item 15 to obtain partial scalar invariance (ΔRMSEA = 0.002; ΔCFI = 0.007; ΔSRMR = 0.004). Construct validity was supported by a negative association of QoR-15I scores with all variables related to worse patient condition and more complex surgery. Conclusion: Our results support the use of the QoR-15I as a valid, reliable, and clinically feasible tool for measuring the quality of recovery after surgery. The results of the confirmatory factor analyses suggest that a unique recovery score can be calculated and support measurement invariance of the QOR-15I across the two type of surgery, suggesting that the questionnaire has the same meaning and the same measurement parameters in colorectal and gynaecologic patients.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Response shift (RS) has been defined as a change in the meaning of an individual's self-evaluation that needs to be accounted for when assessing longitudinal changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). RS detection through structural equation modeling is accomplished by adopting Oort's procedure based on a measurement model in which the observed variables are defined as reflective indicators of the HRQoL latent variable; that is, the latent variable causes the variation in the reflective indicators. This study aims to propose a procedure that assesses RS when formative indicators are used in measuring HRQoL; in this last case, the latent variable is considered to be a function of some formative indicators. A secondary aim is to compare the new procedure with Oort's procedure to highlight similarities and differences. METHODS: The data were retrieved from a consecutive series of 258 patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer and undergoing chemotherapy and/or surgery. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QOL-C30) was administered twice, once before and once six months after treatment. Structural equation modeling was used to evaluate RS and true change with the newly proposed method (in which fatigue and pain were defined as formative indicators) and with Oort's procedure (in which fatigue and pain were defined as reflective indicators). RESULTS: According to the new procedure, there was no measurement bias, and on average, patients' quality of life improved by 3.53 points (on a scale ranging from 0 to 100) at the 6-month follow-up. With Oort's procedure, the loading of the pain indicator was not invariant across the two time points, suggesting the presence of reprioritization, whereas the estimation of true change was very similar to the previous one: 3.87. CONCLUSIONS: RS and true change in HRQoL can be evaluated in the presence of formative indicators. Defining a measurement model by formative or reflective indicators can lead to different results.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais/psicologia , Análise de Classes Latentes , Qualidade de Vida/psicologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Itália/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Projetos de Pesquisa , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
Many previous studies have indicated that the attachment pattern developed during infancy shapes the adult attachment style, which in turn affects responses to stress and help-seeking behaviors. It may be relevant within clinical contexts to have easy-to-administer and rapid tools aimed to investigate attachment dimensions. The current study presents the Italian adaptation of the Brief Modified Experiences in Close Relationships (ECR-M16) - a self-reported measure of the attachment-style dimensions with reference to close others - and assesses its factorial structure. The questionnaire was administered to cancer outpatients. The number of factors to be extracted was calculated via parallel analysis. Subsequently, an exploratory factor analysis was run to calculate the first-order factor structure, which was compared to the original one via Procrustes rotation and Tucker's coefficient. Finally, a second-order factor structure was calculated by factor analyzing the first-order factor scores. The Italian adaptation of the ECR-M16 is characterized by a first-order factor structure comprising four factors, like the original. The degree of similarity between the two ranges between fair and dissimilar. The second-order factor structure comprises two higher order dimensions, like in the original study. Although partially similar, the two second-order factor structures show relevant differences. A clinically oriented discussion centered on the similarities and differences between the two factor structures is provided, along with indications for future studies.