Assessment of efficiency and safety of the comprehensive Chemotherapy Assistance Program for ordering oncology medications.

PURPOSE: To assess whether the newly developed Comprehensive Chemotherapy Assistance Program (CAP) decreases errors and increases performance efficiency in ordering oncology medications as compared to the existing Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) system, the Order Communication System (OCS). METHODS: All chemotherapy prescriptions ordered using OCS and CAP systems during the first year of CAP implementation were prospectively analyzed to identify near-miss cases. The efficiency outcomes were determined in a trial setting with eight predefined hypothetical chemotherapy regimens, each with four measures of the average time, movement distance on the screen, maximum input interval time, and number of mouse or keystrokes per order. A total of 14 physicians participated in the study, and each regimen was ordered twice, once using CAP and once using OCS. RESULTS: For all near-miss types, CAP orders showed significant improvements as compared with OCS orders (p<0.0001). For CAP orders, incorrect dose and agent errors were reduced by 43.9% and 31.6%, respectively. Compared with OCS orders, regimen defects, drug omissions, and incorrect data input errors were reduced by more than 70% for CAP orders. For all four efficiency measures, a statistically significant competence was identified when physicians ordered a chemotherapy prescription with CAP as compared with OCS (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the superiority of CAP over the existing CPOE system for ordering oncology medications with regard to safety and efficiency.

Economic and patient-reported outcomes of outpatient home-based versus inpatient hospital-based chemotherapy for patients with colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This study aims to compare the economic- and patient-reported outcomes between outpatient home-based and inpatient hospital-based chemotherapy in advanced colorectal cancer patients. METHODS: A total of 80 patients from Severance Hospital in Seoul, Korea, who had stage III colorectal cancer and underwent home-based (n = 40) or hospital-based chemotherapy (n = 40) with a FOLFOX regimen between January 2007 and April 2008 were enrolled. Patient satisfaction data were collected by a self-administered questionnaire survey. Based on hospital charge records, average cost (in 2008 Korean won (KW)) per chemotherapy session was estimated and compared between home- and hospital-based chemotherapy from a societal perspective. RESULTS: Patients receiving chemotherapy at home showed higher satisfaction with their treatment (mean satisfaction score 3.58 ± 0.15, 5-point Likert-type scale, with a higher score indicating higher satisfaction) than did those treated at the hospital (3.23 ± 0.21; p < 0.01). After adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups using multivariate analysis, those receiving home-based chemotherapy still showed significantly higher satisfaction than those undergoing hospital-based therapy (ß = 0.271, p < 0.001). Additionally, home-based therapy reduced the cost per chemotherapy session by 16.6%, compared with hospital-based treatment (1,694,216 versus 2,030,383 KW, 1,200 KW ≈ 1 US dollar). The largest cost reduction was attributable to medical costs (-201,122 KW), followed by caregiver's opportunity costs (-135,000 KW). CONCLUSIONS: Higher satisfaction and lower economic cost for home-based chemotherapy suggests that home-based chemotherapy could be a popular and cost-effective treatment option for colorectal cancer patients who are eligible for home-based chemotherapy.

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy of gastric cancer: scrutiny into the clinical evidence based on quality assessment of medical literature of randomized controlled trials.

The aim of this study was to scrutinize the evidence of adjuvant chemotherapy of gastric cancer by assessing the quality of the medical literature of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A quality assessment (QA) scoring system was devised with the three parameters-control of bias, quality of report, and quality of design-which consisted 19 items. We searched for all the publications of the RCTs, from 1969 to 2007, with surgery-only arm, and their associated meta-analyses to score. Among the 26 RCTs, quality of three articles were graded as (2+), 10 articles as (1+), and 13 articles as (-). Recently published studies had overall better quality of report, but not necessarily better quality of design. Three studies demonstrating a positive survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy had a grade (1+). Hierarchical clustering revealed that the 26 articles were grouped into three major branches associated with study quality and a multi-institutional setting. We also obtained a statistically significant set of ten items (P < 0.001) that could differentiate articles of good (1-2+) and low quality (-) through supervised two-way hierarchical clustering. Finally, the level of recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy in gastric cancer was to be a "B" according to the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) System. QA of medical literature should be an essential consideration for medical-related decision-making and the formation of evidence-based guidelines. Multidisciplinary discussion to develop and refine trial design is important for procuring better quality of RCTs of adjuvant chemotherapy of gastric cancer.