Supervised Physical Rehabilitation in the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: As the survival rate of cancer patients increases, the clinical importance of rehabilitation provided by healthcare professionals also increases. However, the evidence supporting the relevance of rehabilitation programs is insufficient. This study aimed to review the literature on effectiveness in physical function, quality of life (QOL) or fatigue of supervised physical rehabilitation in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Cochrane guidelines. We narratively described the results when meta-analysis was not applicable or appropriate. Literature databases including Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, as well as several Korean domestic databases, were searched up to June 2017 for studies that investigated the effectiveness of supervised physical rehabilitation programs on physical function, QOL or fatigue in patients with advanced cancer. The quality of the selected studies was evaluated independently by paired reviewers. RESULTS: Eleven studies with 922 participants were finally selected among 2,459 articles. The meta-analysis revealed that after physical exercise, the physical activity level and strength of patients with advanced cancer increased significantly. The QOL showed a statistically significant improvement after physical rehabilitation according to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer version C30. Though some of measurements about cardiovascular endurance or strength in several studies were not able to be synthesized, each study reported that they were significantly improved after receiving rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: Supervised physical rehabilitation for patients with advanced cancer is effective in improving physical activity, strength, and QOL. However, more trials are needed to prove the effectiveness of supervised exercise and to strengthen the evidence.

Is Primary Androgen Deprivation Therapy a Suitable Option for Asian Patients With Prostate Cancer Compared With Radical Prostatectomy?

BACKGROUND: We conducted a comparative survival analysis between primary androgen deprivation therapy (PADT) and radical prostatectomy (RP) based on nationwide Korean population data that included all patients with prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study enrolled 4,538 patients with prostate cancer from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database linked with Korean Central Cancer Registry data who were treated with PADT or RP between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2014. Kaplan-Meier and multivariate survival analyses stratified by stage (localized and locally advanced) and age (<75 and ≥75 years) were performed using a Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate treatment effects. RESULTS: Among 18,403 patients from the NHIS database diagnosed with prostate cancer during the study period, 4,538 satisfied inclusion criteria and were included in the analyses. Of these, 3,136 and 1,402 patients underwent RP or received PADT, respectively. Risk of death was significantly increased for patients who received PADT compared with those who underwent RP in the propensity score-matched cohort. In subgroup analyses stratified by stage and age, in every subgroup, patients who received PADT had a significantly increased risk of death compared with those who underwent RP. In particular, a much greater risk was observed for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a nationwide survival analysis of nonmetastatic prostate cancer, this study provides valuable clinical implications that favor RP over PDAT for treatment of Asian populations. However, the possibility that survival differences have been overestimated due to not accounting for potential confounding characteristics must be considered.

Comparison between the International Classification of Primary Care and the International Classification of Diseases Classifications in Primary Care in Korea.

BACKGROUND: The International Classification of Primary Care-2 (ICPC-2) is a classification method designed for primary care. Although previous studies have found that ICPC-2 is a useful tool for demonstrating the relationship between patients' expectations and health providers' diagnoses, its utility of ICPC-2 has yet to be fully studied in Korea. This study aimed to evaluate the practicality of ICPC-2 in Korean primary care. METHODS: The study was conducted at primary care clinics in Seoul and Gyeonggi areas from October to November 2015. Third-year family medicine residents examined and analyzed the medical records of patients who visited primary care physicians using ICPC-2, and the results were compared with those obtained using the International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) (Korean version: Korean Standard Classification of Diseases-7). RESULTS: A total of 26 primary care physicians from 23 primary care clinics participated in the study. Furthermore, 2,458 ICD-10 codes and 6,091 ICPC-2 codes were recorded from the data of 1,099 patients. The common disease codes were vasomotor and allergic rhinitis (J30), according to ICD-10, and acute upper respiratory infection (R74) in ICPC-2. Comparing disease status by body systems, the proportion of gastrointestinal disease with ICD-10 codes was significantly higher than that with ICPC-2 codes (P<0.001). Furthermore, patients with >4 diagnoses accounted for 36% of the ICD-10 classifications, whereas those with >4 diagnoses accounted for 4% of the ICPC-2 classifications. CONCLUSION: Introducing ICPC as a complementary means for diagnosing common diseases could be a practical approach in Korean primary care.

Cost-effectiveness of a medication event monitoring system for tuberculosis management in Morocco.

BACKGROUND: Digital health technologies have been used to enhance adherence to TB medication, but the cost-effectiveness remains unclear. METHODS: We used the real data from the study conducted from April 2014 to December 2020 in Morocco using a smart pillbox with a web-based medication monitoring system, called Medication Event Monitoring Systems (MEMS). Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using a decision analysis model including Markov model for Multi-drug resistant (MDR) TB from the health system perspective. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per disability adjusted life-year (DALY) averted. Two-way sensitive analysis was done for the treatment success rate between MEMS and standard of care. RESULTS: The average total per-patient health system costs for treating a new TB patient under MEMS versus standard of care were $398.70 and $155.70, respectively. The MEMS strategy would reduce the number of drug-susceptible TB cases by 0.17 and MDR-TB cases by 0.01 per patient over five years. The ICER of MEMS was $434/DALY averted relative to standard of care, and was most susceptible to the TB treatment success rate of both strategies followed by the managing cost of MEMS. CONCLUSION: MEMS is considered cost-effective for managing infectious active TB in Morocco.

The Effects of Preoperative Education for Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The results of previous experimental studies have been inconsistent in the effect of preoperative education on postoperative outcomes, and there have been no meta-analyses focusing solely on preoperative education for patients with cancer. OBJECTIVES: To identify the magnitude and direction of the effects of preoperative education and to investigate the influence of moderators on postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing cancer-related surgery. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Cochrane guidelines. Electronic databases were searched until October 2019 using Cochrane database, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL for randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies on preoperative education interventions. Ten studies with 45 effect sizes were analyzed in this meta-analysis, and the standardized mean difference was calculated based on Hedges' g as an effect size. RESULTS: Meta-analysis showed that the overall effect size of preoperative education was moderate. Preoperative education improved cancer patients' knowledge and satisfaction and reduced pain. The effects of preoperative education were greater in younger age groups when delivered using verbal or combined educational methods. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated the importance of preoperative educational interventions not only in terms of their surgery-related cognitive aspects but also in terms of the physical and psychological aspects linked to the cancer surgery. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Interventions to provide the most effective preoperative education for patients with cancer in the hospital setting are required, and this information can be used to develop evidence-based education strategies for patients undergoing cancer-related surgery.