Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Geriatr Oncol ; 7(2): 142-3, 2016 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27037160

RESUMEN

The authors regret: A calculation error was corrected in Table 3. As mentioned under the table, the percentage of patients under 'Baseline' was calculated from the total no. of patients with geriatric recommendations data (n = 932 pts). This was mistakenly calculated from the number of patients with available GA data (n = 979). Percentages have been recalculated. The corrected table is reproduced here (Table 3). We emphasize that these percentages are not mentioned in the text of the paper nor do they change any of the conclusions. The authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused.

2.
J Geriatr Oncol ; 6(5): 401-10, 2015 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26296908

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The main objective of this study was to describe geriatric recommendations based on a geriatric assessment (GA) and to evaluate the implementation of these recommendations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A two-step approach of screening followed by a GA was implemented in nine hospitals in Belgium. Patients ≥ 70 years were included at diagnosis or at disease progression/relapse. Concrete geriatric recommendations were systematically documented and reported to the treating physicians and consisted of referrals to professional health care workers. Patient charts were reviewed after one month to verify which geriatric recommendations have been performed. RESULTS: From August 2011 to July 2012, 1550 patients were included for analysis. The median age was 77 (range: 70-97) and 57.0% were female. A solid tumour was diagnosed in 91.4% and a haematological malignancy in 8.6%. Geriatric screening with the G8 identified 63.6% of the patients for GA (n=986). A median of two geriatric recommendations (range: 1-6) were given for 76.2% (95%CI: 73.4-78.8) of the evaluable patients (n=710). A median of one geriatric recommendation (range: 1-5) was performed in 52.1% (95%CI: 48.4-55.8) of the evaluable patients (n=689). In general, 460 or 35.3% (95%CI: 32.8-38.0) of all the geriatric recommendations were performed. Geriatric recommendations most frequently consisted of referrals to the dietician (60.4%), social worker (40.3%), and psychologist (28.9%). CONCLUSION: This implementation study provides insight into GA-based recommendations/interventions in daily oncology practice. Geriatric recommendations were given in about three-fourths of patients. About one-third of all geriatric recommendations were performed in approximately half of these patients.


Asunto(s)
Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bélgica/epidemiología , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Neoplasias/terapia , Estudios Prospectivos , Tasa de Supervivencia/tendencias
3.
J Geriatr Oncol ; 5(4): 431-8, 2014 Oct 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24986786

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to identify treating physicians' general experiences and expectations regarding geriatric assessment (GA) in older patients with cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was carried out in 9 Belgian hospitals, which participated in a national GA implementation project focusing on older patients with cancer. A newly developed questionnaire was completed by their treating physicians. Data collection comprised of reviewing hospital data, general respondent data, and treating physicians' general experiences and expectations regarding GA. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: Eighty-two physicians from 9 hospitals participated. The GA team composition can vary substantially, with a nurse as core member. Ideally, all older patients with cancer in whom a treatment decision is necessary, should benefit from the GA. Nearly all GA domains are reported as very important. Availability of GA results can be improved. Treating physicians want geriatricians to coordinate geriatric recommendations related to the identified GA problems, and expect from trained healthcare workers (THCWs) to collect GA data, to report GA results, and to follow-up the implementation of geriatric recommendations. CONCLUSION: This study identifies relevant information for improving the implementation of GA in older patients with cancer in Belgium and reveals priorities for a THCW from the treating physician's point of view. To increase the effectiveness of GA, further efforts are needed to improve the implementation of geriatric recommendations.


Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Bélgica/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA