Factors Related to, and Effective Interventions for, Vaccination Uptake Among Older Adults in Two Asia-Pacific Countries: A Rapid Review.

This rapid review aims to present a comprehensive overview of barriers, facilitators, and effective interventions that promote vaccination uptake by older adults in the Asia-Pacific region. Rapid review methodology was applied, using two databases (PubMed, Embase). Articles were included if studies were conducted in Australia, Singapore, Indonesia, and the Philippines; included human population ≥50 years of age, and was published from 2016 to August 2022. Related articles were not found from Indonesia and Philippines. A total of 23 articles met the inclusion criteria, with 19 reporting on barriers and facilitators, whereas, four articles reported effective interventions to promote vaccination uptake. Among the 19 studies that identified barriers and facilitators to vaccination uptake, the more common factors were social influences (n = 8/19), perceived benefits of vaccine (n = 7/19), and perceived vaccine safety (n = 6/19). Interventions that focused on supporting clinicians were found to be effective in leading them to recommend vaccinations among older adults, such as creating awareness on the low baseline vaccination rates among older adults, provision of structured health assessment, and nurse reminders. More studies are needed to ascertain the barriers and facilitators to uptake, as well as to identify effective interventions influencing vaccine uptake among older adults in the Asia-Pacific region.

Patient reporting of complications after surgery: what impact does documenting postoperative problems from the perspective of the patient using telephone interview and postal questionnaires have on the identification of complications after surgery?

OBJECTIVES: To identify the frequency of postoperative complications, including problems identified by patients and complications occurring after discharge from hospital. To identify how these impact on quality of life (QoL) and the patient's perception of the success of their treatment. DESIGN: Data from three prospective sources: surgical audit, a telephone interview (2 weeks after discharge) and a patient-focused questionnaire (2 months after surgery) were retrospectively analysed. SETTING: Dunedin Hospital, Dunedin, New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 500 patients, 100 undergoing each of the following types of surgeries: anorectal, biliary, colorectal, hernia and skin. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were complications and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Secondary outcomes included the patient's ratings of their treatment and a questionnaire-derived patient satisfaction score. RESULTS: 226 patients reported a complication; there were 344 separate complications and 411 reports of complications (16% of complications were reported on more than one occasion). The audit, telephone interview and questionnaire captured 12.6%, 36.3% and 51% of the 411 reports, respectively. Patients with complications had a lower SF-36 Physical Composite Summary (PCS) score (48.5 vs 43.9, p=0.021) and a lower Patient Satisfaction Score (85.6 vs 74.6, p<0.001). Rating of information received, care received, symptoms experienced, QoL and satisfaction with surgery were all significantly worse for patients with complications. On linear regression analysis, surgical complications, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score and age all made a similar contribution to the SF-36 PCS score, with standardised beta coefficients between 0.19 and 0.21. CONCLUSIONS: Following surgery, over 40% of patients experienced complications. The QoL and satisfaction score were significantly less than for those without complications. The majority of complications were diagnosed after discharge from hospital. Taking more notice of the patient perspective helps us to identify problems, to understand what is important to them and may suggest ways to improve perioperative care.

Bowel function 14 years after preoperative short-course radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: report of a multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: We investigated very long-term bowel function after total mesorectal excision (TME) with or without preoperative short-course radiotherapy (PRT) for rectal cancer, the risk factors for bowel dysfunction, and the association of bowel dysfunction with health-related quality of life (HRQL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the TME trial (1996-1999), 1530 Dutch patients with rectal cancer were randomized to TME preceded by 5 × 5 Gy PRT or TME alone. A set of questionnaires was sent to the surviving patients (n = 583) in 2012. The questionnaires included the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score (LARS score), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core (EORTC QLQ-C30) and Colorectal Module (EORTC QLQ-CR29). The LARS score range was divided into "no LARS," "minor LARS," and "major LARS" categories in ascending severity of bowel dysfunction. The potential risk factors for major LARS were tested on multivariable analysis. The HRQL was compared between the LARS score categories. RESULTS: Of the 478 respondents, 242 nonstoma patients were included in the present analysis. The median interval since treatment was 14.6 years, and the median age at the follow-up point was 75 years. Major LARS was reported by 46% of all patients (56% PRT plus TME vs. 35% TME). PRT (odds ratio [OR], 3.0; 99% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-6.9) and age ≤ 75 years at the follow-up point (OR, 2.4; 99% CI, 1.1-5.5) increased the risk of major LARS. Gender, tumor height, anastomotic leakage, type of anastomosis, interval since treatment, and comorbid diabetes were not significant. Patients with major LARS fared worse in many HRQL domains (P < .01; score difference > 5% of score range). CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of nonstoma patients endured major LARS years after TME. PRT and age ≤ 75 years at follow-up pose further risks of major LARS in addition to surgery. Major LARS is associated with reduced HRQL.

What Are the Best Questionnaires To Capture Anorectal Function After Surgery in Rectal Cancer?

With enhanced surgical techniques and neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer, survivorship issues are at the forefront of clinical practice and research. More and more patients are living with altered bowel habits following rectal cancer surgery. Sound assessment of anorectal function after rectal cancer surgery is the foundation for the continuing effort to explore the adverse effects of such surgery on bowel function, as well as for working towards reducing these effects. The quality of the assessment is predominantly determined by the instrument administered. This article reviews various questionnaires for capturing anorectal function after surgery in rectal cancer, discussing their attributes and suitability for different evaluation contexts.

Functional results after treatment for rectal cancer / Resultados funcionais após tratamento de câncer retal

INTRODUCTION: With improving survival of rectal cancer, functional outcome has become increasingly important. Following sphincter-preserving resection many patients suffer from severe bowel dysfunction with an impact on quality of life (QoL) - referred to as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). STUDY OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of the current knowledge of LARS regarding symptomatology, occurrence, risk factors, pathophysiology, evaluation instruments and treatment options. RESULTS: LARS is characterized by urgency, frequent bowel movements, emptying difficulties and incontinence, and occurs in up to 50-75% of patients on a long-term basis. Known risk factors are low anastomosis, use of radiotherapy, direct nerve injury and straight anastomosis. The pathophysiology seems to be multifactorial, with elements of anatomical, sensory and motility dysfunction. Use of validated instruments for evaluation of LARS is essential. Currently, there is a lack of evidence for treatment of LARS. Yet, transanal irrigation and sacral nerve stimulation are promising. CONCLUSION: LARS is a common problem following sphincter-preserving resection. All patients should be informed about the risk of LARS before surgery, and routinely be screened for LARS postoperatively. Patients with severe LARS should be offered treatment in order to improve QoL. Future focus should be on the possibilities of non-resectional treatment in order to prevent LARS. (AU)

INTRODUÇÃO: Com o aumento da sobrevida após câncer retal, o resultado funcional se tornou cada vez mais importante. Após ressecção com preservação do esfíncter, muitos pacientes sofrem de disfunção intestinal com um impacto sobre a qualidade de vida (QdV) - denominada síndrome da ressecção anterior baixa (LARS). OBJETIVO DO ESTUDO: Fornecer uma visão geral do conhecimento atual da LARS com relação à sintomatologia, à ocorrência, aos fatores de risco, à fisiopatologia, aos instrumentos de avaliação e às opções de tratamento. RESULTADOS: A LARS é caracterizada por movimentos intestinais repentinos e frequentes, dificuldades de esvaziamento e incontinência e ocorre em até 50-75% dos pacientes em longo prazo. Os fatores de risco conhecidos são anastomose baixa, radioterapia, lesão direta do nervo e anastomose direta. A fisiopatologia parece multifatorial, com elementos de disfunção anatômica, sensorial e da motilidade. O uso de instrumentos validados para avaliação da LARS é essencial. Atualmente, não há comprovações de tratamento da LARS. Ainda hoje, a irrigação transanal e a estimulação do nervo sacral são comprometidas. CONCLUSÃO: A LARS é um problema comum após ressecção com preservação do esfíncter. Todos os pacientes devem ser informados sobre o risco de LARS antes da cirurgia, e o rastreamento da LARS deve ser rotineiro após a cirurgia. Pacientes com LARS severa devem receber tratamento para melhorar a QdV. O foco futuro deve ser nas possibilidades de tratamento sem ressecção a fim de evitar a LARS. (AU)

Bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer treatment: a study comparing the specialist's versus patient's perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate how bowel dysfunction after sphincter-preserving rectal cancer treatment, known as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), is perceived by rectal cancer specialists, in relation to the patient's experience. DESIGN: Questionnaire study. SETTING: International. PARTICIPANTS: 58 rectal cancer specialists (45 colorectal surgeons and 13 radiation oncologists). RESEARCH PROCEDURE: The Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score (LARS score) is a five-item instrument for evaluation of LARS, which was developed from and validated on 961 patients. The 58 specialists individually completed two LARS score-based exercises. In Exercise 1, they were asked to select, from a list of bowel dysfunction issues, five items that they considered to disturb patients the most. In Exercise 2, they were given a list of scores to assign to the LARS score items, according to the impact on quality of life (QOL). OUTCOME MEASURES: In Exercise 1, the frequency of selection of each issue, particularly the five items included in the LARS score, was compared with the frequency of being selected at random. In Exercise 2, the answers were compared with the original patient-derived scores. RESULTS: Four of the five LARS score issues had the highest frequencies of selection (urgency, clustering, incontinence for liquid stool and frequency of bowel movements), which were also higher than random. However, the remaining LARS score issue (incontinence for flatus) showed a lower frequency than random. Scores assigned by the specialists were significantly different from the patient-derived scores (p<0.01). The specialists grossly overestimated the impact of incontinence for liquid stool and frequent bowel movements on QOL, while they markedly underestimated the impact of clustering and urgency. The results did not differ between surgeons and oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: Rectal cancer specialists do not have a thorough understanding of which bowel dysfunction symptoms truly matter to the patient, nor how these symptoms affect QOL.