Are health outcomes in the older colorectal cancer patients treated by curative intent surgery any different to the younger patients?

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer poses a major burden. Its incidence increases with age and older patients with comorbidities have a higher likelihood of major complications. This study investigated the impact of age on health outcomes in colorectal cancer patients treated by surgery. METHODS: A prospective database of all patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery with curative intent between 2012 and 2017 was used to identify patients. A retrospective review of existing medical records investigating health-related outcomes in colorectal cancer patients undergoing surgery was performed. Primary outcomes measured were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Difference in restricted mean survival times (RMST) up to a pre-specified time point of 24 months was used to compare four age groups. RESULTS: Six-hundred and fifty-one patients were divided into four age group categories: ≤65-years (n = 244), 66 to 75-years (n = 213), 76 to 85-years (n = 162) and >85-years (n = 32). Older patients were found to have a higher rate of post-operative medical complications (including confusion) (P = 0.001) and a longer length of stay (LOS) (P = 0.01). There was no difference between the 76 to 85-year age group and >85-year age group in OS and DFS. However, there was a reduced OS in older patients (>65) compared to their younger cohorts (<65) (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Older patients who undergo curative surgery have reduced OS, increased LOS and higher complication rates. Complex older patients may benefit from geriatric assessment and management in the peri-operative period.

Medical student participation in a surgical outpatient clinic: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To determine the patient, doctor and student perceptions with different styles of student participation in a surgical outpatient clinic. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in surgical outpatients. Participants included patients scheduled to see one of four specialist general surgeons, the surgeons themselves and third-year medical students undertaking their general surgery rotation at the Geelong Hospital. A total of 151 consultations were randomized to one of three consultation styles between August 2011 and August 2012. (i) 'No Student', consultation without a student being present, (ii) 'Student with Doctor', consultation where the student accompanied the doctor throughout the consultation and (iii) 'Student before Doctor', consultation where the student interviewed the patient before the doctor and examined the patient in the doctor's presence. Participants' perceptions and experience of each of the consultations was assessed in the form of written questionnaires. RESULTS: There was no difference in overall patient satisfaction with different styles of student participation (P = 0.080). Students showed a clear preference for the 'Student before Doctor' consultation style (P = 0.023). There were no differences in consultation outcomes from the doctor's perspective (P = 0.88), except time (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: This study supports a style of consultation where students are actively involved in patient care as it has no adverse effects on patient satisfaction and it is the preferred participation style from the student's perspective. Doctors do not feel that active student involvement interferes with their ability to deliver healthcare except that it prolongs consultation time.