Patient Involvement: A New Source of Stress in Health Care Work?

Patients have become increasingly well informed with higher expectations to be involved in decision-making processes regarding their care and treatment. However, few studies have examined the impact of patient involvement on health care providers’ partnership-building communication. The aim of this study was to measure and explore the self-reported effects of patient involvement on the work of physicians and nurses. A questionnaire survey was distributed among cardiology staff in 12 Swedish hospitals (N = 488, response rate 67%). The sample was comprised of registered nurses (RNs, n = 303), licensed practical nurses (LPNs, n = 132), and physicians (MDs, n = 53). Confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine seven questionnaire statements concerning implications of patient involvement for one’s clinical work. Regression analyses were used to examine factors associated with staff’s partnership-building communication. Analysis confirmed two distinct factors accounting for 57% of the total variance, representing both negative—“Hassles”—and positive—“Uplifts”—aspects of patient involvement. Regression analyses revealed that only positive aspects (i.e., uplifts) of patient involvement predicted staff behavior aimed at involving patients. Working with actively involved patients may be a source of stress, both negative and positive, for health care professionals. By developing work routines for involving patients in their care, health care workplaces may help health care professionals to buffer the negative effects, and enhance the positive effects, of that stress.     

Maximizing Breast Cancer Therapy with Awareness of Potential Treatment-Related Blood Disorders

In this review we summarize the impact of the various modalities of breast cancer therapy coupled with intrinsic patient factors on incidence of subsequent treatment-induced myelodysplasia and acute myelogenous leukemia (t-MDS/AML). It is clear that risk is increased for patients treated with radiation and chemotherapy at younger ages. Radiation is associated with modest risk, whereas chemotherapy, particularly the combination of an alkylating agent and an anthracycline, carries higher risk and radiation and chemotherapy combined increase the risk markedly. Recently, treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), but not pegylated G-CSF, has been identified as a factor associated with increased t-MDS/AML risk. Two newly identified associations may link homologous DNA repair gene deficiency and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment to increased t-MDS/AML risk. When predisposing factors, such as young age, are combined with an increasing number of potentially leukemogenic treatments that may not confer large risk singly, the risk of t-MDS/AML appears to increase. Patient and treatment factors combine to form a biological cascade that can trigger a myelodysplastic event. Patients with breast cancer are often exposed to many of these risk factors in the course of their treatment, and triple-negative patients, who are often younger and/or BRCA positive, are often exposed to all of them. It is important going forward to identify effective therapies without these adverse associated effects and choose existing therapies that minimize the risk of t-MDS/AML without sacrificing therapeutic gain.

Implications for Practice

Breast cancer is far more curable than in the past but requires multimodality treatment. Great care must be taken to use the least leukemogenic treatment programs that do not sacrifice efficacy. Elimination of radiation and anthracycline/alkylating agent regimens will be helpful where possible, particularly in younger patients and possibly those with homologous repair deficiency (HRD). Use of colony-stimulating factors should be limited to those who truly require them for safe chemotherapy administration. Further study of a possible leukemogenic association with HRD and the various forms of colony-stimulating factors is badly needed.

     

Endoscopy mitigation strategy with telemedicine and low-cost device use for COVID-19 prevention: A fourth-level Colombian center experience

Background and study aimsThe COVID-19 outbreak has reorganized surgical team conditions regarding endoscopy. The number of interventions has been reduced, the number of healthcare professionals must be limited, and both the patients and physicians are more protected than ever.Patients and MethodsIn the highest peak of contagion in Colombia, endoscopy, colonoscopy, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy were performed using a low-cost disposable device. A total of 1388 procedures were performed. Every patient was assessed for symptoms via a telephone call, at the health center, and after the procedure, following specific attention routes.ResultsAfter procedure follow-up, no positive cases of COVID-19 were noted.ConclusionThe methodology reduced the risk of infection during the COVID-19 pandemic.     

Hypofractionation vs. conventional radiotherapy fractionation in the conservative treatment of T1 glottic cancer: a prospective cohort study

Definitive radiotherapy is an effective single-modality in T1 glottic cancer. Hypofractionated schemes could offer excellent results in a shorter treatment period. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and toxicity comparing conventional vs. hypofractionated radiotherapy treatment in T1N0M0-glottic cancer. Between Jan-1st, 2005 and August-1st, 2017, in a prospective cohort study, with 10-year follow-up, 138 patients were treated with conventional schedule 2 Gy/day, total dose 70 Gy/7 weeks (N = 71) or hypofractionated schedule 2, 2–2, 25 Gy/day, total dose 63, 8–63 Gy/5, 5 weeks (N = 67). Endpoints were clinical-response rate, local relapse-free survival (LRFS), laryngectomy-free survival (LFS), toxicity rates, relapse-free survival (RFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), second tumour-free survival (2TFS), and overall survival (OS). All patients showed a complete clinical response. No differences were found for LRFS (p = 0.869), LFS (p = 0.975), RFS (p = 0.767), MFS (p = 0.601), 2TFS (p = 0.293), or OS (p = 0.685). Acute toxicity for skin and mucosae was similar (p = 0.550 and p = 0.698). Acute laryngeal toxicity was higher in the hypofractionation group (p = 0.004), due to an increase in slight moderate grade. No differences in late laryngeal edema were found (p = 0.989). Radiotherapy offers high rate survival, local control, and larynx preservation after 5–10-year follow-up. A hypofractionation could be preferable, since it offers the same results as conventional with fewer treatment sessions.