Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.     

Treatment of Acquired Bilateral Nevus of Ota-Like Macules (Hori''s Nevus) with a Combination of the 532 nm Q-Switched Nd:YAG Laser Followed by the 1,064 nm Q-Switched Nd:YAG Is More Effective: Prospective Study

BACKGROUND: Acquired bilateral nevus of Ota-like macules (Hori's nevus) is a common dyschromatosis among Asian women. Q-switched lasers have been used successfully as a treatment modality. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of using the Q-switched 532 nm neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser followed by the 1,064 nm laser versus the Q-switched 1,064 nm Nd:YAG laser alone in the treatment of Hori's nevus. METHODS: This is a prospective left-right comparative study. Ten women with bilateral Hori's nevus were recruited and treated with a combination of the Q-switched 532 and 1,064 nm Nd:YAG lasers on the right cheek and the Q-switched 1,064 nm Nd:YAG laser alone on the left cheek. Only one laser treatment session was performed. The degree of pigmentation was objectively recorded with a mexameter. Subjective assessment was made by both patients and two blinded, nontreating dermatologists. RESULTS: At 6 months, there was a statistically significant difference (p = .009) of 35.10 points using objective mexameter measurements between the two sides, favoring the side treated with a combination of 532 and 1,064 nm laser treatment. Subjective grading by the patients and blinded dermatologists also confirmed that combination therapy was more successful after one treatment. Although combination treatment had a higher incidence of mild postinflammatory changes, this disappeared within 2 months. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent use of the Q-switched 532 nm Nd:YAG laser in combination with the 1,064 nm laser is more effective in pigment clearance than the Q-switched 1,064 nm Nd:YAG laser alone for Hori's nevi.     

Anxiety in medically III patients

Anxiety disorders and anxiety symptoms are highly prevalent in the general population and more so in the medically ill. They have a number of negative consequences for these patients and may worsen the outcome of the medical illness and increase health care utilization. In the evaluation of these patients, it is of paramount importance to identify the etiology of the anxiety and, in particular, to differentiate primary from secondary anxiety. Management includes medications (especially benzodiazepines and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) and psychotherapy (particularly cognitive-behavioral therapy).