A survey of healthcare professionals and oncology patients at the McGill University Health Centre reveals enthusiasm towards establishing a post-mortem rapid tissue donation program.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23005-e23005
Author(s):  
Matthew Dankner ◽  
Julien Senecal ◽  
Noah Neubarth ◽  
Nicholas Bertos ◽  
Morag Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Health Centre ◽  
Tissue Donation ◽  
Developmental Phase ◽  
Post Mortem ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Mcgill University

e23005 Background: In the early developmental phase of a post-mortem Rapid Tissue Donation (RTD) program for metastatic cancer patients, we surveyed health care professionals (HCPs) and oncology patients at the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC) to assess their knowledge and attitudes pertaining to RTD from metastatic cancer patients for research purposes. Methods: A 23-item survey was developed and distributed to HCPs at tumour board meetings, and a related 26-item survey was developed and distributed to oncology patients at the MUHC Cedars Cancer Centre. Results: 73 HCPs, including 37 attending physicians, and 102 oncology patients participated in the study. Despite the fact that 88% of HCPs rated their knowledge of RTD as none or limited, 42% indicated that they would feel comfortable discussing RTD with their cancer patients. 67% of HCPs indicated that their current knowledge of RTD would impact their decision to discuss such a program with patients, implying the importance of educating HCPs to facilitate enrolment of patients into an RTD program. 78% of patients indicated that they would not be uncomfortable if their doctor discussed RTD with them, and 61% indicated that they would like for their doctor to discuss RTD with them. HCPs and patients felt that the best time for patients to be approached about consenting to an RTD program is in the transition to palliative care when there are no treatment options remaining. Conclusions: HCPs and patients at the MUHC are generally enthusiastic about adopting an RTD program for metastatic cancer patients. Education of HCPs and patients will be an important determinant of the program’s success.

scholarly journals A survey of health care professionals and oncology patients at the McGill University Health Centre reveals enthusiasm for establishing a postmortem rapid tissue donation program

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Dankner ◽  
J. Senecal ◽  
N. S. Neubarth ◽  
N. Bertos ◽  
M. Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Health Centre ◽  
Tissue Donation ◽  
Developmental Phase ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Mcgill University

Background  In the early developmental phase of a postmortem rapid tissue donation (RTD) program for patients with metastatic cancer, we surveyed health care professionals (HCPS) and oncology patients at the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC) to assess their knowledge and attitudes pertaining to RTD from metastatic cancer patients for research purposes.Methods   A 23-item survey was developed and distributed to hcps at tumour board meetings, and a related 26-item survey was developed and distributed to oncology patients at the MUHC Cedars Cancer Centre.Results   The survey attracted participation from 73 HCPS, including 37 attending physicians, and 102 oncology patients. Despite the fact that 88% of hcps rated their knowledge of RTD as none or limited, 42% indicated that they would feel comfortable discussing RTD with their cancer patients. Of the responding hcps, 67% indicated that their current knowledge of RTD would affect their decision to discuss such a program with patients, which implies the importance of education for hcps to facilitate enrolment of patients into a RTD program. Of responding patients, 78% indicated that they would not be uncomfortable if their doctor discussed RTD with them, and 61% indicated that they would like it if their doctor were to discuss RTD with them. The hcps and patients felt that the best time for patients to be approached about consenting to a RTD program would be at the transition to palliative care when no treatment options remain.Conclusions   At the MUHC, hcps and patients are generally enthusiastic about adopting a RTD program for patients with metastatic cancer. Education of hcps and patients will be an important determinant of the program’s success.

Developing pathways for cancer rehabilitation in tertiary oncology centers: Initial observations at the McGill University Health Centre.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 17-17
Author(s):  
Sabrina Cesare ◽  
Irina Uscatescu ◽  
Jonathan di Tomasso ◽  
Lorella Ciutto ◽  
Kevin Yu-Chueh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Handgrip Strength ◽  
Health Centre ◽  
Symptom Assessment ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Cancer Rehabilitation ◽  
Targeted Interventions ◽  
Mcgill University ◽  
Clinically Significant

17 Background: No definitive rehabilitation pathways exist for cancer patients. To address this gap, the Cancer Rehabilitation interdisciplinary team at the McGill University Health Centre has developed three program paths (e.g., Restorative, Supportive, and Cachexia) to meet the various specialized and personalized needs of cancer patients. Methods: A consecutive cohort of patients referred to the Cancer Rehabilitation Clinic between January 1st and June 30th, 2014 was considered. We examined the following baseline characteristics: handgrip strength (HGS), the abridged Patient Generated-Subjective Global Assessment (aPG-SGA) and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) self-reported questionnaires. Results: Of the 54 patients evaluated (57.4% male), 20 (mean age: 47.4 yrs), 8 (59.9 yrs) and 26 (64.6 yrs) were assigned to the restorative, supportive and cachexia streams, respectively. The most common cancer diagnoses were gastrointestinal (15%), gynecological (13%), breast (12%) and lung (12%). Table 1 contains baseline aPG-SGA, ESAS and HGS scores. Conclusions: Our preliminary data confirm clinically significant differences in muscle strength across the 3 streams for both males and females, as well as significant differences in nutritional, appetite and well-being scores between the patients in the restorative and cachexia pathways. Our data confirm the need of personalized and targeted interventions to achieve or maintain optimal performance and quality of life in cancer survivors with different disease and treatment characteristics. [Table: see text]

VTE risk assessment in cancer

2016 ◽  
Vol 07 (01) ◽  
pp. 20-25
Author(s):  
I. Pabinger ◽  
C. Ay
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Medical Oncology ◽  
Clinical Importance ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Ambulatory Setting ◽  
Oncology Patients ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Risk Assessment Models ◽  
Increased Risk

SummaryVenous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer is associated with an increased morbidity and mortality, and its prevention is of major clinical importance. However, the VTE rates in the cancer population vary between 0.5% - 20%, depending on cancer-, treatment- and patient-related factors. The most important contributors to VTE risk are the tumor entity, stage and certain anticancer treatments. Cancer surgery represents a strong risk factor for VTE, and medical oncology patients are at increased risk of developing VTE, especially when receiving chemotherapy or immunomodulatory drugs. Also biomarkers have been investigated for their usefulness to predict risk of VTE (e.g. elevated leukocyte and platelet counts, soluble P-selectin, D-dimer, etc.). In order to identify cancer patients at high risk of VTE and to improve risk stratification, risk assessment models have been developed, which contain both clinical parameters and biomarkers. While primary thromboprophylaxis with lowmolecular- weight-heparin (LMWH) is recommended postoperatively for a period of up to 4 weeks after major cancer surgery, the evidence is less clear for medical oncology patients. Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical oncology patients is advocated, and is based on results of randomized controlled trials which evaluated the efficacy and safety of LMWH for prevention of VTE in hospitalized medically ill patients. In recent trials the benefit of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the ambulatory setting has been investigated. However, at the present stage primary thromboprophylaxis for prevention of VTE in these patients is still a matter of debate and cannot be recommended for all cancer outpatients.

274 High-dose medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) in metastatic cancer patients

1983 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 91
Author(s):  
P. Schmidt-Rhode ◽  
G. Sturm ◽  
K.-D. Schulz ◽  
H.J. Künzig ◽  
M. Wunsch
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Medroxyprogesterone Acetate ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
High Dose

Impact of cancer on emergency department outcomes.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18618-e18618
Author(s):  
Alexander S. Qian ◽  
Edmund M. Qiao ◽  
Vinit Nalawade ◽  
Rohith S. Voora ◽  
Nikhil V. Kotha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Hospital Admission ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Inpatient Admission ◽  
Cancer Site ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Increased Risk

e18618 Background: Cancer patients frequently utilize the Emergency Department (ED) for a variety of diagnoses, both related and unrelated to their cancer. Patients with cancer have unique risks related to their cancer and treatment which could influence ED-related outcomes. A better understanding of these risks could help improve risk-stratification for these patients and help inform future interventions. This study sought to define the increased risks cancer patients face for inpatient admission and hospital mortality among cancer patients presenting to the ED. Methods: From the National Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) we identified patients with and without a diagnosis of cancer presenting to the ED between 2016 and 2018. We used International Classification of Diseases, version 10 (ICD10-CM) codes to identify patients with cancer, and to identify patient’s presenting diagnosis. Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression models assessed the influence of cancer diagnoses on two endpoints: hospital admission from the ED, and inpatient hospital mortality. Results: There were 340 million weighted ED visits, of which 8.3 million (2.3%) occurred in patients with a cancer diagnosis. Compared to non-cancer patients, patients with cancer had an increased risk of inpatient admission (64.7% vs. 14.8%; p < 0.0001) and hospital mortality (4.6% vs. 0.5%; p < 0.0001). Factors associated with both an increased risk of hospitalization and death included older age, male gender, lower income level, discharge quarter, and receipt of care in a teaching hospital. We identified the top 15 most common presenting diagnoses among cancer patients, and among each of these diagnoses, cancer patients had increased risks of hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] range 2.0-13.2; all p < 0.05) and death (OR range 2.1-14.4; all p < 0.05) compared to non-cancer patients with the same diagnosis. Within the cancer patient cohort, cancer site was the most robust individual predictor associated with risk of hospitalization or death, with highest risk among patients with metastatic cancer, liver and lung cancers compared to the reference group of prostate cancer patients. Conclusions: Cancer patients presenting to the ED have high risks for hospital admission and death when compared to patients without cancer. Cancer patients represent a distinct population and may benefit from cancer-specific risk stratification or focused interventions tailored to improve outcomes in the ED setting.

scholarly journals Massage Therapy in Outpatient Cancer Care: A Metropolitan Area Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 851-855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia S. Cowen ◽  
Robin Streit Miccio ◽  
Bijal Parikh
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Metropolitan Area ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Therapeutic Touch ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Systematic Analysis

Massage offers cancer patients general quality of life benefits as well as alleviation of cancer-related symptoms/cancer-treatment–related symptoms including pain, anxiety, and fatigue. Little is known about whether massage is accessible to cancer patients who receive treatment in the outpatient setting and how massage is incorporated into the overall cancer treatment plan. Outpatient cancer centers (n = 78) in a single metropolitan area were included this mixed-methods project that included a systematic analysis of website information and a telephone survey. Massage was offered at only 40 centers (51.3% of total). A range of massage modalities were represented, with energy-based therapies (Reiki and Therapeutic Touch) most frequently provided. Although massage therapists are licensed health care providers in the states included in this analysis, massage was also provided by nurses, physical therapists, and other health care professionals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document