Search

Background: Individual risk prediction of 5-year locoregional recurrence (LRR) and contralateral breast cancer (CBC) supports decisions regarding personalised surveillance. The previously developed INFLUENCE tool was rebuild, including a recent population and patients who received neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST)., Methods: Women, surgically treated for nonmetastatic breast cancer, diagnosed between 2012 and 2016, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Cox regression with restricted cubic splines was compared to Random Survival Forest (RSF) to predict five-year LRR and CBC risks. Separate models were developed for NST patients. Discrimination and calibration were assessed by 100x bootstrap resampling., Results: In the non-NST and NST group, 49,631 and 10,154 patients were included, respectively. Age, mode of detection, histology, sublocalisation, grade, pT, pN, hormonal receptor status ± endocrine treatment, HER2 status ± targeted treatment, surgery ± immediate reconstruction ± radiation therapy, and chemotherapy were significant predictors for LRR and/or CBC in non-NST patients. For NST patients this was similar, but excluding (y)pT and (y)pN status, and including presence of ductal carcinoma in situ, axillary lymph node dissection and pathologic complete response. For non-NST patients, the Cox and RSF models were integrated in the online tool with 5-year AUCs of 0.77 (95%CI:0.77-0.77) and 0.68 (95%CI:0.67-0.68)] for LRR and CBC prediction, respectively. For NST patients, the RSF model performed best (AUCs 0.77 (95%CI:0.76-0.78) and 0.73 (95%CI:0.69-0.76) for LRR and CBC, respectively). Regarding calibration, observed-predicted differences were all <1 %., Conclusion: This INFLUENCE 3.0 models showed moderate performance in LRR and CBC prediction. The models have been made available as online tool to enable clinical decision support regarding personalised follow-up., Competing Interests: Declaration of coompeting interest Tom A. Hueting declares employment at Evidencio. The other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is increasingly implemented in healthcare worldwide. Transparent measurement of the outcomes most important and relevant to patients is essential in VBHC, which is supported by a core set of most important quality indicators and outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a VBHC-burns core set for adult burn patients., Methods: A three-round modified national Delphi study, including 44 outcomes and 24 quality indicators, was conducted to reach consensus among Dutch patients, burn care professionals and researchers. Items were rated on a nine-point Likert scale and selected if ≥ 70% in each group considered an item 'important'. Subsequently, instruments quantifying selected outcomes were identified based on a literature review and were chosen in a consensus meeting using recommendations from the Dutch consensus-based standard set and the Dutch Centre of Expertise on Health Disparities. Time assessment points were chosen to reflect the burn care and patient recovery process. Finally, the initial core set was evaluated in practice, leading to the adapted VBHC-burns core set., Results: Twenty-seven patients, 63 burn care professionals and 23 researchers participated. Ten outcomes and four quality indicators were selected in the Delphi study, including the outcomes pain, wound healing, physical activity, self-care, independence, return to work, depression, itching, scar flexibility and return to school. Quality indicators included shared decision-making (SDM), the number of patients receiving aftercare, determination of burn depth, and assessment of active range of motion. After evaluation of its use in clinical practice, the core set included all items except SDM, which are assessed by 9 patient-reported outcome instruments or measured in clinical care. Assessment time points included are at discharge, 2 weeks, 3 months, 12 months after discharge and annually afterwards., Conclusion: A VBHC-burns core set was developed, consisting of outcomes and quality indicators that are important to burn patients and burn care professionals. The VBHC-burns core set is now systemically monitored and analysed in Dutch burn care to improve care and patient relevant outcomes. As improving burn care and patient relevant outcomes is important worldwide, the developed VBHC-burns core set could be inspiring for other countries., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Not applicable., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of patient-reported outcomes to improve burn care increases. Little is known on burn patients' views on what outcomes are most important, and about preferences regarding online Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Therefore, this study assessed what outcomes matter most to patients, and gained insights into patient preferences towards the use of online PROMs., Methods: Adult patients (≥18 years old), 3-36 months after injury completed a survey measuring importance of outcomes, separately for three time periods: during admission, short-term (<6 months) and long-term (6-24 months) after burn injury. Both open and closed-ended questions were used. Furthermore, preferences regarding the use of patient-reported outcome measures in burn care were queried., Results: A total of 140 patients were included (response rate: 27%). 'Not having pain' and 'good wound healing' were identified as very important outcomes. Also, 'physical functioning at pre-injury level', 'being independent' and 'taking care of yourself' were considered very important outcomes. The top-ten of most important outcomes largely overlapped in all three time periods. Most patients (84%) had no problems with online questionnaires, and many (67%) indicated that it should take up to 15 minutes. Patients' opinions differed widely on the preferred frequency of follow-up., Conclusions: Not having pain and good wound healing were considered very important during the whole recovery of burns; in addition, physical functioning at pre-injury level, being independent, and taking care of yourself were deemed very important in the short and long-term. These outcomes are recommended to be used in burn care and research, although careful selection of outcomes remains crucial as patients prefer online questionnaires up to 15 minutes., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors whose names are listed immediately below have no financial and personal relationships with other people or organisations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)