Search

Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of barrier films and dressings in preventing acute radiation dermatitis (RD)., Methods: OVID Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from 1946 to September 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials on the use of barrier films or dressings to prevent RD. For comparable outcomes between studies, pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random effects analysis in RevMan 5.4., Results: Fourteen and 11 studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses, respectively. Five types of barrier films used for RD were identified: Hydrofilm, StrataXRT®, Mepitel® Film, 3 M™ Cavilon™ No-Sting Barrier Film, and silver leaf nylon dressing. Hydrofilm and Mepitel Film significantly reduced the development of RD grade ≥ 2 in breast and head and neck cancer patients (RR 0.32, 95%CI 0.19, 0.56, p < 0.0001; RR 0.21, 95%CI 0.05, 0.89, p = 0.03, resp.). Moreover, Hydrofilm had a beneficial effect on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (SMD -0.75, 95%CI -1.2, -0.29, p = 0.001). The meta-analyses on the other barrier films did not show any significant effect., Conclusion: This review and meta-analysis demonstrated that Hydrofilm and Mepitel Film could effectively reduce RD severity and improve PROs. The evidence is generally weak for all the studies on barrier films and dressings due to a limited study number, high risk of bias, small sample sizes, and minimal comparable outcome measures. It's potential has been proven, but future research in this field is recommended to confirm the efficacy of these products and assess real-world feasibility., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: In the last months, Italy faced a COVID-19 emergency and implemented preventive measures in order to protect patients and healthcare providers from a disease outbreak. The pandemic control strategies impacted patient experience directly. Questionnaires evaluating patients reported measures (PREMs) may assess critical issues and represent a helpful tool to measure the patient perception of healthcare service. Our aim was to prospectively assess patient satisfaction about doctor-patient interaction in a high-volume radiation therapy and oncology center during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: Cancer patients receiving either systemic and/or radiation treatment underwent a survey. Two validated questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30, FACIT-TS-G version 1) and 14 specific questions evaluating patients' perception of COVID-19 measures were administered., Results: One hundred twenty-five patients admitted to our department from 1-30 April 2020 completed the questionnaires. The majority (66.4%) of patients were women and the most common disease was breast cancer (40%). The average Global Health Status (GHS) of EORTC QLQ-C30 was 61.67. Emotional functioning, social, and cognitive domains obtained scores of 75.48, 80.13, and 84.67, respectively. FACIT-TS-G results revealed 120 patients rated the treatments effective and 108 patients thought the side effects were the same as expected or better. Most (89.6%) rated their treatment good, very good, or excellent. Concerning COVID-19-related questions, patients reported overall very good level of information., Conclusions: Despite the introduction of strict COVID-19 control measures, there was a high level of cancer outpatient satisfaction. The satisfaction levels may influence compliance, continuity of treatments, and patient-doctor communication, impacting the quality of clinical care in the next phases of the pandemic.