Search

Background : The awareness of cancer therapy–related adverse cardiac effects is fueled by recent literature on cardiotoxicity incidence and detection strategies. Although this influences the sense of urgency, in current practice, cardiotoxicity monitoring and treatment is not structurally performed. With this study, we aimed to evaluate current perspectives on cardio-oncology and to assess needs, ultimately to determine an agenda for improvements in current practice. Material and methods: A national multidisciplinary 36-question survey was conducted. The survey was developed by a multidisciplinary team, theoretically based on an implementation checklist and distributed by email, through cardiology and oncology societies as well as social media. Results: One hundred ninety professionals completed the survey, of which 66 were cardiologists, 66 radiation oncologists, and 58 medical oncologists and hematologists. Many professionals were unaware of their specialisms' cardio-oncology guidelines: 62.1% of cardiologists and 29.3% of the hematologists and medical oncologists respectively. Many cardiologists (N = 46; 69.7%), radiation oncologists (N = 45; 68.2%), and hematologists and medical oncologists (N = 38; 65.5%) expressed that they did not have sufficient knowledge to treat cardio-oncology patients and would either refer a patient or aspire to gain more knowledge on the topic. Conclusion: The field of cardio-oncology is advancing rapidly, with progress in stratification and detection strategies leading to the development of new guidelines and consensus statements. However, the application of these guidelines in current practice appears to be lagging. Professionals express a need for additional training and a practical guideline including risk stratification, monitoring, and treatment strategies. Multidisciplinary discussion and consensus on cardio-oncology care is vital to improve implementation of cardio-oncology guidelines, ultimately to improve cardiac care for oncology patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The added value of measuring patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for delivering patient-centered care and assessment of healthcare quality is increasingly evident. However, healthcare system wide data collection initiatives are hampered by the proliferation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and conflicting data collection standards. As part of a national initiative of the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport we developed a consensus-based standard set of generic PROs and PROMs to be implemented across Dutch medical specialist care. Methods: A working group of mandated representatives of umbrella organizations involved in Dutch medical specialist care, together with PROM experts and patient organizations worked through a structured, consensus-driven co-creation process. This included literature reviews, online expert and working group meetings, and feedback from national patient- and umbrella organizations. The 'PROM-cycle' methodology was used to select feasible, valid, and reliable PROMs to obtain domain scores for each of the PROs included in the set. Results: Eight PROs across different domains of health were ultimately endorsed: symptoms (pain & fatigue), functioning (physical, social/participation, mental [anxiety & depression]), and overarching (quality of life & perceived overall health). A limited number of generic PROMs was endorsed. PROMIS short forms were selected as the preferred instruments for all PROs. Several recommendations were formulated to facilitate healthcare system level adoption and implementation of the standard set. Conclusions: We developed a consensus-based standard set of Generic PROMs and a set of recommendations to facilitate healthcare system wide implementation across Dutch medical specialist care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Complementary interventions for persons with severe mental illness (SMI) focus on both personal recovery and illness self-management. This paper aimed to identify the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) associated with the most relevant and meaningful change in persons with SMI who attended the Illness Management and Recovery Programme (IMR). Methods: The effect of the IMR was measured with PROMs concerning recovery, illness self-management, burden of symptoms and quality of life (QoL). From the QoL measures, an anchor was chosen based on the most statistically significant correlations with the PROMs. Then, we estimated the minimal important difference (MID) for all PROMs using an anchor-based method supported by distribution-based methods. The PROM with the highest outcome for effect score divided by MID (the effect/MID index) was considered to be a measure of the most relevant and meaningful change. Results: All PROMs showed significant pre–post-effects. The QoL measure 'General Health Perception (Rand-GHP)' was identified as the anchor. Based on the anchor method, the Mental Health Recovery Measure (MHRM) showed the highest effect/MID index, which was supported by the distribution-based methods. Because of the modifying gender covariate, we stratified the MID calculations. In most MIDs, the MHRM showed the highest effect/MID indexes. Conclusion: Taking into account the low sample size and the gender covariate, we conclude that the MHRM was capable of showing the most relevant and meaningful change as a result of the IMR in persons with SMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

B Correction to: Quality of Life Research b https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-022-03328-3 In the original publication, one of the co-author names was mistakenly misspelled as "Jan Hazelet" instead of "Jan Hazelzet". Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Evidence Based Practice is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Evidence Based Practice is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Evidence Based Practice is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Evidence Based Practice is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Evidence Based Practice is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of TSG: Tijdschrift Voor Gezondheidswetenschappen is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Evidence Based Practice is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Evidence Based Practice is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Evidence Based Practice is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Critical Care (15744280) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Evidence Based Practice is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)