Search

Introduction and hypothesis Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are helpful instruments when measuring and reporting changes in patient health status (Al Sayah et al. J Patient Rep Outcomes 5 (Suppl 2):99, 2021) such as the health-related quality of life (HrQoL) of women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) aims to increase capacity for women to report surgical outcomes through the collection of HrQoL data (Ruseckaite et al. Qual Life Res. 2021) but currently lacks a pain-specific PROM for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDs), particularly POP and SUI. This review aims to systematically review the existing literature and identify instruments that measure pain in women with POP and SUI for inclusion within the APFPR, which reports on complications from these conditions. Methods We conducted a literature search on OVID MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and EMCARE databases in addition to Google Scholar and grey literature to identify studies from inception to April 2021. Full-text studies were included if they used PROMs to measure pain in women with POP and SUI. Two authors independently screened articles, extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Results From 2001 studies, 23 publications describing 19 different PROMs were included for analysis. Eight of these instruments were specific to the pelvic floor; four were only specific to pain and used across multiple disorders; three were generic quality of life instruments and four were other non-validated instruments such as focus group interviews. These instruments were not specific to pain in women with POP or SUI, as they did not identify all relevant domains such as the sensation, region and duration of pain, or incidents where onset of pain occurs. Conclusions The findings of this review suggest there are no current PROMs that are suitable pain-specific instruments for women with POP or SUI. This knowledge may inform and assist in the development of a new PROM to be implemented into the APFPR.

Introduction and hypothesis Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) are common pelvic floor disorders (PFDs). Owing to significant adverse events associated with mesh-related pelvic floor procedures (PFPs) in a proportion of the surgically treated population, and deficits in collection and reporting of these events, the Australian Government identified an urgent need for a tracking mechanism to improve safety and quality of care. The Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) was recently established following the 2018 Senate Committee Inquiry with the aim of tracking outcomes of PFP involving the use of devices and/or prostheses, with the objective of improving the health outcomes of women who undergo these procedures. This paper will describe the APFPR’s aims, development, implementation and possible challenges on the way to its establishment. Methods The APFPR has been developed and implemented in accordance with the national operating principles of clinical quality registries (CQRs). The minimum datasets (MDS) for the registry’s database have been developed using a modified Delphi process, and data are primarily being collected from participating surgeons. Patient recruitment is based on an opt-out approach or a waiver of consent. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) providing additional health and outcome information will be obtained from participating women to support safety monitoring of mesh-related adverse events. Results Currently in the Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) there are 32 sites from various jurisdictions across Australia, that have obtained relevant ethics and governance approvals to start patient recruitment and data collection as of January 2023. Additionally, there are two sites that are awaiting governance review and five sites that are having documentation compiled for submission. Seventeen sites have commenced patient registration and have entered data into the database. Thus far, we have 308 patients registered in the APFPR database. The registry also published its first status report and a consumer-friendly public report in 2022. Conclusions The registry will act as a systematic tracking mechanism by collecting outcomes on PFP, especially those involving devices and/or prostheses to improve safety and quality of care.

Introduction and hypothesis The Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) collects both clinical and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data on women undergoing surgery using a prosthesis such as mesh for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The registry lacks a suitable instrument to assess pain in women following mesh surgery for SUI and POP. This qualitative study describes the views on pain following mesh surgery in women and clinicians through the development of a conceptual framework, which may inform the development of a new instrument for the APFPR. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with women following mesh surgery for POP and SUI (n=17) and clinicians (n=6) in Victoria, Australia. We sought to reveal aspects of any sort of pain after a pelvic floor procedure. Interviews covered sensation, region, continuity of pain, triggers, and the mode and method of administration for a new pain-specific patient-reported outcome measure. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results We identified the important components of pain felt by women with POP and SUI after surgery using mesh. From the seven themes outlined, a conceptual framework was developed compiling related components of pain into six specific domains. Conclusions This study identifies the important components of pain felt by women following mesh surgery. It is hoped that the development of a pain-specific PROM, as supported by clinicians, will assist in the timely and appropriate diagnosis and management of POP and SUI.

Background: The Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) captures clinical and surgical data in women undergoing pelvic floor procedures. The inclusion of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the APFPR is a critical activity providing the additional patient perspective of their condition prior to surgery as well as monitoring beyond the usual post-surgical follow-up time. This study aimed to evaluate the acceptability of seven PROMs for women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and to determine the most suitable instrument for the APFPR. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with women with POP (n = 15) and their treating clinicians (n = 11) in Victoria, Australia. Interview topics covered appropriateness, content, and acceptability of seven POP-specific instruments identified through the literature to determine their suitability and acceptability for inclusion in the APFPR. We analysed the interview data using conventional content analysis. Results: All study participants agreed that PROMs were needed for the APFPR. Both women and clinicians suggested that some of the instruments were ambiguous, too long and confusing. The Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire was accepted widely amongst women and clinicians and recommended for inclusion in the APFPR. All participants agreed it would be appropriate to capture PROMs before surgery, and then followed up post-surgically. Email, phone call or postal mail-out were the preferred options for PROMs data collection. Conclusion: Most women and clinicians supported incorporating PROMs in the APFPR. Study participants believed that capturing PROMs would have potential use in individual care and improve outcomes of women with POP.

The objective was to overview the literature on the existing pelvic floor procedure registries and databases and to identify patient demographic, clinical and/or patient-reported data items for inclusion in the Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) Minimum Data Set (MDS). We conducted a literature search on the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases in addition to Google Scholar and grey literature to identify studies in the period January 2008 to January 2020. All were English studies of registries and databases on female adults undergoing surgery for pelvic floor disorders including stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Studies were assessed on demographic and clinical patient characteristics, procedure or treatment type, health-related quality of life, adverse events and safety outcomes, captured by pelvic floor procedure registries or databases that have been established to date. From 1662 studies, 29 publications describing 22 different pelvic floor registries and databases were included for analysis, 12 (55%) of which were multicentre. Six (27%) registries and databases involved solely SUI, eight (36%) were regarding POP, and the remaining eight (36%) focussed on both conditions. The majority of registries and databases captured similar details on patient characteristics, comorbidities and other clinical features, procedure or treatment type, health-related quality of life, adverse events, safety and efficacy. The findings of this scoping review will assist in determining the MDS for the APFPR, an initiative of the Australian government, to improve health and quality of life outcomes of women who undergo pelvic floor reconstructive procedures.

Clinical registries that monitor and review outcomes for patients with cystic fibrosis have existed internationally for many decades. However, their purpose continues to evolve and now includes the capability to support clinical effectiveness research, clinical trials and Phase IV studies, and international data comparisons and projects. To achieve this, registries must regularly update the information that they collect and ensure design that is adaptable and flexible to changing needs. The Australian Cystic Fibrosis Data Registry commenced in 1998, and in 2018-19 undertook a transformation to enable it to meet the needs of multiple stakeholders into the future. This included a comprehensive, multidisciplinary review of the registry's data elements, and a redesign and rebuild of the registry's database. The data element review comprised the processes of alignment, comparison, selection, consolidation, revision and definition of finalised data elements. The database redesign included attention to each of the registry functions of data collection, storage and management, and reporting. The revision of a national data collection system is a time-intensive process, and requires significant clinical and other expert engagement. The resulting database, while being continually refined, is now fit for purpose to support Australian clinicians and patients with CF to receive best practice care.

Rasa Ruseckaite, Ashika D Maharaj, Karolina Krysinska, Joanne Dean, Susannah Ahern Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaCorrespondence: Rasa RuseckaiteDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, AustraliaTel +61 3 9903 0437Email rasa.ruseckaite@monash.eduPurpose: Patient-centred and value-based health-care organisations are increasingly recognising the importance of the patient perspective in the measurement and evaluation of health outcomes. This has been primarily implemented using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Clinical quality registries (CQRs) are specifically designed to improve direct clinical care, benchmark health-care provision and inform health service planning and policy. Despite CQRs having incorporated the patient perspective to support the evaluation of health-care provision, no evidence-based guidelines for inclusion of PROMs in CQRs exist. This has led to substantial heterogeneity in capturing and reporting PROMs within this setting. This publication is the first in a series describing the development of evidence-informed guidelines for PROMs inclusion within CQRs in Australia.Methods: This study consisted of three components: 1) a literature review of existing evidence of guidelines, enablers, barriers, and lessons learnt of PROMs use within the CQRs setting; 2) a survey of Australian CQRs to determine current practices for PROMs use and reporting; and 3) development of a preliminary conceptual framework for PROMs inclusion in CQRs.Results: Content analysis of the literature review and survey of 66 Australian registries elicited eight categories for the conceptual framework. The framework covers eight components: rationale, setting, ethics, selection of PROMs, administration, data management, statistical methods, feedback, and reporting.Conclusion: We developed a preliminary conceptual framework, which classified findings, from both the literature and the survey, into broad categories ranging from initial development to outcome dissemination providing the structure for development of guidelines in the next phase of this project, engaging national and international leaders in health-related quality of life research, clinicians, researchers, patient advocates and consumers.Keywords: quality of life, registry, outcomes, patient voice

Purpose Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are valuable tools in evaluating the outcomes of surgical treatment health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and may be incorporated into related clinical quality registries. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating PROMs into the Australian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR). Methods Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with women with SUI (N = 12) and their managing clinicians (N = 11) in Victoria, Australia. Interview topics covered content and face validity, appropriateness, and acceptability of three incontinence-specific, two pain, one anxiety and depression, one sexual function and one patient global impression of improvement instruments identified through the literature to determine their suitability and acceptability for the APFPR. We analysed interview data into topics using conventional content analysis. Results Study participants agreed that PROMs were needed for the APFPR. Both participant groups suggested that some of the instruments were ambiguous, therefore only three instruments (one incontinence-specific, sexual function and patient global impression of improvement) will be included in the APFPR. Both clinicians and women agreed it would be appropriate to answer PROMs at baseline and then at 6- and 12-month postsurgically. Email, phone call and mail-out of the instruments were the preferred options for administration. Conclusion Most women and clinicians supported the feasibility of incorporating PROMs in the APFPR. Participants believed the PROMs would demonstrate useful aggregate HRQoL data and have potential for use in individual care.

IntroductionThe occurrence of thyroid cancer is increasing throughout the developed world and since the 1990s has become the fastest increasing malignancy. In 2014, a total of 2693 Australians and 302 New Zealanders were diagnosed with thyroid cancer, with this number projected to rise to 3650 in 2018. The purpose of this protocol is to establish a binational population-based clinical quality registry with the aim of monitoring and improving the quality of care provided to patients diagnosed with thyroid cancer in Australia and New Zealand.Methods and analysisThe Australian and New Zealand Thyroid Cancer Registry (ANZTCR) aims to capture clinical data for all patients over the age of 16 years with thyroid cancer, confirmed by histopathology report, who have been diagnosed, assessed or treated at a contributing hospital. A multidisciplinary steering committee was formed which, with operational support from Monash University, established the ANZTCR in early 2017. The pilot phase of the registry is currently operating in Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia, with over 20 sites expected to come on board across Australia in 2018. A modified Delphi process was undertaken to determine the clinical quality indicators to be reported by the registry, and a minimum data set was developed comprising information regarding thyroid cancer diagnosis, pathology, surgery and 90-day follow-up.Future plansThe establishment of the ANZTCR provides the opportunity for Australia and New Zealand to further understand current practice in the treatment of thyroid cancer and identify variation in outcomes. The engagement of endocrine surgeons in supporting this initiative is crucial. While the pilot registry has a focus on early clinical outcomes, it is anticipated that future collection of longer term outcome data particularly for patients with poor prognostic disease will add significant further value to the registry.

Despite the common practice of combining dexamethasone (Dex) with bortezomib (Bz) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), until now there has been few prospective trials undertaken. We undertook a trial that recapitulated the original APEX study except that dexamethasone was incorporated from cycle 1. We also incorporated an exploratory maintenance component to the study. Twenty sites enrolled 100 relapsed/or refractory MM patients utilizing eight 21 day cycles of IV Bz [1.3 mg/m(2) ; Day (D) 1, 4, 8, 11] and three 35 day cycles; Bz (1.3 mg/m(2) ; Day (D) 1, 8, 15, 22). Our study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00335348). Patients with stable disease or better received maintenance Bz (1.3 mg/m(2) ) every 14 days until progression. Dexamethasone (20 mg) was given for 2 days with each Bz dose. A prospectively defined matched-analysis of primary (overall response rate; ORR) and secondary endpoints [Complete Response (CR) and time to progression (TTP)] compared our cohort to those on the Bz arm of the APEX trial. The addition of Dex improved ORR by 20% (56% vs. 36%) [odds ratio 0.44 (0.24-0.80)]. The median TTP was also significantly longer (10.1 vs. 5.1 months) (hazard ratio 0.50, 95% CI: 0.35-0.72, P = 0.0002) and our landmark analysis demonstrated that this was largely due to the early use of dexamethasone, as we were unable to demonstrate any benefit of bortezomib/dexamethasone maintenance therapy.

We report results from a study exploring the combination of romidepsin, bortezomib, and dexamethasone for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) previously treated with > 1 prior therapy. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination using a novel accelerated dose-escalation schedule in patients with relapsed or refractory MM. The secondary objective was to determine overall response (OR), time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). The MTD identified was bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 (days 1, 4, 8, and 11), dexamethasone 20 mg (days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12), and romidepsin 10 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, and 15) every 28 days. Thrombocytopenia (64%) was the most common ≥ grade 3 hematologic toxicity. Peripheral neuropathy occurred in 76% of patients (n = 19) (≥ grade 3, 8%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1%-26%). Maintenance romidepsin 10 mg/m2 (on days 1 and 8 of a 28-day cycle) proved feasible, with 12 patients receiving a median of 7.5 cycles (range: 1-29). An OR (M-protein) of > minor response (MR) was seen in 18 of 25 patients (72%); 2 (8%) had complete remissions (CRs) and 13 (52%) had partial responses (PRs), including 7 (28%) with very good PRs (VGPRs). The median TTP was 7.2 (95% CI: 5.5-19.6) months, and the median OS was > 36 months. This regimen shows activity with manageable toxicity and warrants further evaluation. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00431990.

Medication errors are an important problem for the UK National Health Service (NHS). The aim of this study was to implement a novel quantitative modelling method to predict rates of preventable adverse drug events (ADEs) and identify interventions with the greatest potential for reducing the burden of medication errors in secondary care. A generic model structure was developed to describe the medication process in secondary care. The model followed pathways from error points through to the outcomes of undetected errors. The model was populated using quantitative estimates and calibration methods to describe the incidence and impacts of medication errors. The effectiveness of potential interventions was estimated by describing the impact of the interventions at different stages of the medication process. The model predicts the range of preventable adverse drug events that occur annually in a 400-bed hospital in the UK to be between 200 and 700. Of the interventions evaluated, computerised physician order entry systems and increased numbers of ward pharmacists are predicted to have the greatest impact on the number of preventable ADEs. The analysis provides a relative analysis of the interventions, and indicates priorities for research allocation decisions. The model highlights the complexity of the relationship between medication errors and adverse events, and the extreme attention to detail required in the development of interventions, and in their evaluation.

Composition of tumour immune cell infiltrates correlates with response to treatment and overall survival (OS) in several cancer settings. We retrospectively examined immune cells present in diagnostic bone marrow aspirates from paediatric patients with B‐cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Our analysis identified a sub‐group (∼30% of patients) with >2.37% CD20 and >6.05% CD7 expression, which had 100% OS, and a sub‐group (∼30% of patients) with ≤2.37% CD20 and ≤6.05% CD7 expression at increased risk of treatment failure (66.7% OS, P < 0.05). Immune cell infiltrate at diagnosis may predict treatment response and could provide a means to enhance immediate treatment risk stratification.

Objective: To develop a core set of clinical indicators to measure the quality of care provided to men with prostate cancer. Design: A modified Delphi study involving interviews of key informants and two rounds of survey to obtain consensus on the indicator set. Setting: Melbourne, Australia Participants: n=20, including specialists involved in prostate cancer management (urology, radiation oncology, medical oncology, nursing, psychology, palliative care) epidemiologists, scientists, consumers and a policy advisor. Intervention(s): A literature review was undertaken to identify potential quality indicators. Interviews were undertaken to ensure completeness of the set and explore potential for inclusion of novel indicators. Survey of Delphi panel participants was conducted to refine the list.

Despite the common practice of combining dexamethasone (Dex) with bortezomib (Bz) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), until now there has been few prospective trials undertaken. We undertook a trial that recapitulated the original APEX study except that dexamethasone was incorporated from cycle 1. We also incorporated an exploratory maintenance component to the study. Twenty sites enrolled 100 relapsed/or refractory MM patients utilizing eight 21 day cycles of IV Bz [1.3 mg/m(2) ; Day (D) 1, 4, 8, 11] and three 35 day cycles; Bz (1.3 mg/m(2) ; Day (D) 1, 8, 15, 22). Our study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00335348). Patients with stable disease or better received maintenance Bz (1.3 mg/m(2) ) every 14 days until progression. Dexamethasone (20 mg) was given for 2 days with each Bz dose. A prospectively defined matched-analysis of primary (overall response rate; ORR) and secondary endpoints [Complete Response (CR) and time to progression (TTP)] compared our cohort to those on the Bz arm of the APEX trial. The addition of Dex improved ORR by 20% (56% vs. 36%) [odds ratio 0.44 (0.24-0.80)]. The median TTP was also significantly longer (10.1 vs. 5.1 months) (hazard ratio 0.50, 95% CI: 0.35-0.72, P = 0.0002) and our landmark analysis demonstrated that this was largely due to the early use of dexamethasone, as we were unable to demonstrate any benefit of bortezomib/dexamethasone maintenance therapy.

To describe the characteristics of patients with and without positive surgical margins (PSMs) and to analyse the impact of PSMs on secondary cancer treatment after radical prostatectomy (RP), with short-term follow-up.We analysed data from 2385 consecutive patients treated using RP, who were notified to the Prostate Cancer Registry by 37 hospitals in Victoria, Australia between August 2008 and February 2012. Independent and multivariate models were constructed to predict the likelihood of PSMs. Independent and multivariate predictors of secondary treatment after RP in the initial 12 months after diagnosis were also assessed.Data on PSM status were collected for 2219/2385 (93%) patients. In total 592/2175 (27.2%) RPs resulted in PSMs; 102/534 (19.1%) in the low-risk group, 317/1218 (26.0%) in the intermediate-risk group, 153/387 (39.5%) in the high-risk group, and 9/11 (81.8%) in the very-high-risk disease group of patients. Patients having surgery in a hospital where10 RPs occur each year were significantly more likely to have a PSM (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.93) and those in the intermediate-, high- or very-high-risk groups (IRR 1.34, 95% CI 1.09-1.65, P = 0.007, IRR 1.96, 95% CI 1.57-2.45, P0.001 and IRR 3.81, 95% CI 2.60-5.60, P0.001, respectively) were significantly more likely to have a PSM than those in the low-risk group (IRR 2.50, 95% CI 1.23-5.11, P = 0.012). Patients with PSMs were significantly less likely to have been treated at a private hospital than a public hospital (IRR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.93, P = 0.006) or to have undergone robot-assisted RP (IRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55-0.87; P = 0.002) than open RP. Of the 2182 patients who underwent RP in the initial 12 months after diagnosis, 1987 (91.1%) received no subsequent treatment, 123 (5.6%) received radiotherapy, 47 (2.1%) received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and 23 (1.1%) received a combination of radiotherapy and ADT. Two patients (0.1%) received chemotherapy combined with another treatment. At a multivariate level, predictors of additional treatment after RP in the initial 12 months included having a PSM compared with a negative surgical margin (odds ratio [OR] 5.61, 95% CI 3.82-8.22, P0.001); pT3 compared with pT2 disease (OR 4.72, 95% CI 2.69-8.23, P0.001); and having high- or very-high-risk disease compared with low-risk disease (OR 4.36, 95% CI 2.24-8.50, P0.001 and OR 4.50, 95% CI 1.34-15.17, P = 0.015, respectively). Patient age, hospital location and hospital type were not associated with secondary treatment. Patients undergoing robot-assisted RP were significantly less likely to receive additional treatment than those receiving open RP (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.88, P = 0.010).These data indicate an important association between hospital status and PSMs, with patients who underwent RP in private hospitals less likely than those in public hospitals to have a PSM. Patients treated in lower-volume hospitals were more likely to have a PSM and less likely to receive additional treatment after surgery in the initial 12 months, and robot-assisted RP was associated with fewer PSMs than was open RP in this non-randomized observational study. PSM status and pathological T3 disease are both important and independent predictors of secondary cancer treatment for patients undergoing RP. A robot-assisted RP approach appears to decrease the likelihood of subsequent treatment, when compared with the open approach.

Objectives The aim of this study is to estimate the potential costs and benefits of three key interventions (computerized physician order entry [CPOE], additional ward pharmacists and bar coding) to help prioritize research to reduce medication errors. Methods A generic model structure was developed to describe the incidence and impacts of medication errors in hospitals. The model follows pathways from medication error points at alternative stages of the medication pathway through to the outcomes of undetected errors. The model was populated from a systematic review of the medication errors literature combined with novel probabilistic calibration methods. Cost ranges were applied to the interventions, the treatment of preventable adverse drug events (pADEs), and the value of the health lost as a result of an ADE. Results The model predicts annual health service costs of between £0.3 million and £1 million for the treatment of pADEs in a 400-bed acute hospital in the UK. Including only health service costs, it is uncertain whether any of the three interventions will produce positive net benefits, particularly if high intervention costs are assumed. When the monetary value of lost health is included, all three interventions have a high probability of producing positive net benefits with a mean estimate of around £31.5 million for CPOE over a five-year time horizon. Conclusions The results identify the potential cost-effectiveness of interventions aimed at medication errors, as well as identifying key drivers of cost-effectiveness that should be specifically addressed in the design of primary evaluations of medication error interventions.

Background Care pathways can be complex, often involving multiple care providers and as such are recognised as containing multiple opportunities for error. Prospective hazard analysis methods may be useful for evaluating care provided across primary and secondary care pathway boundaries. These methods take into account the views of users (staff and patients) when determining where potential hazards may lie. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of prospective hazard analysis methods when assessing quality and safety in care pathways that lie across primary and secondary care boundaries. Methods Development of a process map of the care pathway for patients entering into a Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) supported discharge programme. Triangulation of information from: care process mapping, semi-structured interviews with COPD patients, semi-structured interviews with COPD staff, two round modified Delphi study and review of prioritised quality and safety challenges by health care staff. Results Interview themes emerged under the headings of quality of care and patient safety. Quality and safety concerns were mostly raised in relation to communication, for example, communication with other hospital teams. The three highest ranked safety concerns from the modified Delphi review were: difficulties in accessing hospital records, information transfer to primary care and failure to communicate medication changes to primary care. Conclusion This study has demonstrated the feasibility of using mixed methods to review the quality and safety of care in a care pathway. By using multiple research methods it was possible to get a clear picture of service quality variations and also to demonstrate which points in the care pathway had real potential for patient safety incidents or system failures to occur. By using these methods to analyse one condition specific care pathway it was possible to uncover a number of hospital level problems. A number of safety challenges were systems related; these were therefore difficult to improve at care team level. Study results were used by National Health Service (NHS) stakeholders to implement solutions to problems identified in the review.

Aim: To explore the factor structure, reliability, and potential usefulness of a patient safety climate questionnaire in UK health care. Setting: Four acute hospital trusts and nine primary care trusts in England. Methods: The questionnaire used was the 27 item Teamwork and Safety Climate Survey. Thirty three healthcare staff commented on the wording and relevance. The questionnaire was then sent to 3650 staff within the 13 NHS trusts, seeking to achieve at least 600 responses as the basis for the factor analysis. 1307 questionnaires were returned (36% response). Factor analyses and reliability analyses were carried out on 897 responses from staff involved in direct patient care, to explore how consistently the questions measured the underlying constructs of safety climate and teamwork. Results: Some questionnaire items related to multiple factors or did not relate strongly to any factor. Five items were discarded. Two teamwork factors were derived from the remaining 11 teamwork items and three safety climate factors were derived from the remaining 11 safety items. Internal consistency reliabilities were satisfactory to good (Cronbach’s alpha ⩾0.69 for all five factors). Conclusions: This is one of the few studies to undertake a detailed evaluation of a patient safety climate questionnaire in UK health care and possibly the first to do so in primary as well as secondary care. The results indicate that a 22 item version of this safety climate questionnaire is useable as a research instrument in both settings, but also demonstrates a more general need for thorough validation of safety climate questionnaires before widespread usage.

Purpose The study aimed to evaluate mature outcomes of a Phase I/II high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRB) boost protocol. Methods and materials We analyzed data from 88 patients with T1a–T3a, N0, M0 prostate adenocarcinoma treated on a prospective Phase I/II HDRB boost protocol of 16 (n = 47) or 20 Gy (n = 41) in four fractions, without planned androgen deprivation therapy. HDRB was added to 46 Gy of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Outcomes were compared to a contemporaneous retrospective cohort of 104 patients receiving 66 Gy EBRT monotherapy. The primary endpoint was freedom from biochemical failure, defined as a 2 ng/mL rise above the lowest prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (FFbFn2), whereas the American Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology consensus definition (ACD) was used for comparative purposes. Results For the HDRB cohort, the overall actuarial 5-year FFbFn2 was 67.4% (95% CI: 58.2–75.5%). For the HDRB doses of 16 and 20 Gy, the 5-year FFbFn2 rates were 58.8% (95% CI: 41.9–72.5%) and 77.3% (95% CI: 64.4–88.3%), respectively (log-rank test p = 0.07). Compared to men treated with 66 Gy EBRT, using multivariate analysis, there was no significant benefit to using HDRB with the FFbFn2 outcome (p = 0.52), yet the ACD suggested a significant advantage (hazard ratio 0.50, 95% CI: 0.29–0.86, p = 0.011). There was a trend to better FFbFn2 outcomes with increasing biologically effective doses (p = 0.09), which was significant using the ACD (p = 0.0003). Conclusions The data support HDRB boost as a potential means of dose escalation in prostate cancer. Significant findings using the ACD need to be validated with contemporary biochemical failure definitions. Prospective trials to optimize fractionation and evaluate outcomes in comparison to contemporary EBRT techniques are warranted.

Working jointly, a community staff nurse from a district nursing team within North Bradford Primary Care Trust, and a health visitor (who has a remit to work with the elderly) audited their GP practice’s method of offering all over-75-year-olds a routine annual health check. They found that the method, level and nature of the assessments were not standardized and were organization-led rather than patient-led. This group of patients was not receiving the best service that could be offered. A more integrated approach was needed, and the idea of a ‘health awareness day’ was developed. Evaluation of the day showed that it was successful in raising health awareness and in increasing referrals to the GP for a variety of problems.

Abstract 5037 Various bortezomib (Bz)-based combinations are being examined in the context of relapsed and/ or refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM). Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors (HDACIs) are a novel group of agents that effect a variety of cellular and intracellular processes by enhancing the acetylation of histone and non-histone targets. Romidepsin (Romi), a cyclic tetrapeptide, is a class 1 HDACi. Initial reports suggested that various HDACi induced QTc prolongation as a class effect, although subsequently it has been shown that careful electrolyte management prevent this from being a clinical problem. 32 patients (pts) have been enrolled in a Phase I/II Trial of Romi, Bz and dexamethasone (Dex) in relapsed or refractory MM. The maximum tolerated dose (Romi 10mg/m2, Bz 1.3mg/m2 and Dex 20mg) was determined in the first 6 pts with Romi given on day 1, 8 & 15, Bz on D1, 4, 8 and 11 and Dex D1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11 and 12 of a 28 day cycle (n=25). In an ongoing expanded Phase IIb cohort Romi is only given on day 1 & 8 of a 21 day cycle (n=7/15). Romidepsin was initially given as the standard 4 hour infusion. However animal and clinical safety data support the use of 1hr Romi infusions. In the expansion cohort, the duration of Romi infusions was reduced to 1 hour from cycle 2. To monitor safety (specifically QT interval), ECGs were mandatory pre and post the 4 hour infusions in cycle one and the 1 hour infusions in cycle 2 and reviewed prior to the continuation of the 1 hour infusion from cycle 3. Prolongation of QTc was defined as an increase of 33%, or 60 msec, or QTc 3500 msec. The maintenance of serum potassium > 4.0 mmol/L and magnesium >0.85 mmol/L prior to Romi infusion was mandated. Any patients in the initial cohort remaining on study and still receiving Romi were eligible to move to 1 hour Romi infusions with ECG monitoring during the first cycle. 32 patients have received 598 Romi infusions. 525 infusions have been given over 4 hours and 73 over 1 hour. 19 pts only received 4 hour infusions and 13 pts received at least one 1 hour infusion of Romi. The phase I/II cohort (n=25, median lines of therapy 2 (range1-3)) received 4 hour infusions, the overall response (CR+PR+MR) by modified EBMT criteria was 76% in 21 assessable patients. 2pts had CR (10%), 13 PR (62%), 1 MR (4%), 4 pts had SD, and 1PD. The Phase IIb cohort (n=7, median lines of therapy 2 (range 1–4)) received 1 hour infusions and 6 pts are currently assessable for response with 3 PR and 3 MR. In the first 25 pts receiving the 4 hour infusions, 2 patients experienced arrhythmias during their first cycle, grade 2 atrial flutter possibly related to drug and sinus tachycardia definitely not related. 1pt developed severe ischaemic heart disease and 1pt has died, likely from a PE. Since the introduction of 1hr Romi infusions, only one patient has experienced a Grade 1 cardiac event of asymptomatic lateral T wave flattening and mild ST depression on ECG. This occurred in cycle one, with 4 hour infusions. Full cardiac assessment reveled no clinically significant abnormality. This patient went on to receive the 1 hour infusions without incident. The implementation of the 1 hour infusions has successfully reduced the overall treatment time with Romi/ Bz/ Dex without increase in toxicity. Although numbers are small the response rates appear similar to those using the 4 hour infusions. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Romidepsin and Velcade in combination for the treatment of relapsed/refractory myeloma. Prince:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Harrison:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

8151 Background: In relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), bortezomib (Btz) is often combined with dexamethasone (Dex), as adding Dex to Btz later in patients only achieving SD or PD improved overall resp...