Search

To evaluate the implementation of a web-based system of screening for symptoms and needs in people with diverse cancers in a general hospital in Australia.This was a prospective, single-arm, pragmatic intervention study. After local adaptation of an online portal and training, cancer nurses were asked to register patients to screen via the portal in clinic or at home. Symptoms were scored according to severity, and scores above cut-off were reported to nurses for assessment and management, according to best practice.Fifteen nurses working across diverse tumour types agreed to approach patients for screening. Of these, 7 nurses approached 68 patients, with 5 approaching more than 1 during the 7-month study period. Forty-seven (69%) patients completed screening, and 22 rescreened at least once. At first screening, 33 (70%) patients reported at least one symptom, most commonly tiredness (n = 27; 57%), reduced wellbeing (n = 24; 51%) and drowsiness (n = 17; 36%). Of the total 75 screens undertaken during the study, 56 (75%) identified at least one symptom, and 22 (29%) identified at least one severe symptom. All patients with a positive first screen were followed up by a nurse assessment and intervention-mostly reassurance (n = 19, 59%) or referral to another health professional (n = 11, 34%).Screening for symptoms and needs using a web-based portal identified many unmet needs, but the uptake of this intervention by nurses and patients was lower than expected.

OBJECTIVE: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, use of telehealth to deliver care was recommended across the Australian health system. This study aims to explore the barriers and enablers to delivery of psycho-oncology services via telehealth and attitudes to use of telehealth in psycho-oncology. METHODS: Twenty-one psycho-oncology clinicians participated in semi-structured telephone interviews. Transcribed interviews were thematically analysed using the framework method. RESULTS: Three key themes were identified which described the overall experience of delivering psycho-oncology services via telehealth: (1) Context Matters-for whom is telehealth effective, when is it less effective; (2) Therapy content and telehealth implementation; (3) Recommendations for Sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: These insights into the barriers and enablers to delivering psycho-oncology services via telehealth inform future research and clinical practice. While there is support for the continued use of telehealth in psycho-oncology, there are significant improvements needed to ensure effective implementation and continued benefit.

EDITOR—Dr Foster's case notes on adverse events in hospitals make alarming reading for patients.1 However, evidence shows that involving patients as partners in decisions about and management of drug treatment acts as a safeguard against errors. Patients who understand their drug treatment are better placed to …

I support Mintzes’ concern about protecting the public from covert drugs promotion.1 2 But her fear and dislike of the drug industry has blinded her to the realisation that the control of information by well intentioned health professionals is unhelpful to patients. …

EDITOR—I agree with Cuervo and Aronson's key point that better information is needed about all the effects of healthcare interventions, both beneficial and harmful.1 However, the article implies that such information, suitably reported, analysed and integrated, should …

EDITOR—Bonati and Pandolfini write of the need for a European formulary aimed at helping those who prescribe for children or who dispense for or give drugs to them.1 Better information about medicines for children is …

The relative roles of supportive care and pharmacotherapy in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal are not established. A reliable and validated withdrawal severity assessment scale (Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol, CIWA-A) was developed to assess initially and then follow the clinical course of 38 hospitalized chronic alcoholics requiring hospitalization for withdrawal but without serious concurrent medical or surgical problems. Supportive care, consisting of standardized half-hourly patient assessment (CIWA-A) and nursing care, was used as the initial treatment for all patients. Twenty-eight (74%) patients with clinical supportive care successes within 8 hours, 75% within 4 hours. Two responding patients subsequently developed evidence of withdrawal at 48 hours (hallucinations) and 72 hours (seizure). Ten patients (26%) did not respond to supportive care and required drug therapy in addition. Responders to supportive care drink more by history and have less severe liver disease than nonresponders. There are no other apparent predictors of the patients who require drug therapy. Three quarters of hospitalized patients, without serious medical complications, in alcohol withdrawal respond to intensive supportive care. However, pharmacotherapy is essential for nonresponders and patients with hallucinations.