Integration of the social determinants of health into quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Quality monitoring is a critical component of high-performing cancer care systems. Quality indicators (QIs) are standardised, evidence-based measures of healthcare quality that allow healthcare systems to track performance, identify gaps in healthcare delivery and inform areas of priority for strategic planning. Social structures and economic systems that allow for unequal access to power and resources that shape health and health inequities can be described through the social determinants of health (SDoH) framework. Therefore, granular analysis of healthcare quality through SDoH frameworks is required to identify patient subgroups who may experience health inequity. Given the high burden of disease of colorectal cancer (CRC) and well-defined cancer care pathways, CRC is often the first disease site targeted by health systems for quality improvement. The objective of this review is to examine how SDoH have been integrated into QIs for CRC surgery. This review aims to address three primary questions: (1) Have SDoH been integrated into the development, reporting and assessment of CRC surgery QIs? (2) When integrated, what measures and statistical methods have been applied? (3) In which direction do individual SDoH influence QIs outputs? METHODS: This review will follow Arksey and O'Malley frameworks for scoping reviews. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, HealthSTAR databases for papers that examine QIs for CRC surgery applicable to healthcare systems from database inception until January 2023. Interventional trials, prospective and retrospective observational studies, reviews, case series and qualitative study designs will be included. Two authors will independently review all titles, abstracts and full texts to determine which studies meet the inclusion criteria. ETHICS & DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required for this review. Results will be disseminated through scientific presentation and relevant conferences targeted for researchers examining healthcare quality and equity in cancer care. REGISTRATION DETAILS: osf.io/vfzd3-Open Science Framework.

Role of intraoperative processes of care during major upper gastrointestinal oncological resection in postoperative outcomes: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Optimal delivery and organisation of care is critical for surgical outcomes and healthcare systems efficiency. Anaesthesia volumes have been recently associated with improved postoperative recovery outcomes; however, the mechanism is unclear. Understanding the individual processes of care (interventions received by the patient) is important to design effective systems that leverage the volume-outcome association to improve patient care. The primary objective of this scoping review is to systematically map the evidence regarding intraoperative processes of care for upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery. We aim to synthesise the quantity, type, and scope of studies on intraoperative processes of care in adults who undergo major upper gastrointestinal cancer surgeries (oesophagectomy, hepatectomy, pancreaticoduodenectomy, and gastrectomy) to better understand the volume-outcome relationship for anaesthesiology care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will follow the Arksey and O'Malley framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension framework for scoping reviews. We will systematically search MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases for original research articles published after 2010 examining postoperative outcomes in adult patients undergoing either: oesophagectomy, hepatectomy, pancreaticoduodenectomy, or gastrectomy, which report at least one intraoperative processes of care (intervention or framework) applied by anaesthesia or surgery. The data from included studies will be extracted, charted, and summarised both quantitatively and qualitatively through descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required for this scoping review. Results will be disseminated through publication targeted at relevant stakeholders in anaesthesiology and cancer surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/392UG; https://archive.org/details/osf-registrations-392ug-v1.

Novel patient-centred outcome in cancer care, days at home: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-centred care is valued by patients and providers. As management of cancer becomes increasingly complex, the value of providing care that incorporates an individual's values and preferences along with demographic and tumour factors is increasingly important. To improve care, patients with cancer need easily accessible information on the outcomes important to them. The patient-centred outcome, days at home (DAH), is based on a construct that measures the time a patient spends alive and out of hospitals and healthcare institutions. DAH is accurately measured from various data sources and has shown construct validity with many patient-centred outcomes. There is significant heterogeneity in terms used and definitions for DAH in cancer care. This scoping review aims to consolidate information on the outcome DAH in cancer care and to review definitions and terms used to date to guide future use of DAH as a patient-centred care, research and policy tool. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review protocol has been designed with joint guidance from the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis and the expanded framework from Arksey and O'Malley. We will systematically search MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus for studies measuring DAH, or equivalent, in the context of active adult cancer care. Broad inclusion criteria have been developed, given the recent introduction of DAH into cancer literature. Editorials, opinion pieces, case reports, abstracts, dissertations, protocols, reviews, narrative studies and grey literature will be excluded. Two authors will independently perform full-text selection. Data will be extracted, charted and summarised both qualitatively and quantitively. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required for this scoping review. Results will be disseminated through scientific publication and presentation at relevant conferences.

Association Between Familiarity of the Surgeon-Anesthesiologist Dyad and Postoperative Patient Outcomes for Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery.

Importance: The surgeon-anesthesiologist teamwork and relationship is crucial to good patient outcomes. Familiarity among work team members is associated with enhanced success in multiple fields but rarely studied in the operating room. Objective: To examine the association between surgeon-anesthesiologist dyad familiarity-as the number of times working together-with short-term postoperative outcomes for complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based retrospective cohort study based in Ontario, Canada, included adults undergoing esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, and hepatectomy for cancer from 2007 through 2018. The data were analyzed January 1, 2007, through December 21, 2018. Exposures: Dyad familiarity captured as the annual volume of procedures of interest done by the surgeon-anesthesiologist dyad in the 4 years before the index surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Ninety-day major morbidity (any Clavien-Dindo grade 3 to 5). The association between exposure and outcome was examined using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Seven thousand eight hundred ninety-three patients with a median age of 65 years (66.3% men) were included. They were cared for by 737 anesthesiologists and 163 surgeons who were also included. The median surgeon-anesthesiologist dyad volume was 1 (range, 0-12.2) procedures per year. Ninety-day major morbidity occurred in 43.0% of patients. There was a linear association between dyad volume and 90-day major morbidity. After adjustment, the annual dyad volume was independently associated with lower odds of 90-day major morbidity, with an odds ratio of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92-0.98; P = .01) for each incremental procedure per year, per dyad. The results did not change when examining 30-day major morbidity. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults undergoing complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery, increasing familiarity of the surgeon-anesthesiologist dyad was associated with improved short-term patient outcomes. For each additional time that a unique surgeon-anesthesiologist dyad worked together, the odds of 90-day major morbidity decreased by 5%. These findings support organizing perioperative care to increase the familiarity of surgeon-anesthesiologist dyads.

Variation in Anesthesiology Provider-Volume for Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: A Population-Based Study.

OBJECTIVE: Examine between-hospital and between-anesthesiologist variation in anesthesiology provider-volume (PV) and delivery of high-volume anesthesiology care. BACKGROUND: Better outcomes for anesthesiologists with higher PV of complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery have been reported. The factors linking anesthesiology practice and organization to volume are unknown. METHODS: We identified patients undergoing elective esophagectomy, hepatectomy, and pancreatectomy using linked administrative health data sets (2007-2018). Anesthesiology PV was the annual number of procedures done by the primary anesthesiologist in the 2 years before the index surgery. High-volume anesthesiology was PV>6 procedures/year. Funnel plots to described variation in anesthesiology PV and delivery of high-volume care. Hierarchical regression models examined between-anesthesiologist and between-hospital variation in delivery of high-volume care use with variance partition coefficients (VPCs) and median odds ratios (MORs). RESULTS: Among 7893 patients cared for at 17 hospitals, funnel plots showed variation in anesthesiology PV (median ranging from 1.5, interquartile range: 1-2 to 11.5, interquartile range: 8-16) and delivery of HV care (ranging from 0% to 87%) across hospitals. After adjustment, 32% (VPC 0.32) and 16% (VPC: 0.16) of the variation were attributable to between-anesthesiologist and between-hospital differences, respectively. This translated to an anesthesiologist MOR of 4.81 (95% CI, 3.27-10.3) and hospital MOR of 3.04 (95% CI, 2.14-7.77). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation in anesthesiology PV and delivery of high-volume anesthesiology care existed across hospitals. The anesthesiologist and the hospital were key determinants of the variation in high-volume anesthesiology care delivery. This suggests that targeting anesthesiology structures of care could reduce variation and improve delivery of high-volume anesthesiology care.

The Association Between Hospital High-volume Anesthesiology Care and Patient Outcomes for Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: A Population-based Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of between hospital rates of high-volume anesthesiology care and of postoperative major morbidity. BACKGROUND: Individual anesthesiology volume has been associated with individual patient outcomes for complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery. However, whether hospital-level anesthesiology care, where changes can be made, influences the outcomes of patients cared at this hospital is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, or hepatectomy for cancer from 2007 to 2018. The exposure was hospital-level adjusted rate of high-volume anesthesiology care. The outcome was hospital-level adjusted rate of 90-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade 3-5). Scatterplots visualized the relationship between each hospital's adjusted rates of high-volume anesthesiology and major morbidity. Analyses at the hospital-year level examined the association with multivariable Poisson regression. RESULTS: For 7893 patients at 17 hospitals, the rates of high-volume anesthesiology varied from 0% to 87.6%, and of major morbidity from 38.2% to 45.4%. The scatter plot revealed a weak inverse relationship between hospital rates of high-volume anesthesiology and of major morbidity (Pearson: -0.23). The adjusted hospital rate of high-volume anesthesiology was independently associated with the adjusted hospital rate of major morbidity (rate ratio: 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98; P <0.001 for each 10% increase in the high-volume rate). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals that provided high-volume anesthesiology care to a higher proportion of patients were associated with lower rates of 90-day major morbidity. For each additional 10% patients receiving care by a high-volume anesthesiologist at a given hospital, there was an associated reduction of 4% in that hospital's rate of major morbidity.

Low Rates of Medical Oncology Consultation for Older Women (≥ 70 Years) with Newly Diagnosed, Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Curative intent cancer treatment needs to be balanced with patient comorbidities and quality of life when treating older women with breast cancer. We examined consultation patterns and association of age at diagnosis with lack of specialist cancer consultations for older women with breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of older women (≥ 70 years of age) with incident, non-metastatic breast cancer (2010-2018) by linking administrative databases in Ontario, Canada. The outcomes of interest were lack of specialist cancer consultation (surgeon, medical oncology, or radiation oncology) within 12 months of diagnosis. Association of age with lack of specialist cancer consultation was examined using Poisson regression modeling. RESULTS: Of 21,849 older women, 2.4% (n = 517) did not have any specialist cancer consultation within 12 months of diagnosis; lack of any specialist cancer consultation increased with age (0.8% for age 70-74 years, 1.3% for age 75-79 years, 2.5% for age 80-84 years, and 7.0% for age ≥ 85 years; p < 0.001). The proportion of patients who did not have consultations with surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists was 8.6% (n = 1888), 34.4% (n = 7510), and 24.7% (n = 5404), respectively. Older age group was independently associated with an increased likelihood of lacking any specialist consultation, as well as not receiving surgical and medical oncology consultations. CONCLUSION: More than one-third of women ≥ 70 years of age with non-metastatic breast cancer did not have a consultation with a medical oncologist, with women aged ≥ 85 years least likely to have a medical oncology consultation.

Patient-Reported Symptom Burden After Cancer Surgery in Older Adults: A Population-Level Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Older adults have unique needs for supportive care after surgery. We examined symptom trajectories and factors associated with high symptom burden after cancer surgery in older adults. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a population-level study of patients ≥ 70 years old undergoing cancer surgery (2007-2018) using prospectively collected Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) scores. The monthly prevalence of moderate to severe symptoms (ESAS ≥ 4) for anxiety, depression, drowsiness, lack of appetite, nausea, pain, shortness of breath, tiredness, and poor wellbeing was computed over 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: Among 48,748 patients, 234,420 ESAS scores were recorded over 12 months after surgery. Moderate to severe tiredness (57.8%), poor wellbeing (51.9%), and lack of appetite (39.3%) were most common. The proportion of patients with moderate to severe symptoms was stable over the 1 month prior to and 12 months after surgery (< 5% variation for each symptom). There was no clinically significant change (< 5%) in symptom trajectory with the initiation of adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported symptom burden was stable for up to 1 year after cancer surgery among older adults. Neither surgery nor adjuvant therapy coincided with a worsening in symptom burden. However, the persistence of symptoms at 1 year may suggest gaps in supportive care for older adults. This information on symptom trajectory and predictors of high symptom burden is important to set appropriate expectations and improve patient counseling, recovery care pathways, and proactive symptom management for older adults after cancer surgery.

Incidence of psychiatric illness in patients with neuroendocrine tumors: a comparative population-based analysis.

PURPOSE: Diversion of tryptophan to tumoral hormonal production has been suggested to result in psychiatric illnesses in neuroendocrine tumors (NET). We measured the occurrence of psychiatric illness after NET diagnosis and compare it to colon cancer (CC). METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study. Adults with NET were matched 1:1 to CC (2000-2019). Psychiatric illness was defined by mental health diagnoses and mental health care use after a cancer diagnosis, categorized as severe, other, and none. Cumulative incidence functions accounted for death as a competing risk. RESULTS: A total of 11,223 NETs were matched to CC controls. Five-year cumulative incidences of severe psychiatric illness for NETs vs. CC was 7.7% (95%CI 7.2-8.2%) vs 7.6% (95%CI 7.2-8.2%) (p = 0.50), and that of other psychiatric illness was 32.9% (95%CI 32.0-33.9%) vs 31.6% (95%CI 30.8-32.6%) (p = 0.005). In small bowel and lung NETs, 5-year cumulative incidences of severe (8.1% [95%CI 7.3-8.9%] vs. 7.0% [95%CI 6.3-7.8%]; p = 0.01) and other psychiatric illness (34.7% [95%CI 33.3-36.1%] vs. 31.1% [95%CI 29.7-32.5%]; p < 0.01) were higher than for matched CC. The same was observed for serotonin-producing NETs for both severe (7.9% [95%CI 6.5-9.4%] vs. 6.8% [95%CI 5.5-8.2%]; p = 0.02) and other psychiatric illness (35.4% [95%CI 32.8-38.1%] vs. 31.9% [95%CI 29.3-34.4%]; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In all NETs, there was no difference observed in the incidence of psychiatric illness compared to CC. For sub-groups of small bowel and lung NETs and of serotonin-producing NETs, the incidence of psychiatric illness was higher than for CC. These data suggest a signal towards a relationship between those sub-groups of NETs and psychiatric illness.