ABSTRACT
Background: Without a definitive curative option available to many patients, learning to live with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and manage symptoms effectively becomes a priority in their care. Anaemia is an almost universal feature of MDS. Individuals suffer differently and better individualisation of care is needed. Most MDS patient information offers scant appreciation for disease heterogeneity, variable response to treatment and each patient's likely trajectory. Methods: We undertook a two-part, online workshop to discuss what matters most to people living with MDS. Patients generated questions about their condition which they felt should be addressed by research or change how their care is delivered. Patients voted on the importance of each topic, creating a "prioritised" list of issues. Results: Fourteen participants of varying age and experience took part raising 56 unique questions under the themes of: prognosis; end of life; treatment; supportive care; medical staff training; diagnosis and communication. These reflect the symptoms of MDS, improving quality of life (QoL) and communication. Discussion: Although haemoglobin (Hb) levels have correlation to QoL, it is widely reported that other factors are important in determining QoL and need for transfusions varies despite stable Hb levels. We showed that Hb level and the need for transfusions is not comparable between different patients and even non-comparable over time meaning that the maximal benefit and timing of transfusions cannot be determined from Hb alone. This workshop highlighted patient dissatisfaction with the "numbers-led" approach and the need for an alternative method to determine when to transfuse.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Surgical audits provide constructive feedback to individual surgeons, hospitals and other healthcare sector professionals. Audits identify deficiencies in treatment processes, evaluate practice trends and detect practice gaps. The credibility and validity of the Queensland Audit of Surgical Mortality (QASM) relies on the accuracy of its data. METHODS: To determine the validity of routine reporting of surgical information to QASM, surgical case forms were compared against medical records (considered the gold standard). Data were extracted by a trained medical research assistant. QASM forensically reviewed 896 of a total of 5636 deaths in 20 Queensland public hospitals between 2008 and 2013. Concordance between the surgical case form and the relevant medical record was determined for 27 objective items. RESULTS: Overall concordance was 98.2%. The median concordance was 100% (interquartile range 87-100%). Cases with discordance were few and in these, most had only one discordant item. Discordances were mainly omissions. CONCLUSION: The QASM surgical case form is a reliable data collection tool that provides high-quality data. QASM objective data can be confidently regarded as accurate and therefore reliable for use in publications, reports and case studies.
