How to Support Communication Between Nurses and Residents During Shift Work: A Mixed-Methods Study Into Local Practices and Perceptions.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore local practices and perceptions of effective nurse-resident communication during shifts. Subsequently, effective communication was sought to be reinforced by implementing an initiative for improvement. DESIGN: A mixed-methods study was performed, combining a questionnaire with focus groups. Following qualitative analysis, 3 initiatives for improvement of nurse-resident communication were scrutinized, after which 1 initiative was implemented. Overall contentment with the implementation and effectiveness of communication was reassessed through a questionnaire at 3 months postimplementation. SETTING: This study took place between 2022 and 2023 at the Department of Surgery of the Leiden University Medical Center, a tertiary center in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: All surgical nurses (n = 150) and residents (n = 20) were invited to participate, by responding to the questionnaire and take part in the focus groups. A total of 38 nurses (response rate 25.3%) and 12 residents (60%) completed the questionnaire, and 31 nurses and 13 residents participated in the focus groups. RESULTS: The themes "clarity," "mutual respect," "accessibility" and "approach" were critical for effective communication, in which there were interdisciplinary differences in the interpretation and needs regarding "clarity." In response, structured moments for interdisciplinary consultation during shifts were implemented, which were foremostly useful according to nurses (73.9%), compared to residents (40.0%). A majority of the nurses agreed that communication during shifts improved through fixed moments (60.9%). CONCLUSION: Differences in the perception of critical elements for efficient nurse-resident communication during shifts can be found, which could possibly be explained by differences in training and culture. Mutual awareness for each other's tasks, responsibilities and background seems vital for the ability to deliver good patient care during shifts. To improve interprofessional practice and overcome concerns of quality of care, attention for local practices is imperative. Practical arrangements, such as fixed moments for peer communication, can strengthen partnership during shift work.

Treating acute colonic diverticulitis with extraluminal pericolic air: An Acute Care Surgery in the Netherlands (ACCSENT) multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Owing to improved quality of computed tomography, a new category of complicated acute diverticulitis, including patients with pericolic air but without abscess formation, can be defined (Hinchey 1a). Recent studies question whether this new category of acute diverticulitis could be treated as uncomplicated cases. The aim of our study is to report on the clinical course of acute diverticulitis Hinchey 1a in current clinical practice. METHODS: For this multicenter retrospective cohort study, patients presenting at the emergency department with Hinchey 1a acute diverticulitis as demonstrated by computed tomography scan, were identified. The primary outcome measure was successful conservative treatment with observation alone, antibiotics, and/or hospital admission. Readmissions, percutaneous drainage of abscesses, and emergency operations were considered as failure. RESULTS: Between October 2016 and October 2018, 1,199 patients were clinically suspected for acute diverticulitis, of whom 101 (8.4%) were radiologically diagnosed to have type 1a acute diverticulitis (average age 57 (±13) years, 45% female) and started with conservative treatment. This was successful in 86 (85%) patients. One of the 15 unsuccessfully treated patients (1%) received percutaneous drainage of an abdominal abscess. Surgery was required in 9 cases (9%) after a median time of 6 days (range, 3 to 69 days). Although a difference in the volume of extraluminal air on computed tomography scan was found, this was not shown to be a risk factor for the clinical course. CONCLUSION: Patients with type 1a acute diverticulitis can be treated successfully by conservative therapy in the majority of cases (85%). More research is required to define predictive factors for successful conservative management.

Survival differences with immediate versus delayed chemotherapy for asymptomatic incurable metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: For patients with asymptomatic, incurable, metastatic colorectal cancer, palliative, systemic treatment can be started immediately, or can be delayed until disease-related symptoms occur. How the potential survival benefit of starting palliative, systemic treatment immediately after diagnosis weighs up against the potential side effects is currently under debate, and was investigated in this review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of immediate versus delayed chemotherapy, with or without targeted therapy, on overall survival, toxicity, quality of life, progression-free survival, and compliance with chemotherapy for individuals with asymptomatic, metastatic, incurable colorectal cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 8, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, PsycINFO, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and Clinicaltrials.gov, from inception to 23 August 2018. We did not apply limitations based on language or date of publication. We searched the reference lists of all included studies to identify trials that may not have been identified from the electronic searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials evaluating immediate versus delayed chemotherapy in persons with asymptomatic, metastatic, incurable colorectal cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We applied standard methodological procedures, according to the recommendations of Cochrane and Cochrane Colorectal Cancer. Two review authors independently reviewed the studies identified by literature searches, selected relevant trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of the included studies. We used the Cochrane tool to assess risk of bias, Review Manager 5 software for meta-analysis, GRADE methods to evaluate the quality of the evidence, and GRADEpro GDT software to develop a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS: We included three randomised controlled trials (351 participants) investigating immediate versus delayed chemotherapy in people diagnosed with asymptomatic, metastatic, incurable colorectal cancer. Giving immediate versus delayed chemotherapy may make little or no difference to overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.46; 3 studies, 351 persons; low-quality evidence). For toxicity, giving immediate versus delayed chemotherapy may make little or no difference to the risk of grade 3 or 4 nausea and vomiting (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.25; 2 studies, 140 persons; very low-quality evidence), stomatitis (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.55; 2 studies, 140 persons; very low-quality evidence), or diarrhoea (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.40; 2 studies, 140 persons, very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether delayed chemotherapy made a difference to quality of life (very low-quality evidence), progression-free survival (low-quality evidence), or compliance with chemotherapy (low-quality evidence), as we had insufficient data to pool for these outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on a limited number of trials, very sparse data, and uncertainty of the evidence, this review was unable to establish whether there was a difference in overall survival or other clinically relevant outcomes, between immediate or delayed chemotherapy in persons with metastatic, incurable, colorectal cancer. The results should be interpreted with caution.

Clinical Relevance of a Grading System for Anastomotic Leakage After Low Anterior Resection: Analysis From a National Cohort Database.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage is a severe complication after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. With a global increase in registration initiatives, adapting uniform definitions and grading systems is highly relevant. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to provide clinical parameters to categorize anastomotic leakage into subcategories according to the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer. DESIGN: All of the patients who underwent a low anterior resection in the Netherlands with primary anastomosis were included using the population-based Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. SETTINGS: Data were derived from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The development of grade B anastomotic leakage (requiring invasive treatment but no surgery) versus grade C anastomotic leakage (requiring reoperation) was measured. RESULTS: Overall, 4287 patients underwent low anterior resection with primary anastomosis. A total of 159 patients (4%) were diagnosed with grade B anastomotic leakage versus 259 (6%) with grade C. Hospital stay and intensive care unit visits were significantly higher in patients with grade C anastomotic leakage compared with patients with grade B leakage. Mortality in patients with grade C leakage was higher compared with grade B leakage, although nonsignificant (5.8% vs 2.5%; p = 0.12). Multivariate analysis showed that patients with diverting stomas (n = 2866) had a decreased risk of developing grade C leakage compared with grade B (OR = 0.17 (95% CI, 0.10-0.29)). Male patients had an increased risk of developing grade C anastomotic leakage, and patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment before surgery had an increased risk of developing grade B anastomotic leakage. LIMITATIONS: Some possibly relevant variables, such as smoking and nutritional status, were not recorded in the database. CONCLUSIONS: Anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer was a frequent observed complication in this cohort. Differences in clinical outcome suggest that grade B and C leakage should be considered separate entities in future registrations. In patients with a diverting stoma, the chances of experiencing grade C anastomotic leakage were reduced. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A315.

The mortality reducing effect of aspirin in colorectal cancer patients: Interpreting the evidence.

In 1971 the first study appeared that suggested a relationship between aspirin and cancer. Currently publications on the subject of aspirin and cancer are numerous, with both a beneficial effect of aspirin on cancer incidence and a beneficial effect on cancer survival. This review focusses on the relation between the use of aspirin and improved survival in colorectal cancer patients. Various study designs have been used, with the main part being observational studies and post hoc meta-analyses of cancer outcomes in cardiovascular prevention trials. The results of these studies are unambiguously pointing towards an effect of aspirin on colorectal cancer survival, and several randomised controlled trials are currently ongoing. Some clinicians feel that the current evidence is conclusive and that the time has come for aspirin to be prescribed as adjuvant therapy. However, until this review, not much attention has been paid to the specific types of bias associated with these studies. One of these biases is confounding by indication, because aspirin is indicated for patients as secondary prevention for cardiovascular disease. This review aims to provide perspective on these biases and provide tools for the interpretation of the current evidence. Albeit promising, the current evidence is not sufficient to already prescribe aspirin as adjuvant therapy for colorectal cancer.

No association between metformin use and survival in patients with pancreatic cancer: An observational cohort study.

Several studies have suggested an association between use of metformin and an increased overall survival in patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, however with several important methodological limitations. The aim of the study was to assess the association between overall survival, pancreatic cancer, and metformin use.A retrospective cohort study of 1111 patients with pancreatic cancer was conducted using data from The Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (1998-2011). Data were linked to the PHARMO Database Network containing drug-dispensing records from community pharmacies. Patients were classified as metformin user or sulfonylurea derivatives user from the moment of first dispensing until the end of follow up. The difference in overall survival between metformin users and nonusers was assessed, and additionally between metformin users and sulfonylurea derivatives users. Univariable and multivariable parametric survival models were used and use of metformin and sulfonylurea derivatives was included as time-varying covariates.Of the 1111 patients, 91 patients were excluded because of differences in morphology, 48 patients because of using merely metformin before diagnosis, and 57 metformin-users ever used contemporary sulfonylurea derivatives and were therefore excluded. Lastly, 8 patients with a survival of zero months were excluded. This resulted in 907 patients for the analysis. Overall, 77 users of metformin, 43 users of sulfonylurea derivatives, and 787 nonusers were identified. The adjusted rate ratio for overall survival for metformin users versus nonusers was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.66-1.11; P = 0.25). The difference in overall survival between metformin users and sulfonylurea derivatives users showed an adjusted rate ratio of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.59-1.40; P = 0.67).No association was found between overall survival, pancreatic cancer, and metformin use. This was in concordance with 2 recently published randomized controlled trials. Future research should focus on the use of adjuvant metformin in other cancer types and the development or repurposing of other drugs for pancreatic cancer.

The Influence of BRAF and KRAS Mutation Status on the Association between Aspirin Use and Survival after Colon Cancer Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Use of aspirin after diagnosis of colon cancer has been associated with improved survival. Identification of cancer subtypes that respond to aspirin treatment may help develop personalized treatment regimens. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of BRAF and KRAS mutation status on the association between aspirin use and overall survival after colon cancer diagnosis. METHODS: A random selection of 599 patients with colon cancer were analyzed, selected from the Eindhoven Cancer Registry, and BRAF and KRAS mutation status was determined. Data on aspirin use (80 mg) were obtained from the PHARMO Database Network. Parametric survival models with exponential (Poisson) distribution were used. RESULTS: Aspirin use after colon cancer diagnosis was associated with improved overall survival in wild-type BRAF tumors, adjusted rate ratio (RR) of 0.60 (95% CI 0.44-0.83). In contrast, aspirin use in BRAF mutated tumors was not associated with an improved survival (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.57-2.16). P-value for interaction was non-significant. KRAS mutational status did not differentiate in the association between aspirin use and survival. CONCLUSION: Low-dose aspirin use after colon cancer diagnosis was associated with improved survival in BRAF wild-type tumors only. However, the large confidence interval of the rate ratio for the use of aspirin in patients with BRAF mutation does not rule out a possible benefit. These results preclude BRAF and KRAS mutation status to be used as a marker for individualized treatment with aspirin, if aspirin becomes regular adjuvant treatment for colon cancer patients in the future.

Tumor LINE-1 Methylation Level in Association with Survival of Patients with Stage II Colon Cancer.

Genome-wide DNA hypomethylation is associated with a worse prognosis in early-stage colorectal cancer. To measure genome-wide DNA methylation levels, long interspersed nucleotide element (LINE-1) repeats are used as a surrogate marker. Cohort studies on the clinical impact of genome-wide DNA methylation level in patients with only early-stage colon cancer, are currently lacking. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of LINE-1 methylation in a stage II colon cancer cohort (n = 164). Manual needle microdissection of tumor areas was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue sections followed by DNA extraction. Bisulfite converted DNA was used to assess tumor LINE-1 methylation level by qPCR. Patients with LINE-1 hypomethylated tumors had a significantly worse overall survival compared to patients with a higher level of LINE-1 tumor DNA methylation (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.03-2.75; p = 0.04). This effect was more prominent in patients aged over 65 years (HR 2.00, 95% CI 1.13-3.52; p = 0.02), although the test for age interaction was not significant. No significant effect on recurrence-free survival was observed. Based on these results, tumor LINE-1 hypomethylation is associated with a worse overall survival in stage II colon cancer. Whether the origin of this causation is cancer-specific or age-related can be debated.

The effect of aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use after diagnosis on survival of oesophageal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Aspirin use has been shown to lower incidence and mortality in cancer patients. The aim of this population-based study was to determine the effect of postdiagnosis low-dose aspirin use on survival of patients with oesophageal cancer. METHODS: Patients with oesophageal cancer (1998-2010) were selected from the Eindhoven Cancer Registry and linked with outpatient pharmacy data regarding aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Users were subdivided into both prediagnosis and postdiagnosis or only postdiagnosis users. Parametric survival models with an exponential (Poisson) distribution were used with non-specific death as endpoint. RESULTS: In this study 560 patients were included. Overall, 157 patients (28.0%) were non-users, 293 patients (52.3%) pre- and postdiagnosis (89 aspirin and 204 NSAID users) and 110 patients (19.6%) only postdiagnosis users (16 aspirin and 94 NSAID users). Postdiagnosis aspirin use was associated with overall survival (RR 0.45 (95% CI 0.34-0.60; P<0.001); adjusted rate ratio was 0.42 (95% CI: 0.30-0.57; P<0.001). Postdiagnosis use of NSAIDs was associated with overall survival (RR 0.61 (95% CI 0.49-0.76; <0.001); however, adjusted analyses did not show a significant association with a rate ratio of 0.84 (95% CI 0.66-1.07; P=0.2). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that postdiagnosis aspirin use might be associated with a higher survival rate in oesophageal cancer patients. A randomised clinical trial is needed to verify our observations of possible postdiagnosis aspirin use benefit.