Patient-centred pathology reporting improves patient experience and understanding of disease in prostate cancer care.

Introduction and Objectives: Patient-centred (PC) and holistic care improves patient satisfaction and health outcomes. We sought to investigate the benefit of utilising a PC pathology report in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa). Our study aimed to evaluate and compare patient understanding of their PCa diagnosis after RP, upon receiving either a standard histopathology report or a personalised and PC report (PCR). Moreover, we evaluated knowledge retention at 4 weeks after the initial consultation. Methods: We invited patients undergoing RP at three metropolitan Urology clinics to participate in our randomised controlled study. Patients were randomised to receive either a PCR or standard pathology report. Patient satisfaction questionnaires (Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions [PEPPI], Consultation and Relational Empathy [CARE] and Communication Assessment Tool [CAT]) and a knowledge test were conducted within 72 h of the initial appointment and again at 4 weeks. Accurate recollection of Gleason grade group (GGG) and extracapsular extension (ECE) were classified as 'correct'. Baseline demographic data included age, education, marital and employment status, pre-op prostate specific antigen (PSA) and clinical stage. Baseline data were tested for differences between groups using the Student's t test, chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test depending on whether data were continuous, categorical or sparse. Comparison of correctly answered 'knowledge' questions was analysed using chi-squared test. A significance level of p ≤ 0.05 was used. Results: Data from 62 patients were analysed (30 standard vs. 32 PCR). No significant differences in baseline demographics were found between groups. Both groups reported high levels of satisfaction with their healthcare experiences in all domains of patient-physician rapport, empathy and communication. There were no significant differences between groups in PEPPI (p = 0.68), CAT (p = 0.39) and CARE (p = 0.66) scores, at baseline and 4 weeks. Ninety-three per cent of patients who received the PCR understood the report while 90% felt the report added to their understanding of their PCa. Regarding patient knowledge, the PCR group had significantly more correct answers on GGG and ECE as compared with the standard report group at baseline and 4 weeks (p < 0.001 and 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that PC pathology reports improve patient knowledge and understanding of their PCa that is retained for at least 4 weeks after initial receipt of results.

The Perils of Cosmetic Surgery Tourism: Evolving Knowledge, Awareness, and Challenges.

Concern has been expressed for some years about the risks of complications and the need for revision procedures after cosmetic surgery tourism. Such tourism is large and growing. Recent literature and coroners' inquests have provided a new evidence base for evaluating the extent of the dangers posed by a variety of overseas cosmetic surgery procedures. This article reviews such literature and identifies reason for considerable concern about cosmetic surgery tourism as well as about the deficits in regulatory and legal liability that might otherwise inhibit substandard practice. Provision of carefully drafted information about risk issues which patients can factor into their decision-making before embarking on overseas trips for the purpose of cosmetic surgery is a constructive initiative deserving of further attention by relevant Colleges, professional association and health advocacy groups.

Development of melanoma clinical quality indicators for the Australian melanoma clinical outcomes registry (MelCOR): A modified Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical quality registries aim to identify significant variations in care and provide anonymised feedback to institutions to improve patient outcomes. Thirty-six Australian organisations with an interest in melanoma, raised funds through three consecutive Melanoma Marches, organised by Melanoma Institute Australia, to create a national Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry (MelCOR). This study aimed to formally develop valid clinical quality indicators for the diagnosis and early management of cutaneous melanoma as an important step in creating the registry. METHODS: Potential clinical quality indicators were identified by examining the literature, including Australian and international melanoma guidelines, and by consulting with key melanoma and registry opinion leaders. A modified two-round Delphi survey method was used, with participants invited from relevant health professions routinely managing melanoma as well as relevant consumer organisations. RESULTS: Nineteen participants completed at least one round of the Delphi process. 12 of 13 proposed clinical quality indictors met the validity criteria. The clinical quality indicators included acceptable biopsy method, appropriate excision margins, standardised pathology reporting, indications for sentinel lymph node biopsy, and involvement of multidisciplinary care and referrals. CONCLUSION: This study provides a multi-stakeholder consensus for important clinical quality indicators that define optimal practice that will now be used in the Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry (MelCOR).

The changing face of cosmetic surgery regulation: a review of controversies and potential reforms.

Cosmetic surgery is becoming increasingly popular in Australia with the industry estimated to be worth over 1 billion dollars annually. Regulators both in Australia and internationally have been criticized for not keeping up with the rapidly changing field and keeping patients sufficiently safe in an environment that is problematically entrepreneurial. In this article, we explore the current regulation of and controversies surrounding cosmetic surgery in Australia, including the use of the title 'cosmetic surgeon', consent processes and the phenomenon of medical tourism. Lastly, we review the potential future reforms in Australia and how other countries have regulated the industry to keep patients safe.

Impact of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia on melanoma outcomes: A retrospective case-control study.

With new, effective treatments for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) the impact of second malignancies is increasingly important. We performed a retrospective case-controlled study examining the effect of CLL and its treatment on melanoma-specific survival and recurrence. A total of 56 patients with melanoma with CLL were matched 1:1 to patients without CLL for age, date of diagnosis, gender and melanoma tumour, node, metastasis (TNM) stage. Multivariate analysis found CLL was associated with significantly worse melanoma-specific mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 2.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-4.74, p = 0.007) and recurrence (HR 3.44, 95% CI 1.79-6.63, p < 0.001). Patients with CLL had poor immunotherapy tolerance and prior CLL treatment was not associated with melanoma outcomes.

Legal and ethical considerations of artificial intelligence in skin cancer diagnosis.

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology is becoming increasingly accurate and prevalent for the diagnosis of skin cancers. Commercially available AI diagnostic software is entering markets across the world posing new legal and ethical challenges for both clinicians and software companies. Australia has the highest rates of skin cancer in the world and is poised to be a significant benefactor and pioneer of the technology. This review describes the legal and ethical considerations raised by the emergence of artificial intelligence in skin cancer diagnosis and proposes recommendations for best practice.

Developing an Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry (MelCOR): a protocol paper.

INTRODUCTION: Australia has the highest incidence of melanoma in the world with variable care provided by a diverse range of clinicians. Clinical quality registries aim to identify these variations in care and provide anonymised, benchmarked feedback to clinicians and institutions to improve patient outcomes. The Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry (MelCOR) aims to collect population-wide, clinical-level data for the early management of cutaneous melanoma and provide anonymised feedback to healthcare providers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A modified Delphi process will be undertaken to identify key clinical quality indicators for inclusion in the MelCOR pilot. MelCOR will prospectively collect data relevant to these quality indicators, initially for all people over the age of 18 years living in Victoria and Queensland with a melanoma diagnosis confirmed by histopathology, via a two-stage recruitment and consent process. In stage 1, existing State-based cancer registries contact the treating clinician and provide an opportunity for them to opt themselves or their patients out of direct contact with MelCOR. After stage 1, re-identifiable clinical data are provided to the MelCOR under a waiver of consent. In stage 2, the State-based cancer registry will approach the patient directly and invite them to opt in to MelCOR and share identifiable data. If a patient elects to opt in, MelCOR will be able to contact patients directly to collect patient-reported outcome measures. Aggregated data will be used to provide benchmarked, comparative feedback to participating institutions/clinicians. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Following the successful collection of pilot data, the feasibility of an Australia-wide roll out will be evaluated. Key quality indicator data will be the core of the MelCOR dataset, with additional data points added later. Annual reports will be issued, first to the relevant stakeholders followed by the public. MelCOR is approved by the Alfred Ethics Committee (58280/127/20).