Selecting a PRO-CTCAE-based subset for patient-reported symptom monitoring in prostate cancer patients: a modified Delphi procedure.

BACKGROUND: Clinician-based reporting of adverse events leads to underreporting and underestimation of the impact of adverse events on prostate cancer patients. Therefore, interest has grown in capturing adverse events directly from patients using the Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). We aimed to develop a standardized PRO-CTCAE subset tailored to adverse event monitoring in prostate cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used a mixed-method approach based on the 'phase I guideline for developing questionnaire modules' by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life group, including a literature review, and interviews with patients (n = 30) and health care providers (HCPs, n = 16). A modified Delphi procedure was carried out to reach consensus on the final subset selected from the complete PRO-CTCAE item library. RESULTS: Fourteen multidisciplinary HCPs and 12 patients participated in the Delphi rounds. Ninety percent agreed on the final subset, consisting of: 'ability to achieve and maintain erection', 'decreased libido', 'inability to reach orgasm', 'urinary frequency', 'urinary urgency', 'urinary incontinence', 'painful urination', 'fecal incontinence', 'fatigue', 'hot flashes', 'feeling discouraged', 'sadness', and 'concentration'. From 16 articles identified in the literature review, the following adverse events for which no PRO-CTCAE items are available, were included to the recommendation section: 'nocturia', 'blood and/or mucus in stool', 'hemorrhoids', 'hematuria', 'cystitis', 'neuropathy', and 'proctitis'. CONCLUSIONS: The obtained PRO-CTCAE-subset can be used for multidisciplinary adverse event monitoring in prostate cancer care. The described method may guide development of future PRO-CTCAE subsets.

Cyclic workflow to improve implementation of learning points from morbidity and mortality meetings.

BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality meetings (M&MMs) are organized in most hospital departments with an educational purpose to learn from adverse events (AEs) to improve patient care. M&MMs often lack effectiveness due to unsuccessful systematic follow-up of areas of improvement. This can have an effect on improving patient safety and care. Therefore, a new strategy that focuses on implementing areas of improvement into daily practice is necessary. The study aim is to see if we could improve the implementation of meeting outcomes from the M&MM by using a cyclic workflow, and which factors are important to achieve its implementation. METHODS: This prospective study took place at the department of gynecologic oncology of a university hospital. Research was conducted with a participatory action research (PAR) approach using 10 consecutive M&MMs in 2019 and 2020. The cyclical workflow consisted of an action list based on the PDCA-cycle, a check of the implementation of areas for improvement at the next M&MM and regular monitoring of tasks. Each M&MM was observed and each professional with an assigned task was interviewed and gave their informed consent. Thematic content analysis was performed with the program Atlas.ti 8.4.20. RESULTS: Out of the 39 tasks that resulted from 10 M&MMs, 37 (94.8%) followed all the steps in the PDCA-cycle and were implemented. In total, 16 interviews were conducted with consultants, nurses, registrars and residents. Five main factors were important to achieve follow-up of areas for improvement: organizational culture, motivation, commitment, communication to mobilize employees and skills. Repetition of the cyclic workflow at the M&MM and an external person who reminded professionals of their assigned task(s) was important to change habits and motivate professionals. CONCLUSION: Cyclical tools can support the implementation of areas for improvement to optimize the M&MM. A M&MM with an organizational culture where attendees can discuss openly and freely may motivate attendees to take on tasks successfully. A positive stimulant to reach commitment of professionals is team participation. Integrating new habits of reflection may lead to a deeper level of learning from the PDCA-cycle and of the M&MM. Creating a learning environment outside of the M&MM may support professionals to take on actions and engage in improvement practices. Future research may focus on including a comparative analysis to show a success rate of the implementation of learning points from the M&MM more clearly.

The effect of opportunistic salpingectomy for primary prevention of ovarian cancer on ovarian reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Opportunistic salpingectomy (OS) is an attractive method for primary prevention of ovarian cancer. Although OS has not been associated with a higher complication rate, it may be associated with earlier onset of menopause. OBJECTIVE: To provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of OS on both age at menopause and ovarian reserve. METHODS: A search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, Embase and MEDLINE databases from inception until March 2022. We included randomized clinical trials and cohort studies investigating the effect of OS on onset of menopause and/or ovarian reserve through change in anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), antral follicle count (AFC), estradiol (E2), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH). Data was extracted independently by two researchers. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate the pooled effect of OS on ovarian reserve. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 1047 studies. No studies were found investigating the effect of OS on age of menopause. Fifteen studies were included in the meta-analysis on ovarian reserve. Meta-analyses did not result in statistically significant differences in mean change in AMH (MD -0.07 ng/ml, 95%CI -0.18;0.05), AFC (MD 0.20 n, 95 % CI -4.91;5.30), E2 (MD 3.97 pg/ml, 95%CI -0.92;8.86), FSH (MD 0.33mIU/ml, 95%CI -0.15;0.81) and LH (MD 0.03mIU/ml; 95%CI -0.47;0.53). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that OS does not result in a significant reduction of ovarian reserve in the short term. Further research is essential to confirm the absence of major effects of OS on menopausal onset since clear evidence on this subject is lacking. Registration number PROSPERO CRD42021260966.

Adherence to guideline-based quality indicators in early pregnancy care in hospitals with and without an early pregnancy assessment unit.

RESEARCH QUESTION: How do hospitals with and without an early pregnancy assessment unit (EPAU) adhere to guideline-based quality indicators for an EPAU relating to logistics, access to services and quality of early pregnancy care? DESIGN: A qualitative interview study assessing the adherence to 19 quality indicators in four hospitals with an EPAU and four hospitals without an EPAU in the Netherlands. For each quality indicator, a ratio for guideline adherence was calculated. Overall non-adherence per hospital was defined as less than 100% adherence to the 19 quality indicators. RESULTS: Non-adherence was seen in three indicators (3/19 [16%]) for hospitals with an EPAU and in five indicators (5/19 [26%]) for hospitals without an EPAU. A standard digital system for the registration of ultrasound findings and clear explanation of all treatment options was present in all hospitals with an EPAU and in three hospitals without an EPAU. Certified ultrasound training for working staff members was absent in all hospitals. A discrete waiting area was present in one hospital with an EPAU compared with none of the hospitals without an EPAU. Self-referrals from women with a previous ectopic pregnancy was accepted in one hospital with and in one hospital without an EPAU. CONCLUSIONS: Non-adherence to guideline-based quality indicators for an EPAU was about the same for hospitals with and without an EPAU in the Netherlands.

Disclosing Adverse Events in Clinical Practice: The Delicate Act of Being Open.

Practicing a "safe" disclosure of adverse events remains challenging for healthcare professionals. In addition, knowledge on how to deliver a disclosure is still limited. This review focuses on how disclosure communication may be practiced based on the perspectives of patients and healthcare professionals. Empirical studies conducted between September 2008 and October 2019 were included from the databases PubMed, Web of Science and Psychinfo. After full text analysis and quality appraisal this scoping review included a total of 23 studies out of 2537 studies. As a first step, the needs of patients and the challenges of healthcare professionals with the practice of providing an effective disclosure were extracted from the empirical literature. Based on these findings, the review demonstrates that specific disclosure communication strategies on the level of interpersonal skills, organization, and supportive factors may facilitate healthcare professionals to provide optimal disclosure of adverse events. These may be relevant to provide patients with a tailored approach that accompanies their preferences for information and recognition. In conclusion, healthcare professionals may need training in interpersonal (verbal and nonverbal) communication skills. Furthermore, it is important to develop an open (organizational) culture that supports the communication of adverse events and disclosure as a standard practice.

Openness to new perspectives created by patient participation at the morbidity and mortality meeting.

OBJECTIVES: Morbidity and mortality meetings (M&MMs) at surgical departments may improve when patients participate, leading to different learning points. A gynecological oncology department invited patients to join their M&MMs. The practical constraints and experiences important from the perspective of patients and their healthcare professionals were evaluated. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and professionals who attended M&MMs at a gynecological oncology department between 2016 and 2018. The interviews were transcribed and coded and thematic content analysis was performed. RESULTS: Eight patients and 17 healthcare professionals participated. Eleven themes related to interpersonal dynamics. The five shared themes are: patient-doctor relationship, language, openness of communication, learning and personal impact. All participants suggested maintaining the new practical design of the M&MMs. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and healthcare professionals valued patient participation in the M&MMs. Patient participation is possible when professionals are open to discussing and learning from adverse events (AEs). In this setting, patients feel that they are taken seriously and gain a better understanding of the course of an AE. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Involving patients in M&MMs led to new insights, better understanding, and improved processing of AEs. Collaborating with patients and using their feedback seems to be effective when developing innovations in healthcare.

Fertility navigators in female oncofertility care in an academic medical center: a qualitative evaluation.

PURPOSE: To explore patients' and professionals' experiences with fertility navigators in female oncofertility care. METHODS: Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with nine female cancer patients and six healthcare professionals to explore their experiences. They were recruited from an academic medical center (referral clinic for female fertility preservation care). Data were analyzed using the concepts of grounded theory. RESULTS: Patients were satisfied about the supportive role of the fertility navigator in their fertility preservation process: fertility navigators added value as they became "familiar faces" and provided information, emotional support, personal care, and served as patients' primary contact person. The fertility navigators had a pleasant collaboration with professionals and supported professionals by taking over tasks. To improve the role of fertility navigators, it was suggested that they should always be present in fertility preservation counseling, and attention should be paid to their availability to improve continuity of care. CONCLUSION: Fertility navigators provide personal care, improve satisfaction in patients in their oncofertility process, and support professionals. The overview of issues that need to be addressed when assigning fertility navigators in female oncofertility care combined with the improvement suggestions could be used by other centers when considering implementing fertility navigators.

Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study.

Standardized structured reporting (SSR) enables high-quality pathology reporting, but implementing SSR is slow. The objective of this study is to identify both barriers and facilitators that pathologists encounter in SSR, in order to develop tailored implementation tools to increase SSR usage. We used a mixed method design: a focus group interview helped to identify barriers and facilitators in SSR. The findings were classified into the following domains: innovation, individual professional, social setting, organization, and economic and political context. We used a web-based survey among Dutch pathologists to quantify the findings. Ten pathologists participated in the focus group interview, and 97 pathologists completed the survey. The results of both showed that pathologists perceive barriers related to SSR itself. Particularly its incompatibility caused lack of nuance (73%, n = 97) in the standardized structured pathology report. Regarding the individual professional, knowledge about available SSR-templates was lacking (28%, n = 97), and only 44% (n = 94) of the respondents agreed that using SSR facilitates the most accurate diagnosis. Related to social setting, support from the multidisciplinary team members was lacking (45%, n = 94). At organization level, SSR leads to extra work (52%, n = 94) because of its incompatibility with other information systems (38%, n = 93). Main facilitators of SSR were incorporation of speech recognition (54%, n = 94) and improvement in communication during multidisciplinary team meetings (69%, n = 94). Both barriers and facilitators existed in various domains. These factors can be used to develop implementation tools to encourage SSR usage.

Professionals' barriers in female oncofertility care and strategies for improvement.

STUDY QUESTION: What are healthcare professionals' barriers and strategies for improvement in female oncofertility care? SUMMARY ANSWER: Professionals perceived barriers in knowledge, attitude and organization of oncofertility care and suggested strategies to improve oncofertility care. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The potential loss of fertility is one of the most important undesirable side effects of cancer treatment in women of reproductive age. Unfortunately, despite guideline recommendations, not all patients are informed about their fertility risks and referred for fertility preservation (FP) counselling. Insight into barriers for discussing FP and appropriate referral is necessary before improvements can be made. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The aim of this was study was to identify barriers and gather improvement suggestions through semi-structured in-depth interviews conducted with 24 professionals working in oncofertility care. Subsequently, an expert panel meeting was held to reach consensus on a set of improvement strategies. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Oncological professionals were recruited from the three Dutch expertise hospitals for female FP and their affiliated hospitals. The expert panel consisted of six healthcare professionals, five survivors and two researchers. In the Dutch setting, financial aspects do not play a role in oncofertility care. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Barriers were identified and categorized into the patient level (e.g. focus on surviving cancer), the professional level (e.g. lack of awareness, knowledge, time, and attitude), or the organizational level (e.g. unavailable written information, disagreement on who is responsible for discussing infertility risks). The expert panel reached consensus on essential elements for a multifaceted improvement programme: development of information materials (leaflets, online decision aid), education of professionals, a role for specialized oncology nurses in informing patients and patient navigators at the fertility department to facilitate referral and counselling, medical record reminders, standard consultations with a gynaecologist and agreement on responsibility. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Selection bias could have occurred because it is likely that only professionals with interest in oncofertility care participated. However, this would mean that the barriers were underestimated. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study forms the basis for the development of a multifaceted oncofertility programme, which is essential to increase adherence to the national clinical guideline. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by the Radboud university medical center. The authors have declared no competing interests. Prof. Dr Braat reports unrestricted grants from Ferring BV, Serono and Goodlife, outside the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Review: Effectiveness of implementation strategies to increase physical activity uptake during and after cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this review was to assess the effectiveness of different strategies to implement physical activity during and after cancer treatment. DESIGN: We searched for studies containing strategies to implement physical activity in cancer care that meet the inclusion criteria of the Cochrane EPOC group. The primary outcome was physical activity uptake. We expressed the effectiveness of the strategies as the percentage of studies with improvement. RESULTS: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Patient groups doing physical activities via an implementation strategy had better outcomes than those receiving usual care: 83% of the studies showed improvement. Strategies showing significant improvement compared to usual care employed healthcare professionals to provide individual counselling or advice for exercise or interactive elements such as audit and feedback systems. When comparing the different strategies 1) interactive elements or 2) elements tailored to the needs of the patients had better physical activity uptake. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation strategies containing individual and interactive elements, tailored to the individual needs of patients, are more successful in improving physical activity uptake.

Needs and preferences of patients with head and neck cancer in integrated care.

OBJECTIVES: Incorporation of patients' perspectives in daily practice is necessary to adapt care to users' needs. However, information on patients' needs and preferences for integrated care is lacking. The aim was to explore these needs and preferences, taking patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) as example, to adapt current integrated care to be more patient-centred. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were held with current and former patients and chairmen of patient associations. Relevant needs and preferences were identified and categorised using the eight-dimension Picker model of patient-centred care. SETTING: Integrated HNC in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with HNC and chairmen of two Dutch HNC patient associations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' needs and preferences of integrated HNC care categorised according the Picker model. RESULTS: A total of 34 themes of needs and preferences were identified, by 14 patients with HNC or their delegates, using the Picker dimensions. Themes often emerged were as follows: personalisation of health care regarding patient values; clear insight into the healthcare process at organisational level; use of personalised communication, education and information that meets patients' requirements; adequate involvement of allied health professionals for physical support; more attention to the impact of HNC and its treatment; adequate involvement of family and friends; adequate general practitioner involvement in the aftercare; and waiting time reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring the identified themes in integrated HNC care, fitting in the Picker model, will enable us to respond better to the needs and preferences of patients, and patient-centred care in oncological care can be enhanced.

Prenatal (non)treatment decisions in extreme prematurity: evaluation of decisional conflict and regret among parents.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/jp.2017.90.

Prenatal (non)treatment decisions in extreme prematurity: evaluation of Decisional Conflict and Regret among parents.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate Decisional Conflict and Regret among parents regarding the decision on initiating comfort or active care in extreme prematurity and to relate these to decision-making characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: A nationwide, multicenter, cross-sectional study using an online survey in the Netherlands. Data were collected from March 2015 to March 2016 among all parents with infants born at 24+0/7-24+6/7 weeks gestational age in 2010-2013. The survey contained a Decisional Conflict and Decision Regret Scale (potential scores range from 0 to 100) and decision-making characteristics. RESULTS: Sixty-one surveys were returned (response rate 27%). The median Decisional Conflict score was 28. From the subscores within Decisional Conflict, 'values clarity' revealed the highest median score of 42-revealing that parents felt unclear about personal values for benefits and risks of the decision on either comfort care or active care. The median Decision Regret score was 0. Regret scores were influenced by the actual decision made and by outcome: Decision Regret was lower in the active care group and in the survivor group. CONCLUSION: We found little Decisional Conflict and no Decision Regret among parents regarding decision-making at 24 weeks gestation.

Implementing targeted expectant management in fertility care using prognostic modelling: a cluster randomized trial with a multifaceted strategy.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the effectiveness of a multifaceted implementation strategy compared to usual care on improving the adherence to guideline recommendations on expectant management for couples with unexplained infertility? SUMMARY ANSWER: The multifaceted implementation strategy did not significantly increase adherence to guideline recommendations on expectant management compared to care as usual. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Intrauterine insemination (IUI) with or without ovarian hyperstimulation has no beneficial effect compared to no treatment for 6 months after the fertility work-up for couples with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis of natural conception. Therefore, various professionals and policy makers have advocated the use of prognostic profiles and expectant management in guideline recommendations. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cluster randomized controlled trial in 25 clinics in the Netherlands was conducted between March 2013 and May 2014. Clinics were randomized between the implementation strategy (intervention, n = 13) and care as usual (control, n = 12). The effect of the implementation strategy was evaluated by comparing baseline and effect measurement data. Data collection was retrospective and obtained from medical record research and a patient questionnaire. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: A total of 544 couples were included at baseline and 485 at the effect measurement (247 intervention group/238 control group). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Guideline adherence increased from 49 to 69% (OR 2.66; 95% CI 1.45-4.89) in the intervention group, and from 49 to 61% (OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.38-3.00) in the control group. Multilevel analysis with case-mix adjustment showed that the difference of 8% was not statistically significant (OR 1.31; 95% CI 0.67-2.59). The ongoing pregnancy rate within six months after fertility work-up did not significantly differ between intervention and control group (25% versus 27%: OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.40-1.27). LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: There is a possible selection bias, couples included in the study had a higher socio-economic status than non-responders. How this affects guideline adherence is unclear. Furthermore, when powering for this study we did not take into account the unexpected improvement of adherence in the control group. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Generalization of our results to other countries with recommendations on expectant management might be questionable because barriers for expectant management can be very different in other countries. Furthermore, due to a large variation in improved adherence rate in the intervention group it will be interesting to further analyse the process of implementation in each clinic with a process evaluation on professionals and couples' exposure to and experiences with the strategy. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Supported by Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMW, project number 171203005). No competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch trial Register, www.trialregister.nl NTR3405. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 19 April 2012. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 10 July 2012.

General practitioners' adherence to work-up and referral recommendations in fertility care.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the current guideline adherence by general practitioners (GPs) for work-up and subsequent referral from primary to secondary care for patients suffering from infertility? SUMMARY ANSWER: Guideline adherence by GPs concerning infertility was 9.2% in couples referred. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Adherence to recommendations can decrease unnecessary referral, diagnostics and treatments, and consequently result in lower expenditures. Moreover, patients can be saved from unnecessary hospital visits, emotional burden and out of pocket costs. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, AND DURATION: A retrospective cohort study among 306 patients referred for basic fertility work-up between January 2011 and June 2013 from primary care to a secondary care teaching hospital or a tertiary hospital with IVF facilities. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING AND METHODS: Couples were eligible to participate when there was no previous referral for fertility problems and the duration of the child wish was <2 years. Data to assess guideline adherence were collected from the referral letter and the medical records. A patient questionnaire was used to determine patients' general and fertility-related characteristics. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The GP performed a Chlamydia Antibody Titre (CAT) testing and semen analysis as recommended in 15.9% and 42.2% of the referred patients, respectively. According to the guideline, 39% of the couples were under referred (i.e. not immediately referred as recommended), 8.8% were unnecessarily referred and the CAT and semen analysis were unnecessarily repeated in secondary care in 80.0% and 57.1% of cases, respectively. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: We could not include non-referred patients with expectant management in primary care, an unknown number of whom became pregnant in this period. This may have resulted in an underestimation of primary care performance. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our findings show that guideline adherence concerning work-up and subsequent referral for fertility problems is low. The influence of patient demands for referral remains largely unknown. Barriers and facilitators for guideline adherence should be determined to develop interventions to improve guideline adherence in the areas of work-up and referral for fertility care and to diminish duplicate tests in secondary care. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Funded by CZ, a Dutch healthcare insurer (grant number AFVV 11-232). CZ had no role in designing the study, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data or writing of the report. Competing interests: None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

Quality indicators of integrated care for patients with head and neck cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Oncological care is very complex, and delivery of integrated care with optimal alignment and collaboration of several disciplines is crucial. To monitor and effectively improve high-quality integrated oncological care, a dashboard of valid and reliable quality indicators (QIs) is indispensable. The aim was to develop multidisciplinary QIs to measure quality of integrated oncological care, specifically for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. DESIGN: The RAND-modified Delphi method was used to decide on the outcome, process and structure QIs form three different perspectives. In addition, case-mix factors were determined. SETTING: Integrated HNC in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Head and neck cancer patients, chairmen of both patient organisations and medical specialists and allied health professionals involved in HNC care in the Netherlands. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome, process and structure indicators. RESULTS: Outcome indicators were assigned to healthcare status, tumour recurrence, complications, quality of life and patient experiences. The process indicators focused on the (allied health) care aspects during the diagnostic, treatment and follow-up phases, for example regarding waiting times, multidisciplinary team meetings and screening for the need of allied health care. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first set of multidisciplinary QIs for HNC care, to assess quality of integrated care agreed by patients and professionals. This set can be used to build other oncological quality dashboards for integrated care.

Very high uptake of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: A single-center experience.

OBJECTIVE: Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is the only effective surgical strategy to reduce the increased risk of epithelial ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Given the long-term health consequences of premature surgical menopause, we need insight in uptake and timing of RRSO to guide us in improving healthcare. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers diagnosed and counseled at the multidisciplinary Family Cancer Clinic of the Radboud university medical center in Nijmegen, The Netherlands, between 1999 and 2014. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze uptake and timing of RRSO. RESULTS: Data of 580 BRCA1/2 were analyzed. The uptake of RRSO among mutation carriers who are currently above the upper limit of the recommended age for RRSO, is 98.5% and 97.5% for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. The vast majority undergoes RRSO ≤40 (BRCA1) or ≤45 (BRCA2) years of age, provided that mutation status is known by that age: 90.8% and 97.3% of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The uptake of RRSO among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers who were counseled at our Family Cancer Clinic is extremely high. High uptake might be largely attributed to the directive and uniform way of counseling by professionals at our Family Cancer Clinic. Given the fact that RRSO is often undergone at premenopausal age in our population, future research should focus on minimizing long-term health consequences of premature surgical menopause either by optimization of hormone replacement therapy or by investigating alternative strategies to RRSO.

Tailored expectant management in couples with unexplained infertility does not influence their experiences with the quality of fertility care.

STUDY QUESTION: Do couples who were eligible for tailored expectant management (TEM) and did not start treatment within 6 months after the fertility work-up, have different experiences with the quality of care than couples that were also eligible for TEM but started treatment right after the fertility work-up? SUMMARY ANSWER: Tailored expectant management of at least 6 months in couples with unexplained infertility is not associated with the experiences with quality of care or trust in their physician. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In couples with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis of natural conception within 1 year, expectant management for 6-12 months does not compromise ongoing birth rates and is equally as effective as starting medically assisted reproduction immediately. Therefore, TEM is recommended by various international clinical guidelines. Implementation of TEM is still not optimal because of existing barriers on both patient and professional level. An important barrier is the hesitance of professionals to counsel their patients for TEM because they fear that patients will be dissatisfied with care. However, if and how adherence to TEM actually affects the couples' experience with care is unknown. Experiences with the quality care can be measured by evaluating the patient-centredness of care and the patients' trust in their physician. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study. A survey with written questionnaires was performed among all couples who participated in the retrospective audit of guideline adherence on TEM in 25 Dutch clinics. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Couples were eligible to participate if they were diagnosed with unexplained infertility and had a good prognosis (>30%) of natural conception within 1 year based on the Hunault prediction model. We used patient's questionnaires to collect data on the couples' experience with the quality of care and possible confounders for their experiences other than having undergone TEM or not. Multilevel regression analyses were performed to investigate case-mix adjusted association of TEM with the patient-centredness of care (PCQ-Infertility) and the patients' trust in their physician (Wake Forest Trust Scale). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Couples who adhered to TEM experienced the quality of care on the same level as couples who were exposed to early treatment, i.e. started fertility treatment within 6 months after fertility work-up. There were no associations between adherence to TEM and the patient-centredness of care or the patients' trust in their physician. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Because this study is retrospective, recall bias might occur. Furthermore, we were unable to measure the difference in experience with care over time. Therefore, our results have to be interpreted carefully. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Prospective research on couples undergoing TEM have to be performed to provide more detailed insight in the patients' experiences with the decision making process and subsequently the expectant period. Tackling the barriers surrounding TEM, i.e. better counselling and more patient information material, could further improve patient experiences with the quality of care for couples who are advised TEM. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: Supported by Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMW). ZonMW had no role in designing the study, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data or writing of the report. Competing interests: none. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: www.trialregister.nl NTR3405.

Trends in quality of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma care: is it getting better?

This study outlines trends in quality of delivered non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) care in the Netherlands between 2007 and 2011 and to what extend this was influenced by the national Visible Care program, which aimed at increasing transparency by providing insight into the quality of healthcare. We analyzed data collected from medical records in two observational studies, combined into 20 validated quality indicators (QIs) of which 6 were included in the national program. A random sample of 771 patients, diagnosed with NHL in 26 Dutch hospitals, was examined. Multilevel regression analyses were used to assess differences in quality of NHL care and to provide insight into the effect of the national program. We reported improved adherence to only 3 out of 6 QIs involved in the national program and none of the other 14 validated QIs. Improvement was shown for performance of all recommended staging techniques (from 26 to 43 %), assessment of International Prognostic Index (from 21 to 43 %), and multidisciplinary discussion of patients (from 23 to 41 %). We found limited improvement in quality of NHL care between 2007 and 2011; improvement potential (<80 % adherence) was still present for 13 QIs. The national program seems to have a small positive effect, but has not influenced all 20 indicators which represent the most important, measurable parts in quality of NHL care. These results illustrate the need for tailored implementation and quality improvement initiatives.