Antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infection across a national primary care network in 2019.

Background: Respiratory tract infection (RTI) is the leading reason for avoidable antimicrobial use in primary care, yet provider-level feedback on its use is only available in some provinces. The aim of this study was to validate case definitions for RTI across the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) and determine baseline provider-level variability in antimicrobial prescribing in 2019. Methods: The RTI case definitions were developed using demographic, diagnostic coding and keywords in electronic medical record. Manual chart abstraction was performed to identify cases of acute otitis media. Remaining RTI definitions were validated using a random sample of 5,164 patients with encounters in 2019. The proportion of patients with an RTI treated with antibiotics was determined by provider, per patient, per episode and per patient encounter. Results: Negative predictive value, positive predictive value and prevalence were as follows: 1.00 (0.99-1.00), 0.99 (0.96-0.99) and 4.14% (4.10-4.19) for common cold; 1.00 (0.99-1.00), 0.94 (0.88-0.98) and 1.09% (1.07-1.12) for acute otitis media; 0.98 (0.96-1.00), 0.93 (0.87-0.97) and 1.2% (1.18-1.22) for acute pharyngitis; 0.99 (0.99-1.00), 0.88 (0.81-0.93) and 1.99% (1.96-2.02) for sinusitis; 0.99 (0.97-0.99), 0.95 (0.89-0.98) and 4.01% (3.97-4.05) for acute bronchitis/asthma. By provider, median (interquartile range [IQR]) proportion treated with antibiotics (per patient) was 6.72 (14.92) for common cold, 64.29 (40.00) for acute otitis media, 20.00 (38.89) for pharyngitis, 54.17 (38.09) for sinusitis, 8.33 (20.00) for acute bronchitis/asthma and 21.10 (20.56) for overall RTI. Conclusion: The CPCSSN can provide national surveillance of antimicrobial prescribing practices for RTI across primary care. Baseline variability underscores the need for provider feedback and quality improvement.

Identifying Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for Routine Surveillance of Physical and Emotional Symptoms in Head and Neck Cancer Populations: A Systematic Review.

The aims of this review were to identify symptoms experienced by head and neck cancer (HNC) patients and their prevalence, as well as to compare symptom coverage identified in HNC specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Searches of Ovid Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, and CINAHL were conducted to identify studies. The search revealed 4569 unique articles and identified 115 eligible studies. The prevalence of reported symptoms was highly variable among included studies. Variability in sample size, timing of the assessments, and the use of different measures was noted across studies. Content mapping of commonly used PROMs showed variability and poor capture of prevalent symptoms, even though validation studies confirmed satisfactory reliability and validity. This suggests limitations of some of the tools in providing an accurate and comprehensive picture of the patient's symptoms and problems.

Cancer Care Ontario's Systematic Symptom Screening Strategy: A Human-Centred Design Approach to Exploring System Gaps and Defining Strategies for the Future.

Cancer patients experience a high symptom burden throughout their illness. Quality cancer symptom management has been shown to improve patient quality of life and prevent emergency department use. Cancer Care Ontario introduced standardized symptom screening in Ontario, using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) to facilitate patient reporting and management of symptoms. However, patient symptom information is not always sufficiently addressed. To address these gaps, patient and family advisors collaborated with clinicians, administrators and health system leaders from across the Province in a Symptom Management Summit to share perspectives and co-design context-specific solutions to improve care in their region.

Surgical waiting times for ocular and periocular cancer patients in Toronto.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate surgical waiting times experienced by intraocular and periocular cancer patients in Toronto and to assess the period of greatest delay between certain stages of ocular cancer care. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on cases of adult patients who underwent surgery between January 2002 and December 2004 for malignant or premalignant tumours of the eye and ocular adnexa. Waiting time intervals were calculated between 5 time points: initial presentation to referring physician or optometrist, date of referral to oculoplastics or ocular oncology, initial assessment, consent date, and surgery date. Total surgical waiting time was the period between the initial presentation and surgery date. RESULTS: The mean total surgical waiting time was 85.93 (standard error [SE] 212.70) days. The 5% trimmed mean total waiting time was 51.07 days. The longest mean total waiting time averaged 94.16 (SE 18.69) days for patients with orbital or lacrimal tumours. For all patients, the interval of greatest delay was between initial assessment and consent (according to means) or between referral and initial assessment (according to 5% trimmed means). For patients with lid, brow, or conjunctival tumours the interval of greatest delay was between referral and initial assessment, and for those with orbital, lacrimal, or intraocular tumours it was between initial assessment and consent. INTERPRETATION: By measuring the period between consent and surgery, the Ontario government is not measuring the interval of greatest delay in ocular cancer care. The wait-time registry may benefit from including data from patients with periocular tumours.