Search

Purpose: Cancer is a leading cause of global childhood mortality, affecting 400,000 children annually. While treatable with modern therapies, children living in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have limited access to care and lower survival rates. Hospital-based cancer registries (HBCRs) collect detailed patient information to critically evaluate and evolve care. The St. Jude Global Childhood Cancer Analytics Resource and Epidemiological Surveillance System (SJCARES) is a cloud-based HBCR network facilitating quality data collection of pediatric cancer. Wide variation in the success of implementation has warranted further research into the implementation approach, to create a sustainable and adaptable HBCR in LMICs., Methods: Seven of 89 sites using the SJCARES registry were selected, stratified by global region and stage of implementation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key groups (clinicians, administrators, data clerks) using an interview guide developed from the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were conducted via a video-telephone software program and transcribed by a transcription service. Transcripts were thematically coded using rapid qualitative analysis., Results: A total of 18 participants (11 clinicians, 4 administrators, 3 data clerks) were interviewed. Several barrier themes were identified, including: difficulty integrating the registry into existing workflow; lack of resources; lack of government or administrative support; and damaged, misplaced, or illegible medical records. Facilitator themes were identified, including: internal support for the registry; clear and extensive training; and dedicated support staff., Conclusion: Interviewed participants identified key barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the SJCARES registry across multiple phases. We plan to use these results to develop targeted implementation strategies including a readiness assessment tool to help guide more successful implementation of the SJCARES registry and other HBCRs in LMICs., (© 2024 The Author(s). Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose: The goal of this study is to determine barriers and facilitators to the implementation of medication adherence interventions to support cancer patients taking novel, targeted oral anticancer agents (OAAs)., Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews using a semi-structured guide from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We used purposive sampling to identify clinicians (physicians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, nurses) and administrators (leadership from medicine, pharmacy, and nursing) who delivered care and/or oversee care delivery for patients with chronic leukemia prescribed an OAA., Results: A total of 19 individuals participated in an interview (12 clinicians and 7 administrators), with 10 primarily employed by an academic cancer center; 5 employed by the community cancer center; and 4 employed by the integrated health-system specialty pharmacy. Barriers identified included low awareness of adherence interventions, difficulty in adherence measurement, complexity of designing and implementing a structured adherence intervention, and competing priorities. Facilitators identified included support of hospital administrators, value for pharmacists, and willingness to embrace change. Participants also made recommendations moving forward including standardizing workflow, designating champions, iterating implementation strategies, and improving communication between clinicians and with patients., Conclusion: Individual and system level factors were identified as determinants of implementation effectiveness of medication adherence interventions. A multidisciplinary advisory panel will be assembled to design comprehensive and actionable strategies to refine and implement a structured intervention to improve medication adherence in cancer patients., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: Benyam Muluneh is a consultant for Servier and his spouse is employed by Novartis; Michele Muir *and JB Collins are* a post-doctoral fellow with GlaxoSmithKline, Emily Mackler has research funding with Astra Zeneca; William Wood has research funding with Genentech and Pfizer; Leah Zullig has research funding with Proteus Digital Health, PhRMA Foundation and is a consultant for Novartis and Pfizer;, (Copyright: © 2023 Muluneh et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

The use of non-opioid analgesics following surgery has proven beneficial in managing pain and decreasing adverse outcomes following surgery. Data assessing outcomes related to opioid use is limited in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). We evaluated the effectiveness of implementing a reduced to no opioid use protocol in KTRs. This retrospective cohort study included adult KTRs between January 2017 and July 2019 with a multimodal analgesic protocol (MAP), focused on limiting opioids, implemented in August 2018. We compared analgesic requirements in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) during transplant admissions between the MAP cohort and traditional cohort. There were 217 KTRs who met the criteria. Inpatient opioid use was significantly reduced in the MAP cohort (16.5 ± 19.2 MME/day vs 24.7 ± 19.7 MME/day; P <.05) with no significant difference in pain scores. No use of opioids within six months of discharge was significantly increased in the MAP cohort (50% vs 7%; P <.001), and there were no reported deaths at six months in either cohort. The use of multimodal analgesia is beneficial in KTRs to provide adequate pain control with limited to no exposure of opioids during admission or at discharge., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Intraoperative modality for "real-time" left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony quantification and optimal resynchronization is not established. This study determined the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of intracardiac echocardiography (ICE), coupled with vector velocity imaging (VVI), to evaluate LV dyssynchrony and to guide LV lead placement at the time of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implant., Methods: One hundred and four consecutive heart failure patients undergoing ICE-guided (Group 1, N = 50) or conventional (Group 2, N = 54) CRT implant were included in the study. For Group 1 patients, LV dyssynchrony and resynchronization were evaluated by VVI including visual algorithms and the maximum differences in time-to-peak (MD-TTP) radial strain. Based on the findings, the final LV lead site was determined and optimal resynchronization was achieved. CRT responders were defined using standard criteria 6 months after implantation., Results: Both groups underwent CRT implant with no complications. In Group 1, intraprocedural optimal resynchronization by VVI including visual algorithms and MD-TTP was a predictor discriminating CRT response with a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 89%. Use of ICE/VVI increased number of and predicted CRT responders (82% in Group 1 vs 63% in Group 2; OR = 2.68, 95% CI 1.08-6.65, P = 0.03)., Conclusion: ICE can be safely performed during CRT implantation. "Real-time" VVI appears to be helpful in determining the final LV lead position and pacing mode that allow better intraprocedural resynchronization. VVI-optimized acute resynchronization predicts CRT response and this approach is associated with higher number of CRT responders., (© 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)