Search

Background: Potentially curative therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer consists of gastrectomy, usually in combination with perioperative chemotherapy. An oncological resection includes a radical (R0) gastrectomy and modified D2 lymphadenectomy; generally, a total omentectomy is also performed, to ensure the removal of possible microscopic disease. However, the omentum functions as a regulator of regional immune responses to prevent infections and prevents adhesions which could lead to bowel obstructions. Evidence supporting a survival benefit of routine complete omentectomy during gastrectomy is lacking., Methods: OMEGA is a randomized controlled, open, parallel, non-inferiority, multicenter trial. Eligible patients are operable (ASA < 4) and have resectable (≦ cT4aN3bM0) primary gastric cancer. Patients will be 1:1 randomized between (sub)total gastrectomy with omentum preservation distal of the gastroepiploic vessels versus complete omentectomy. For a power of 80%, the target sample size is 654 patients. The primary objective is to investigate whether omentum preservation in gastrectomy for cancer is non-inferior to complete omentectomy in terms of 3-year overall survival. Secondary endpoints include intra- and postoperative outcomes, such as blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, readmission rate, quality of life, disease-free survival, and cost-effectiveness., Discussion: The OMEGA trial investigates if omentum preservation during gastrectomy for gastric cancer is non-inferior to complete omentectomy in terms of 3-year overall survival, with non-inferiority being determined based on results from both the intention-to-treat and the per-protocol analyses. The OMEGA trial will elucidate whether routine complete omentectomy could be omitted, potentially reducing overtreatment., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05180864. Registered on 6 th January 2022., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: This study examined the relationship between speech-in-noise recognition and incident/recurrent falls due to balance problems ten years later (RQ-1); 10-year change in speech-in-noise recognition and falls (RQ-2a), as well as the role of dizziness in this relationship (RQ-2b). The association between hearing aid use and falls was also examined (RQ-3)., Methods: Data was collected from the Netherlands Longitudinal Study on Hearing between 2006 and December 2022. Participants completed an online survey and digits-in-noise test every five years. For this study, data was divided into two 10-year follow-up time intervals: T0 (baseline) to T2 (10-year follow-up), and T1 (5-years) to T3 (15-years). For all RQs, participants aged ≥ 40 years at baseline, without congenital hearing loss, and non-CI users were eligible (n = 592). Additionally, for RQ-3 participants with a speech reception threshold in noise (SRTn) ≥ -5.5 dB signal-to-noise ratio were included (n = 422). Analyses used survey variables on hearing, dizziness, falls due to balance problems, chronic health conditions, and psychosocial health. Logistic regressions using General Estimating Equations were conducted to assess all RQs., Results: Among individuals with obesity, those with poor baseline SRTn had a higher odds of incident falls ten years later (odds ratio (OR):14.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) [2.12, 103]). A 10-year worsening of SRTn was significantly associated with a higher odds of recurrent (OR: 2.20, 95% CI [1.03, 4.71]) but not incident falls. No interaction was found between dizziness and change in SRTn. Hearing aid use (no use/ < 2 years use vs. ≥ 2 years) was not significantly associated with incident nor recurrent falls. Although there was a significant interaction with sex for this association, the effect of hearing aid use on incident/recurrent falls was not statistically significant among males nor females., Conclusions: A longitudinal association between the deterioration in SRTn and recurrent falls due to balance problems after 10 years was confirmed in this study. This result stresses the importance of identifying declines in hearing earlier and justifies including hearing ability assessments within fall risk prevention programs. Mixed results of hearing aid use on fall risk warrant further investigation into the temporality of this association and possible differences between men and women., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has challenged healthcare globally. An acute increase in the number of hospitalized patients has necessitated a rigorous reorganization of hospital care, thereby creating circumstances that previously have been identified as facilitating prescribing errors (PEs), e.g. a demanding work environment, a high turnover of doctors, and prescribing beyond expertise. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients may be at risk of PEs, potentially resulting in patient harm. We determined the prevalence, severity, and risk factors for PEs in post-COVID-19 patients, hospitalized during the first wave of COVID-19 in the Netherlands, 3 months after discharge., Methods: This prospective observational cohort study recruited patients who visited a post-COVID-19 outpatient clinic of an academic hospital in the Netherlands, 3 months after COVID-19 hospitalization, between June 1 and October 1 2020. All patients with appointments were eligible for inclusion. The prevalence and severity of PEs were assessed in a multidisciplinary consensus meeting. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated by univariate and multivariate analysis to identify independent risk factors for PEs., Results: Ninety-eight patients were included, of whom 92% had ≥1 PE and 8% experienced medication-related harm requiring an immediate change in medication therapy to prevent detoriation. Overall, 68% of all identified PEs were made during or after the COVID-19 related hospitalization. Multivariate analyses identified ICU admission (OR 6.08, 95% CI 2.16-17.09) and a medical history of COPD / asthma (OR 5.36, 95% CI 1.34-21.5) as independent risk factors for PEs., Conclusions: PEs occurred frequently during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Patients admitted to an ICU during COVID-19 hospitalization or who had a medical history of COPD / asthma were at risk of PEs. These risk factors can be used to identify high-risk patients and to implement targeted interventions. Awareness of prescribing safely is crucial to prevent harm in this new patient population., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: We aimed to assess whether longer indwelling time of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) increases risk of central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in haematology patients., Methods: Multicentre retrospective cohort study among haematology patients receiving PICCs between 2013 and 2015. Occurrence of CLABSI based on CDC definitions was assessed. We calculated incidence rates, determined risk factors for CLABSI and used Poisson regression models to assess the risk of developing CLABSI as a function of PICC dwell time. We compared diagnoses and treatment characteristics between 2013-2015 and 2015-2020., Results: 455 PICCs placed in 370 patients were included, comprising 19,063 catheter days. Median indwelling time was 26 days (range 0-385) and CLABSI incidence was 4.0 per 1000 catheter days, with a median time to CLABSI of 33 days (range 18-158). Aplastic anaemia (AA) was associated with an increased risk of CLABSI; patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (SCT) were less likely to develop CLABSI. In the unadjusted analysis, PICCs with an indwelling time of 15-28 days, 29-42 days, 43-56 days and > 56 days each had an increased CLABSI incidence rate ratio of 2.4 (1.2-4.8), 2.2 (0.95-5.0), 3.4 (1.6-7.5) and 1.7 (0.9-3.5), respectively, compared to PICCs in place for < 15 days. However, after adjusting for AA and SCT, there was no significant difference in incidence rates between dwell times (p 0.067)., Conclusions: Our study shows that risk of CLABSI does not appear to increase with longer PICC indwelling time. Routine replacement of PICCs therefore is unlikely to prevent CLABSI in this population., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Incurable cancer does not only affect patients, it also affects the lives of their partners. Many partners take on caregiving responsibilities. The burden of these caregiving tasks are often associated with physical, psychological, and social difficulties and many partners have unmet supportive care needs. Oncokompas is an eHealth self-management application to support partners in finding and obtaining optimal supportive care, tailored to their quality of life and personal preferences. A randomized controlled trial will be carried out to determine the efficacy and cost-utility of Oncokompas., Methods: A total of 136 adult partners of patients with incurable cancer will be included. Partners will be randomly assigned to the intervention group, which directly gets access to Oncokompas, or the waiting-list control group, which gets access to Oncokompas after three months. The primary outcome measure is caregiver burden. Secondary outcome measures comprise self-efficacy, health-related quality of life, and costs. Measures will be assessed at baseline, two weeks after randomization, and three months after the baseline measurement., Discussion: This study will result in evidence on the efficacy and cost-utility of Oncokompas among partners of patients with incurable cancer, which might lead to implementation of Oncokompas as a health service for partners of patients with incurable cancer., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR 7636. Registered on 23 November 2018.

Background: Information on the prevalence of adjustment disorders among cancer patients and the value of psychological interventions in this group of patients is limited. This study investigates the prevalence of adjustment disorders among cancer patients as well as the reach, effectiveness, cost-utility and budget impact of a tailored psychological intervention., Method: This study consists of two parts. Part 1 is an observational study among a representative group of mixed cancer patients after cancer treatment on the prevalence of adjustment disorder as well as the uptake (i.e. reach) of psychological treatment. In Part 2, patients diagnosed with an adjustment disorder are invited to participate in a randomized controlled trial. Patients will be randomized to the intervention (access to the tailored psychological intervention) or control group (waitlist period of 6 months). The psychological intervention consists of three modules: one module containing psycho-education (3 sessions, all patients) and two additional modules (maximum of 6 sessions per module) provided as continuum, in case needed. Module 2 and 3 can consist of several evidence-based interventions (e.g. group interventions, mindfulness, eHealth) The primary outcome is psychological distress (HADS). Secondary outcomes are mental adjustment to cancer (MAC) and health-related quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30). To assess the cost-utility and budget impact, quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L) and costs (iMCQ and iPCQ) will be measured. Measures will be completed at baseline and 3 and 6-months after randomization., Discussion: This study will provide data of the prevalence of adjustment disorders and the reach, effectiveness, cost-utility and budget impact of a tailored psychological intervention., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register identifier: NL7763. Registered on 3 June 2019.

Background: Patients with incurable cancer have to deal with a wide range of symptoms due to their disease and treatment, influencing their quality of life. Nowadays, patients are expected to adopt an active role in managing their own health and healthcare. Oncokompas is an eHealth self-management application developed to support patients in finding optimal palliative care, tailored to their quality of life and personal preferences. A randomized controlled trial will be carried out to determine the efficacy and cost-utility of Oncokompas compared to care as usual., Methods: 136 adult patients with incurable lung, breast, colorectal and head and neck cancer, lymphoma and glioma, will be included. Eligible patients have no curative treatment options and a prognosis of at least three months. Patients will be randomly assigned to the intervention group or the control group. The intervention group directly has access to Oncokompas alongside care as usual, while the waiting list control group receives care as usual and will have access to Oncokompas after three months. The primary outcome measure is patient activation, which can be described as a patient's knowledge, skills and confidence to manage his or her own health and healthcare. Secondary outcome measures comprise self-efficacy, health-related quality of life, and costs. Measures will be assessed at baseline, two weeks after randomization, and three months after the baseline measurement., Discussion: This study will result in knowledge on the efficacy and cost-utility of Oncokompas among patients with incurable cancer. Also, more knowledge will be generated into the need for and costs of palliative care from a societal and healthcare perspective., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register identifier: NTR 7494 . Registered on 24 September 2018.