3 results on '"Terry Hawrysh"'
Search Results
2. Evaluation of a preoperative personalized risk communication tool: a prospective before-and-after study
- Author
-
Sylvain Gagne, Kumanan Wilson, Alan J. Forster, Annette McKinnon, Daniel I. McIsaac, Dawn Stacey, Monica Taljaard, Kira Hawrysh, Kednapa Thavorn, Cameron Bell, David Yachnin, Terry Hawrysh, Christopher L. Pysyk, Katherine M. Atkinson, Husein Moloo, David MacDonald, Emily Hladkowicz, Homer Yang, Luke T. Lavallée, Carl van Walraven, Laura Boland, Gregory L. Bryson, and Doug Manuel
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,business.industry ,General Medicine ,Confidence interval ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine ,Patient satisfaction ,Primary outcome ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,Anesthesiology ,Anesthesia ,Emergency medicine ,medicine ,eHealth ,Risk communication ,Anxiety ,Before and after study ,030212 general & internal medicine ,medicine.symptom ,business - Abstract
Patients want personalized information before surgery; most do not receive personalized risk estimates. Inadequate information contributes to poor experience and medicolegal complaints. We hypothesized that exposure to the Personalized Risk Evaluation and Decision Making in Preoperative Clinical Assessment (PREDICT) app, a personalized risk communication tool, would improve patient knowledge and satisfaction after anesthesiology consultations compared with standard care. We conducted a prospective clinical study (before-after design) and used patient-reported data to calculate personalized risks of morbidity, mortality, and expected length of stay using a locally calibrated National Surgical Quality Improvement Program risk calculator embedded in the PREDICT app. In the standard care (before) phase, the application’s materials and output were not available to participants; in the PREDICT app (after) phase, personalized risks were communicated. Our primary outcome was knowledge score after the anesthesiology consultation. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction, anxiety, feasibility, and acceptability. We included 183 participants (90 before; 93 after). Compared with standard care phase, the PREDICT app phase had higher post-consultation: knowledge of risks (14.3% higher; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.5 to 22.0; P < 0.001) and satisfaction (0.8 points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.4; P = 0.03). Anxiety was unchanged (− 1.9%; 95% CI, − 4.2 to 0.5; P = 0.13). Acceptability was high for patients and anesthesiologists. Exposure to a patient-facing, personalized risk communication app improved knowledge of personalized risk and increased satisfaction for adults before elective inpatient surgery. www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03422133); registered 5 February 2018.
- Published
- 2020
3. Partnering with patients to get better outcomes with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy: towards engagement of patients in early phase trials
- Author
-
Grace Fox, Manoj M. Lalu, Robert A. Holt, Gisell Castillo, Joshua Montroy, Harold L. Atkins, Sarah Asad, Stuart Schwartz, Dean Fergusson, Justin Presseau, Natasha Kekre, Kednapa Thavorn, Madison Foster, Zarah Monfaredi, and Terry Hawrysh
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,Health (social science) ,PPI ,Patient engagement ,lcsh:Medicine ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Quality of life (healthcare) ,Patient and public involvement ,Patient partners ,Medicine ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Protocol (science) ,lcsh:R5-920 ,Data collection ,business.industry ,lcsh:R ,Retrospective cohort study ,Chimeric antigen receptor ,Clinical trial ,Clinical research ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,Family medicine ,General Health Professions ,Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy ,lcsh:Medicine (General) ,business ,Research Article - Abstract
Aim Though patient engagement in clinical research is growing, recent reports suggest few clinical trials report on such activities. To address this gap, we describe our approach to patient engagement in the development of a clinical trial protocol to assess a new immunotherapy for blood cancer (chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, CAR-T cell therapy). Methods Our team developed a clinical trial protocol by working with patient partners from inception. Two patient partners with lived blood cancer experience were identified through referrals from our team’s professional network and patient organization contacts. Our patient partners were onboarded to the team and engaged in several studies conducted to develop the clinical trial protocol, including a systematic review of the existing literature on the therapy, patient interviews and a survey to obtain perspectives on barriers and enablers to participating in the trial, an early economic analysis, and a retrospective cohort study. Results Engaging patient partners enhanced our research in ways that would not have otherwise occurred. By selecting patient important outcomes for data collection, our partners helped flag that quality of life and health utility measures have not been reported in previous CAR-T cell therapy trials for blood cancer. Our partners also co-developed a non-technical summary of the systematic review that summarized results in an accessible manner. Our patient partners reviewed interview and survey questions, to improve the language and appropriateness; provided recruitment suggestions; and provided a patient perspective on the results, thereby confirming the importance of findings. Input was also obtained on costs for the early economic analysis. Our patient partners identified costs that may be a burden to both patients and caregivers during a trial and helped to confirm that the overall structure of the economic model reflected the patient care pathway. Our patient partners also shared their diagnosis and treatment stories, which helped to provide the research team with insight into this experience. Conclusions Contributions by our patient partners were invaluable to each component study, as well as the overall development of the trial protocol. We plan to use this approach in the future in order to meaningfully engage patients in the development of other clinical trials; we also hope that by reporting our methods this will help other research teams to do the same. Trial registration Affiliated with the development of NCT03765177.
- Published
- 2020
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.