Search

Background In 2017, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, a Canadian federally sponsored organisation, initiated a national multijurisdictional quality improvement (QI) initiative to maximise the use of synoptic data to drive cancer system improvements, known as the Evidence for Surgical Synoptic Quality Improvement Programme. The goal of our study was to evaluate the outcomes, determinants and learning of this nationally led initiative across six jurisdictions in Canada, integrating a mix of cancer surgery disease sites and clinicians.Methods A mixed-methods evaluation (surveys, semistructured interviews and focus groups) of this initiative was focused on the ability of each jurisdiction to use synoptic reporting data to successfully implement and sustain QI projects to beyond the completion of the initiative and the lessons learnt in the process. Resources provided to the jurisdictions included operational funding, training in QI methodology, national forums, expert coaches, and ad hoc monitoring and support. The programme emphasised foundational concepts of the QI process including data literacy, audit and feedback reports, communities of practice (CoP) and positive deviance methodology.Results 101 CoP meetings were held and 337 clinicians received feedback reports. There were 23 projects, and 22 of 23 (95%) showed improvements with 15 of 23 (65%) achieving the proposed targets. Enablers of effective data utilisation/feedback reports for QI included the need for clinicians to trust the data, have comparative data for feedback, and the engagement of both data scientists and clinicians in designing feedback reports. Enablers of sustainability of QI within each jurisdiction included QI training for clinicians, the ability to continue CoP meetings, executive and broad stakeholder engagement, and the ability to use pre-existing organisational infrastructures and processes. Barriers to continue QI work included lack of funding for core team members, lack of automated data collection processes and lack of clinician incentives (financial and other).Conclusion Success and sustainability in data-driven QI in cancer surgery require skills in QI methodology, data literacy and feedback, dedicated supportive personnel and an environment that promotes the process of collective learning and shared accountability. Building these capabilities in jurisdictional teams, tailoring interventions to facility contexts and strong leadership engagement will create the capacity for continued success in QI for cancer surgery.

Healthcare systems in Canada and elsewhere have identified the need to develop methods to effectively and safely transition appropriate cancer survivors to primary care. It is generally accepted that survivors with a low risk of adverse events, including recurrence and toxicity, should be more systematically identified and offered transition. There remains a lack of clarity about what constitutes an appropriate profile that would assist greater application in practice. To address this gap, we examined the clinical profiles of patients that were transitioned from a large regional cancer centre to the community. The factors examined included disease site, clinical stage, time since diagnosis/first consult, cancer treatments, and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) scores. In total, 2604 patients were identified as transitioned between 2013 and 2020. These patients tended to have common cancers (e.g., breast, endometrium, colorectal) that were generally of lower stage. Half of the patients had received chemotherapy and/or radiation treatment. Nearly one-third of survivors were transitioned within a year of first consult and a third after five years. Most patients reported minimal symptoms based on ESAS scores prior to being transitioned. This study represents one of the first to analyze the types of cancer patients that are being selected for transition to primary care.

Abstract Background Rare diseases are a global public health priority. Though each disease is rare, when taken together the thousands of known rare diseases cause significant morbidity and mortality, impact quality of life, and confer a social and economic burden on families and communities. These conditions are, by their nature, encountered very infrequently by individual clinicians, who may feel unprepared to address their diagnosis and treatment. Clinical practice guidelines are necessary to support clinical and policy decisions. However, creating guidelines for rare diseases presents specific challenges, including a paucity of high certainty evidence to inform panel recommendations. Methods This paper draws from the authors’ experience in the development of clinical practice guidelines for three rare diseases: hemophilia, sickle cell disease, and catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome. Results We have summarized a number of strategies for eliciting and synthesizing evidence that are compatible with the rigorous, internationally accepted standards for guideline development set out by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. These strategies include: use of pre-existing and ad hoc qualitative research, use of systematic observation forms, use of registry data, and thoughtful use of indirect evidence. Their use in three real guideline development efforts, as well as their theoretical underpinnings, are discussed. Avenues for future research to improve clinical practice guideline creation for rare diseases – and any disease affected by a relative lack of evidence - are also identified. Conclusions Rigorous clinical practice guidelines are needed to improve the care of the millions of people worldwide who suffer from rare diseases. Innovative evidence elicitation and synthesis methods will benefit not only the rare disease community, but also individuals with common diseases who have rare presentations, suffer rare complications, or require nascent therapies. Further refinement and improved uptake of these innovative methods should lead to higher quality clinical practice guidelines in rare diseases.

Abstract: Ibrutinib therapy was associated with an increased risk of bleeding in previous trials. In this systematic review and meta-analysis of published trials including patients treated with ibrutinib, the relative risk (95% confidence interval [CI]) of overall bleeding was significantly higher in ibrutinib recipients (2.72 [1.62-6.58]), but major bleeding did not show a significant difference (1.66 [0.96-2.85]). The incidences (95% CI) of major bleeding and any bleeding were 3.0 (2.3-3.7) and 20.8 (19.1-22.1) per 100 patient-years, respectively. This analysis is limited by reporting bias from variable ascertainment of bleeding and lack of allocation concealment in some studies and differing exposures between groups, leading to potential overestimation of event rates in the ibrutinib group.

Introduction Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia (CML) constitutes 15% of new adult leukaemia cases as well as 2%–3% of leukaemia in children under 15% and 9% of leukaemias in adolescents 15–19 years of age annually. The introduction of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKI) therapy has dramatically improved survival in these patients, yet the off-target effects of this treatment may have long-term health impacts on CML survivors. The risk of adverse health outcomes is especially important in children, where TKI exposure may occur during critical windows of growth and puberty, and patients require treatment for prolonged periods of time. The aim of this systematic review protocol is to report on the methods used to conduct a systematic review to investigate the endometabolic and bone health effects of TKI therapy in CML.Methods and analysis Searches will be conducted in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and MEDLINE from inception on August 1st, 2019. Searches may be updated while performing the systematic review to ensure new evidence is included if applicable. Grey literature search will include ClinicalTrials.gov and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses A&I. We will perform a meta-analysis if there are at least two studies reporting similar populations, interventions, methods and tracking the same outcome measures. The studies should also have similar age and sex distributions.Ethics and dissemination As this is a systematic review protocol, it does not include patient data; therefore, Research Ethics Board approval is not indicated. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at international conferences.PROSPERO registration number CRD42018091175.

Background: Resident doctors are integral to healthcare delivery in Canada. Engaging residents in resource stewardship is important for professional development, but also as they are drivers of healthcare resource use. To date, no national resident-specific resource stewardship guideline has been developed. Resident Doctors of Canada (RDoC) in collaboration with Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) sought to develop an evidence-informed, consensus-based list of five recommendations to promote resource stewardship. Methods: RDoC convened a taskforce with diverse geographic and specialty representation to develop candidate recommendations targeting resident resource stewardship behaviours using a consensus-based process, supported by a literature review. Residents across the country provided feedback on the candidate recommendations via an online questionnaire. The taskforce used this feedback to finalize the list. Results: The taskforce prepared 28 candidate recommendations for consideration. A detailed literature review and consensus process narrowed this list to 12 candidate recommendations for consultation. A total of 754 residents (754/10,068 residents = 7.5%) representing all provinces and levels of residency training reviewed and ranked the candidate recommendations. The highest-ranked recommendations comprised the final list. Conclusion: Resident doctors are willing and able to demonstrate leadership in advancing resource stewardship by the development of a national resident-specific list of Choosing Wisely Canada recommendations.