结直肠癌和虚弱的决策和结果:DeCaF研究。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
A Kler, J Tay, C Slawinski, C Welch, S Moug, S Blackwell, R Arnott, P Mitchell, N Heywood
{"title":"结直肠癌和虚弱的决策和结果:DeCaF研究。","authors":"A Kler, J Tay, C Slawinski, C Welch, S Moug, S Blackwell, R Arnott, P Mitchell, N Heywood","doi":"10.1308/rcsann.2025.0050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Surgical resection is the main treatment for non-metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). However, 6% of patients do not undergo surgery owing to frailty, according to the National Bowel Cancer Audit (NBOCA). The impact of preoperative evaluation and decision making on outcomes in frail patients is underexplored. This study examines variation in decision making for frail, older patients and the availability/use of resources by colorectal multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) across United Kingdom (UK) hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A UK-wide questionnaire was distributed to colorectal MDTs via the NBOCA newsletter and social media (18 May to 30 June 2021). Part A assessed MDT structure and resource use; Part B explored MDT decisions for two simulated 75-year-old patients with colonic and rectal cancer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty MDTs responded. Decisions were MDT-driven in 55% (<i>n</i> = 11) and surgeon-driven in 45% (<i>n</i> = 9). Clinical examination (85%) and performance status (90%) were most used. Resource utilisation during MDT meetings varied across sites; for example, echocardiogram results were available and considered in MDT decision making in only 15% of centres. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing was used in 75%, anaesthetic assessment in 80%, frailty scoring in 25%, and preoperative geriatric assessment in 5%. Management of right-sided cancer was more consistent; rectal cancer decisions were more variable.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Variation exists across MDTs in the availability and use of resources when managing frail CRC patients. There is less consensus for rectal than caecal cancer. These findings highlight the need for standardised MDT protocols to support equitable, patient-centred care in complex cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":8088,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decision making and outcomes in colorectal cancer and frailty: the DeCaF study.\",\"authors\":\"A Kler, J Tay, C Slawinski, C Welch, S Moug, S Blackwell, R Arnott, P Mitchell, N Heywood\",\"doi\":\"10.1308/rcsann.2025.0050\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Surgical resection is the main treatment for non-metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). However, 6% of patients do not undergo surgery owing to frailty, according to the National Bowel Cancer Audit (NBOCA). The impact of preoperative evaluation and decision making on outcomes in frail patients is underexplored. This study examines variation in decision making for frail, older patients and the availability/use of resources by colorectal multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) across United Kingdom (UK) hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A UK-wide questionnaire was distributed to colorectal MDTs via the NBOCA newsletter and social media (18 May to 30 June 2021). Part A assessed MDT structure and resource use; Part B explored MDT decisions for two simulated 75-year-old patients with colonic and rectal cancer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty MDTs responded. Decisions were MDT-driven in 55% (<i>n</i> = 11) and surgeon-driven in 45% (<i>n</i> = 9). Clinical examination (85%) and performance status (90%) were most used. Resource utilisation during MDT meetings varied across sites; for example, echocardiogram results were available and considered in MDT decision making in only 15% of centres. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing was used in 75%, anaesthetic assessment in 80%, frailty scoring in 25%, and preoperative geriatric assessment in 5%. Management of right-sided cancer was more consistent; rectal cancer decisions were more variable.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Variation exists across MDTs in the availability and use of resources when managing frail CRC patients. There is less consensus for rectal than caecal cancer. These findings highlight the need for standardised MDT protocols to support equitable, patient-centred care in complex cases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8088,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2025.0050\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2025.0050","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

手术切除是非转移性结直肠癌(CRC)的主要治疗方法。然而,根据国家肠癌审计(NBOCA), 6%的患者由于身体虚弱而不接受手术。术前评估和决策对体弱患者预后的影响尚未得到充分探讨。本研究考察了英国(UK)医院的结直肠多学科团队(MDTs)在体弱、老年患者决策和资源可用性/使用方面的差异。方法:通过NBOCA通讯和社交媒体(2021年5月18日至6月30日)向结直肠mdt患者分发全英国范围的调查问卷。A部分评估MDT结构和资源使用;B部分探讨了两名模拟的75岁结肠癌和直肠癌患者的MDT决策。结果:20名MDTs有反应。55% (n = 11)的决定由mdt驱动,45% (n = 9)的决定由外科医生驱动。临床检查(85%)和工作状态(90%)最为常用。MDT会议期间的资源利用情况因地点而异;例如,超声心动图结果是可用的,并且只有15%的中心在MDT决策中考虑了超声心动图结果。心肺运动试验占75%,麻醉评估占80%,衰弱评分占25%,术前老年评估占5%。右侧肿瘤的处理更为一致;直肠癌的决定则更加多变。结论:不同MDTs在治疗体弱CRC患者时,在资源的可得性和使用方面存在差异。与直肠癌相比,直肠癌的共识较少。这些发现强调需要标准化的联合化疗方案,以支持在复杂病例中公平、以患者为中心的护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Decision making and outcomes in colorectal cancer and frailty: the DeCaF study.

Introduction: Surgical resection is the main treatment for non-metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). However, 6% of patients do not undergo surgery owing to frailty, according to the National Bowel Cancer Audit (NBOCA). The impact of preoperative evaluation and decision making on outcomes in frail patients is underexplored. This study examines variation in decision making for frail, older patients and the availability/use of resources by colorectal multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) across United Kingdom (UK) hospitals.

Methods: A UK-wide questionnaire was distributed to colorectal MDTs via the NBOCA newsletter and social media (18 May to 30 June 2021). Part A assessed MDT structure and resource use; Part B explored MDT decisions for two simulated 75-year-old patients with colonic and rectal cancer.

Results: Twenty MDTs responded. Decisions were MDT-driven in 55% (n = 11) and surgeon-driven in 45% (n = 9). Clinical examination (85%) and performance status (90%) were most used. Resource utilisation during MDT meetings varied across sites; for example, echocardiogram results were available and considered in MDT decision making in only 15% of centres. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing was used in 75%, anaesthetic assessment in 80%, frailty scoring in 25%, and preoperative geriatric assessment in 5%. Management of right-sided cancer was more consistent; rectal cancer decisions were more variable.

Conclusions: Variation exists across MDTs in the availability and use of resources when managing frail CRC patients. There is less consensus for rectal than caecal cancer. These findings highlight the need for standardised MDT protocols to support equitable, patient-centred care in complex cases.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
316
期刊介绍: The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England is the official scholarly research journal of the Royal College of Surgeons and is published eight times a year in January, February, March, April, May, July, September and November. The main aim of the journal is to publish high-quality, peer-reviewed papers that relate to all branches of surgery. The Annals also includes letters and comments, a regular technical section, controversial topics, CORESS feedback and book reviews. The editorial board is composed of experts from all the surgical specialties.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信