Estévez L G, Martín M, Alba E, Colomer R, Lobo F, Lluch A, Adrover E, Albanell J, Barnadas A, García-Mata J, Llombart A, Muñoz M, Rodríguez C, Sánchez-Rovira P, Seguí M A, Tusquets I
Centro Integral Oncológico Clara Campal, C/Oña, Madrid, Spain.
Clin Transl Oncol. 2007 Jun;9(6):375-84. doi: 10.1007/s12094-007-0070-z.
Medical professionals in general, and medical oncologists in particular, have highly stressful practices because they are under constant pressure to have the highest-quality, up-to-date evidence available in order to make the right decision for each individual patient. From a practical point of view, being updated on oncological and other medical specialties may seem an insurmountable task because the number of scientific publications has increased dramatically. The use of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials or the application of results obtained from high-quality randomised controlled trials are some of the most common ways to address this need. Unfortunately, they do not cover all complex clinical situations that the majority of medical oncologists face in their outpatient consultations. In this review, we report the conclusions achieved in a multiexpert meeting where five important controversies in the treatment of breast cancer were analysed. Five highly experienced medical oncologists were required to defend an affirmative answer and another five were required to defend a negative answer for each of the clinical questions. After that, a one-day meeting was organised to debate each clinical question and to reach a consensus. We report here the content of this multi-expert meeting along with the conclusions drawn.
一般而言,医疗专业人员,尤其是肿瘤内科医生,工作压力极大,因为他们始终面临压力,要掌握最高质量的最新证据,以便为每位患者做出正确决策。从实际角度来看,了解肿瘤学及其他医学专业领域的最新情况似乎是一项难以完成的任务,因为科学出版物的数量急剧增加。使用随机对照试验的系统评价或应用高质量随机对照试验得出的结果是满足这一需求的一些最常见方法。不幸的是,它们并未涵盖大多数肿瘤内科医生在门诊会诊中面临的所有复杂临床情况。在本综述中,我们报告了一次多专家会议得出的结论,该会议分析了乳腺癌治疗中的五个重要争议点。对于每个临床问题,要求五名经验丰富的肿瘤内科医生支持肯定答案,另外五名医生支持否定答案。之后,组织了为期一天的会议来辩论每个临床问题并达成共识。我们在此报告这次多专家会议的内容以及得出的结论。