Huang Xiao Jun, Liu Kaiyan, Ritchie David, Andersson Borje, Lu Jin, Hou Jian, Burguera Adolfo de la Fuente, Wang JianXiang, Yeoh Allen, Yan Chenhua, Zhou Daobin, Tan Daryl, Kim Dong Wook, Wu Depei, Shpall Elizabeth, Kornblau Stephen, Neelapu Sattava, Hongeng Suradej, Li Jianyong, Hu Jiong, Zhang Lian Sheng, Wang Michael, Malhotra Pankaj, Jiang Qian, Qin Yazhen, Wong Raymond, Champlin Richard, Hagemeister Frederick, Westin Jason, Iyer Swaminathan, Mathews Vikram, Wang Yu, Hu Yu, Xiao Zhijian, Shao Zonghong, Orlowski Robert Z, Chim Chor Sang, Mulligan Stephen, Sanz Miguel, Ozawa Keiya, Parmar Simrit, Issaragrisil Surapol
Peking University People's Hospital, Peking University Institute of Hematology, Beijing, China.
Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Oncotarget. 2017 Jun 20;8(25):41620-41630. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.15655.
This report serves as a snapshot of the state-of-knowledge in the Asia Pacific (APAC) Hematology Oncology community, and establishes a baseline for longitudinal investigations to follow changes in best practices over time. The objective of this study was to understand the approach to hematologic diseases, common standards of care and best practices, issues that remain controversial or debated, and educational or resource gaps that warrant attention. We used mobile application to disseminate and distribute questionnaires to delegates during the 6th international hematologic malignancies conference hosted by the APAC Hematology Consortium at Beijing, China. User responses were collected in an anonymous fashion. We report survey results in two ways: the overall responses, and responses as stratified between Chinese physicians and "Other" represented nationalities. Overall geographical concordance in survey responses was positive and strong. Perhaps more interesting than instances of absolute agreement, these data provide a unique opportunity to identify topics in which physician knowledge or opinions diverge. We assigned questions from all modules to broad categories of: patient information; diagnosis; treatment preference; transplantation; and general knowledge/opinion. On average, we observed a geographic difference of 15% for any particular answer choice, and this was fairly constant across survey modules. These results reveal utility and need for widespread and ongoing initiatives to assess knowledge and provide evidence-based education in real time. The data will be made more valuable by longitudinal participation, such that we can monitor changes in the state of the art over time.
本报告呈现了亚太血液学肿瘤学界的知识现状快照,并为纵向研究建立了基线,以追踪最佳实践随时间的变化。本研究的目的是了解血液疾病的治疗方法、常见的护理标准和最佳实践、仍存在争议或有待讨论的问题,以及值得关注的教育或资源差距。我们在中国北京由亚太血液学联盟主办的第六届国际血液恶性肿瘤会议期间,使用移动应用程序向与会代表分发问卷。用户回复以匿名方式收集。我们以两种方式报告调查结果:总体回复情况,以及按中国医生和“其他”代表的国籍分层的回复情况。调查回复中的总体地域一致性积极且显著。或许比绝对一致的情况更有趣的是,这些数据提供了一个独特的机会,来识别医生知识或观点存在分歧的主题。我们将所有模块的问题归为以下几大类:患者信息;诊断;治疗偏好;移植;以及一般知识/观点。平均而言,我们观察到对于任何特定答案选项,地域差异为15%,并且在各个调查模块中这一差异相当稳定。这些结果揭示了开展广泛且持续的举措以评估知识并实时提供循证教育的作用和必要性。通过纵向参与,这些数据将变得更有价值,这样我们就能随时间监测最新技术的变化。