Suppr超能文献

值得吗?肿瘤姑息外科新结局测量方法的批判性评价。

Was It Worth It? Critical Evaluation of a Novel Outcomes Measure in Oncologic Palliative Surgery.

机构信息

From the Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.

出版信息

J Am Coll Surg. 2023 Jun 1;236(6):1156-1162. doi: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000649. Epub 2023 Feb 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patient selection for palliative surgery is complex, and appropriate outcomes measures are incompletely defined. We explored the usefulness of a specific outcomes measure "was it worth it" in patients after palliative-intent operations for advanced malignancy.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review of a comprehensive longitudinal palliative surgery database was performed at an academic tertiary care center. All patients who underwent palliative-intent operation for advanced cancer from 2003 to 2022 were included. Patient satisfaction ("was it worth it") was reported within 30 days of operation after palliative-intent surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 180 patients were identified, and 81.7% self-reported that their palliative surgery was "worth it." Patients who reported that their surgery was "not worth it" were significantly older and were more likely to have recurrent symptoms and to need reoperation. There was no significant difference in overall, recurrence-free, and reoperation-free survival for patients when comparing "worth it" with "not worth it." Initial symptom improvement was not significantly different between groups. Age older than 65 years (hazard ratio 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.80, p = 0.03), family engagement (hazard ratio 6.71, 95% CI 1.49 to 31.8, p = 0.01), and need for reoperation (hazard ratio 0.042, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.16, p < 0.0001) were all independently associated with patients reporting that their operation was "worth it."

CONCLUSIONS

Here we demonstrate that simply asking a patient "was it worth it" after a palliative-intent operation identifies a distinct cohort of patients that traditional outcomes measures fail to distinguish. Family engagement and durability of an intervention are critical factors in determining patient satisfaction after palliative intervention. These data highlight the need for highly individualized care with special attention paid to patients self-reporting that their operation was "not worth it."

摘要

背景

姑息性手术的患者选择较为复杂,且合适的疗效评估指标并不完善。本研究旨在探讨一种特定的疗效评估指标“是否值得”,用于评估接受姑息性手术的晚期恶性肿瘤患者的疗效。

研究设计

回顾性分析了一家学术型三级医疗中心的全面纵向姑息性手术数据库。纳入 2003 年至 2022 年间接受姑息性手术治疗的晚期癌症患者。所有患者在接受姑息性手术后 30 天内报告对手术的满意度(“是否值得”)。

结果

共纳入 180 例患者,81.7%的患者报告其姑息性手术“值得”。报告手术“不值得”的患者年龄明显较大,且更易出现复发症状并需要再次手术。比较“值得”和“不值得”两组患者的总生存率、无复发生存率和无再次手术生存率,差异无统计学意义。两组患者的初始症状改善无显著差异。年龄大于 65 岁(风险比 0.25,95%置信区间 0.07 至 0.80,p = 0.03)、家庭参与(风险比 6.71,95%置信区间 1.49 至 31.8,p = 0.01)和需要再次手术(风险比 0.042,95%置信区间 0.01 至 0.16,p < 0.0001)与患者报告手术“值得”独立相关。

结论

本研究表明,简单询问接受姑息性手术的患者“是否值得”,可以识别出传统疗效评估指标无法区分的患者群体。家庭参与度和干预措施的持久性是确定姑息性干预后患者满意度的关键因素。这些数据强调了需要对患者进行高度个体化的护理,特别关注那些报告手术“不值得”的患者。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验