IMPORTANCE Head and neck cancer (HNC) is more common among socioeconomically disenfranchised individuals, making financial burden particularly relevant. OBJECTIVE To assess the financial burdens of HNC compared with other cancers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this retrospective review of nationally representative, publicly available survey, data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey were extracted from January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2015. A total of 444 867 adults were surveyed, which extrapolates to a population of 221 503 108 based on the weighted survey design. Data analysis was performed from April 18, 2018, to August 20, 2018. EXPOSURES Of 16 771 patients with cancer surveyed (weighted count of 10 083 586 patients), 489 reported HNC (weighted count of 261 631). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Patients with HNC were compared with patients with other cancers on demographics, income, employment, and health. Within the HNC group, risk factors for total medical expenses and relative out-of-pocket expenses were assessed with regression modeling. Complex sampling methods were accounted for with weighting using balanced repeated replication. RESULTS A total of 16 771 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.3 [18.9] years; 9006 [53.7%] female) with cancer were studied. Compared with patients with other cancers, patients with HNC were more often members of a minority race/ethnicity, male, poor, publicly insured, and less educated, with lower general and mental health status. Median annual medical expenses
Objective To determine if there are differences in mortality from oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC) based on oral cavity (OC) subsites. Methods Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) 9 database, patients with sequence number 0 or 1 squamous cell OCSCC were analyzed by OC subsite for 5‐year cause‐specific mortality (CSM) from OCSCC. Proportional hazards regression determined the association between 5‐year CSM and OC subsites while controlling for treatment modality, stage, and demographic characteristics using hazard ratios. Significance was set at alpha = 0.05. Results 20,647 OC patients were included in the regression analysis. The most commonly diagnosed sites were floor of mouth (34.4%) and oral tongue (34.3%). Floor of mouth, upper gum, and retromolar trigone were associated with lower CSM compared to oral tongue. Not receiving surgery and receiving radiation were associated with increased CSM, and CSM increased with cancer staging when distant or regional disease was compared to localized disease. Also, patients diagnosed at 60 years or older and black patients had increased CSM. Conclusion Among OCSCC patients, those with oral tongue cancer are more likely to experience CSM than patients with floor of mouth, upper gum, and retromolar trigone cancer. It is important to understand these mortality related differences in the management of OCSCC patients. Understanding subsite‐specific mortality may benefit prognosis counseling of OCSCC patients and elicit subsite‐directed research as a means to improve outcomes. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope, 129:1400–1406, 2019
Immunoassay procedures have a wide application in clinical medicine and as such are used throughout clinical biochemistry laboratories both for urgent and routine testing. Clinicians and laboratory personnel are often presented with immunoassay results which are inconsistent with clinical findings. Without a high index of suspicion interferences will often not be suspected. Artifactual results can be due to a range of interferences in immunoassays which can include cross reacting substances, heterophile antibodies, autoantibodies and the high dose hook effect. Further, pre-analytical aspects and certain disease states can influence the potential for interference in immunoassays. Practical solutions for investigation of artifactual results in the setting of the routine clinical laboratory are provided.
Background: There are currently no field data about the effect of implementing European Working Time Directive (EWTD)-compliant rotas in a medical setting. Surveys of doctors’ subjective opinions on shift work have not provided reliable objective data with which to evaluate its efficacy.Aim: We therefore studied the effects on patient's safety and doctors’ work-sleep patterns of implementing an EWTD-compliant 48 h work week in a single-blind intervention study carried out over a 12-week period at the University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust. We hypothesized that medical error rates would be reduced following the new rota.Methods: Nineteen junior doctors, nine studied while working an intervention schedule of <48 h per week and 10 studied while working traditional weeks of <56 h scheduled hours in medical wards. Work hours and sleep duration were recorded daily. Rate of medical errors (per 1000 patient-days), identified using an established active surveillance methodology, were compared for the Intervention and Traditional wards. Two senior physicians blinded to rota independently rated all suspected errors.Results: Average scheduled work hours were significantly lower on the intervention schedule [43.2 (SD 7.7) (range 26.0–60.0) vs. 52.4 (11.2) (30.0–77.0) h/week; P < 0.001], and there was a non-significant trend for increased total sleep time per day [7.26 (0.36) vs. 6.75 (0.40) h; P = 0.095]. During a total of 4782 patient-days involving 481 admissions, 32.7% fewer total medical errors occurred during the intervention than during the traditional rota (27.6 vs. 41.0 per 1000 patient-days, P = 0.006), including 82.6% fewer intercepted potential adverse events (1.2 vs. 6.9 per 1000 patient-days, P = 0.002) and 31.4% fewer non-intercepted potential adverse events (16.6 vs. 24.2 per 1000 patient-days, P = 0.067). Doctors reported worse educational opportunities on the intervention rota.Conclusions: Whilst concerns remain regarding reduced educational opportunities, our study supports the hypothesis that a 48 h work week coupled with targeted efforts to improve sleep hygiene improves patient safety.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.