No abstract

Background Nurses are becoming increasingly important as providers of primary health care in Australia. In November 2010, Medicare provider rights and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme rights for nurse practitioners, working in private practice and in collaboration with a medical practitioner, were introduced in Australia. Although international evidence suggests that nurse practitioners would be appropriate and acceptable providers of care at the first point of contact, such as primary health care, there is little Australian evidence about what care consumers are willing to accept from nurse practitioners.Objectives To ascertain what care Australian health-care consumers would accept from nurse practitioners in this setting.Participants Australian adults over 18 years of age.Methods National Survey delivered online. Information about the survey was disseminated through a media campaign, stakeholder engagement and through the health-care consumer networks nationally.Results The total number of respondents that started the survey was n = 1883. Ninety-five percentage (n = 1784) of respondents completed the survey. The majority of respondents were women, aged 25-54 years, had completed tertiary education and had an annual household income of more than A$80 000. The majority of the respondents (n = 1562, 87%) said they would be prepared to see a nurse practitioner for some of their primary health-care needs.Conclusions The findings of this study suggest consumers are accepting of a range of activities undertaken by nurse practitioners in primary health care and this has relevance for primary healthcare workforce mix and organization, particularly for areas that are underserved by medical practitioners.

Introduction: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART) as part of a multi-modality approach for locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) requires further investigation. Importantly, this approach may allow for a single-staged surgical procedure, with mastectomy and immediate autologous reconstruction. Multiple other potential benefits of NART include improved pathological downstaging of breast disease, reduced overall treatment time, elimination of time period with breast tissue deficit and improved patient satisfaction. Methods: This is a retrospective multi-institutional review of patients with LABC and high-risk breast disease undergoing NART. Eligible patients sequentially underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with or without HER2-targeted therapy, NART, followed by mastectomy with immediate autologous breast reconstruction (BR) 4-to 6 weeks post-completion of radiotherapy. Patient and tumour characteristics were analysed using descriptive statistics. Surgical complications were assessed using the Clavien-Dindo Classification (Ann Surg 2004; 240: 205). Results: From 3/2013 to 9/2019, 153 patients were treated with NART. The median age was 47 years (IQR 42-52), with median body mass index of 27. Eighteen patients experienced Grade 3 acute surgical complications. This included 13 Grade 3B breast-site events and 9 Grade 3B donor-site events, where further surgical intervention was required for management of wound infection, wound dehiscence, flap or mastectomy skin necrosis, haematoma and internal mammary venous anastomotic thrombosis. No autologous flap loss was observed. Conclusion: Neoadjuvant radiotherapy facilitates a single-stage surgical procedure with mastectomy and immediate autologous BR, eliminating the delay to reconstructive surgery and thus shortening a woman's breast cancer journey. The findings of this review support the use of NART, with comparable rates of surgical complications to standard sequencing.

IMPORTANCE: COVID-19 can cause serious illness requiring multimodal treatment and is associated with secondary infections. Studies have suggested an increased risk of fungal infections, including candidemia following severe COVID-19 though understanding of risk factors and clinical outcomes remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To describe clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors of candidemia among patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter, case-control study of patients with severe COVID-19 was conducted to evaluate risk factors and clinical outcomes in patients who developed candidemia between August 2020 and August 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Chart review evaluating institutional and patient demographics, clinical and mycological characteristics, concomitant interventions (antibiotics, immunosuppressive agents, parenteral nutrition, degree of oxygen support, mechanical ventilation, surgery), treatment regimens, and outcomes (length of stay and discharge disposition) RESULTS: A total of 275 patients were enrolled in the study, including 91 patients with severe COVID-19 and subsequent candidemia and 184 with severe COVID-19 without candidemia. Most patients received antibiotics prior to candidemia episode (93%), while approximately one-quarter of patients received biologic for COVID-19. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the cases compared with the controls (68% vs 40%; p < 0.01). Candida albicans was the most common (53%), followed by C. glabrata (19%). Use of central lines, biologic, and paralytics were independent risk factors for candidemia. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Candidemia following COVID-19 infection is a concern that requires clinical consideration and patient monitoring. Risk factors for the development of candidemia in the setting of COVID-19 infection are largely consistent with traditional risk factors for candidemia in hospitalized patients.