Out-patient visits for gastrointestinal cancer at a quaternary South African hospital-trends and geospatial distribution

Exploring the gastric cancer care pathway in South Africa

BACKGROUND

 Gastric cancer (GC) diagnosis and care data in South Africa (SA) is sparse, and SA has a high GC mortality rate. Mapping the GC care pathway is needed to explore its efficacy in association with the SA GC burden and mortality.

AIM

 The study aims to map the GC care pathway in SA from diagnosis to management by healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in the GC patient journey and explore barriers and facilitators to the effective flow of the GC care pathway.

SETTING

 Interviews conducted with South African HCPs were the data source used in this article for analysis. General physicians (GP) were the first contact point with chain-referral sampling sourcing other clinicians.

METHODS

 Interviews were conducted via Microsoft Teams (MS Teams) and Google Meet with qualitative analyses via MAXQDA.

RESULTS

 Themes identified were GC care pathway processes, public versus private healthcare system differences and care pathway challenges. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) care is practised for GC in SA, starting with the GP or nurse followed by gastroenterologist (GI), surgeon and pathologist. Thereafter, nurses, dieticians and palliative care specialists are involved. Healthcare sector differences are diagnosis time, GC staging, HCP and treatment access. Challenges include low GC index of suspicion by primary care clinicians (PCC) and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) detection.

CONCLUSION

 A MDT approach for optimal treatment and patient care may be the best method for prolonged life.Contribution: A South African national consensus for GC care via a MDT, emphasising early diagnosis to aid in a robust treatment plan for improved patient outcomes is warranted.

Self-adherence to post-colonoscopy consults in patients undergoing diagnostic colonoscopy: Findings from a cross-sectional, quantitative survey at a South African quaternary hospital

Post-colonoscopy consults empower patients to make informed decisions around their subsequent treatment, and non-compliance with these consults ("no-shows") hinders disease management. There is a paucity in the literature regarding self-adherence to post-colonoscopy consults in resource-limited settings such as South Africa. An understanding of self-adherence to post-colonoscopy consults in this setting is required to establish whether improved interventions are needed, and what specific elements of self-adherence should be addressed with these interventions. The objective of this hypothesis-generating, cross-sectional, quantitative survey was to conduct a baseline assessment of cognitive, motivational, social, and behavioural variables related to self-adherence to post-colonoscopy consults in patients who underwent diagnostic colonoscopy at a South African quaternary hospital. The Adherence Determinants Questionnaire (ADQ) was administered in 47 patients to establish a baseline assessment of elements related to self-adherence to post-colonoscopy consults, including interpersonal aspects of care, perceived utility, severity, susceptibility, subjective norms, intentions, and supports/barriers. ADQ scores were transformed to a percentage of the maximum score for each element (100.0%). The overall mean transformed ADQ score was 57.8%. The mean transformed scores for specific ADQ components were as follows: subjective norms (40.8%), perceived severity (55.4%), perceived utility (56.6%), intentions (59.4%), supports/barriers (59.9%), interpersonal aspects (62.2%), and perceived susceptibility (65.9%). There were no statistically significant differences in overall mean transformed ADQ scores and individual ADQ elements across categories of participant age (p-values ranging between 0.180 and 0.949 when compared between participants ≤40 years and >40 years old), gender (p-values ranging between 0.071 and 0.946 when compared between males and females), and race (p-values ranging between 0.119 and 0.774 when compared between Black Africans and non-Black Africans). Our findings suggest a general need for appropriate interventions to improve self-adherence to post-colonoscopy consults in our setting.

Predictors of treatment refusal in patients with colorectal cancer: A systematic review

This systematic review was conducted to investigate predictors of treatment refusal in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. An understanding of these predictors would inform statistical models for the identification of high-risk patients who might benefit from interventions that seek to improve treatment compliance. We performed a search of PubMed and Scopus to identify potentially relevant studies on predictors of treatment refusal in CRC patients that were published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2021. We screened manuscripts using predefined eligibility criteria. Information on study design, study location, patient characteristics, treatments, rates and predictors of treatment refusal, and the impact of treatment refusal on mortality or survival were collected from eligible studies. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa score. The overall findings of the review process were summarized using descriptive statistics and a narrative synthesis. A total of 13 studies were included in this review. Ten studies reported on refusal of CRC surgery, refusal rate: 0.25%-3.26%; three studies reported on chemotherapy refusal (one of which reported on both surgery and chemotherapy refusal), refusal rate: 7.8%-41.5%; and one study reported on refusal of any cancer treatment, refusal rate: 8.7%. The bulk of the published literature confirmed the harmful association between treatment refusal and poor survival outcomes in CRC patients. Frequently cited predictors of treatment refusal included patient demographic characteristics (age, race, gender), clinical characteristics (disease stage, comorbidity), and factors that impact access to cancer care services (healthcare insurance, facility level). Potentially high rates of treatment refusal pose a challenge to CRC control. This review has identified several factors which must be considered when attempting to reduce treatment refusal in CRC patients. Furthermore, these factors should be tested as components of predictive risk models for this important outcome.

Reproductive health issues, infections and non-communicable diseases

NIL