Development of a core outcome set for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma trials: identification of core domains and outcomes

BACKGROUND

The lack of uniformity in the outcomes reported in clinical studies of the treatment of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) complicates efforts to compare treatment effectiveness across trials.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a core outcome set (COS), a minimum set of agreed-upon outcomes to be measured in all clinical trials of a given disease or outcome, for the treatment of cSCC.

METHODS

One hundred and nine outcomes were identified via a systematic literature review and interviews with 28 stakeholders. After consolidation of this long list, 55 candidate outcomes were rated by 19 physician and 10 patient stakeholders, in two rounds of Delphi exercises. Outcomes scored 'critically important' (score of 7, 8 or 9) by ≥ 70% of patients and ≥ 70% of physicians were provisionally included. At the consensus meeting, after discussion and voting of 44 international experts and patients, the provisional list was reduced to a final core set, for which consensus was achieved among all meeting participants.

RESULTS

A core set of seven outcomes was finalized at the consensus meeting: (i) serious or persistent adverse events, (ii) patient-reported quality of life, (iii) complete response, (iv) partial response, (v) recurrence-free survival, (vi) progression-free survival and (vii) disease-specific survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to increase the comparability of results across trials and to reduce selective reporting bias, cSCC researchers should consider reporting these core outcomes. Further work needs to be performed to identify the measures that should be reported for each of these outcomes.

Applying the WHO conceptual framework for the International Classification for Patient Safety to a surgical population

OBJECTIVE

Efforts to improve patient safety are challenged by the lack of universally agreed upon terms. The International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) was developed by the World Health Organization for this purpose. This study aimed to test the applicability of the ICPS to a surgical population.

DESIGN

A web-based safety debriefing was sent to clinicians involved in surgical care of abdominal organ transplant patients. A multidisciplinary team of patient safety experts, surgeons and researchers used the data to develop a system of classification based on the ICPS. Disagreements were reconciled via consensus, and a codebook was developed for future use by researchers.

RESULTS

A total of 320 debriefing responses were used for the initial review and codebook development. In total, the 320 debriefing responses contained 227 patient safety incidents (range: 0-7 per debriefing) and 156 contributing factors/hazards (0-5 per response). The most common severity classification was 'reportable circumstance,' followed by 'near miss.' The most common incident types were 'resources/organizational management,' followed by 'medical device/equipment.' Several aspects of surgical care were encompassed by more than one classification, including operating room scheduling, delays in care, trainee-related incidents, interruptions and handoffs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that a framework for patient safety can be applied to facilitate the organization and analysis of surgical safety data. Several unique aspects of surgical care require consideration, and by using a standardized framework for describing concepts, research findings can be compared and disseminated across surgical specialties. The codebook is intended for use as a framework for other specialties and institutions.