Journal of pediatric surgery · 2022
A survey of management preferences for bladder exstrophy and cloacal anomalies among Canadian pediatric surgeons and urologists.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Morgan Catherine, Lees Mackenzie C, MacLellan Dawn L, Blackmore Christopher, Romao Rodrigo Lp
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study examined the current referral patterns and preferences of Canadian Association of Paediatric Surgeons (CAPS) and Pediatric Urologists of Canada (PUC) members for management of bladder exstrophy and cloacal anomalies (BECA).
METHODS: We invited CAPS and PUC members to participate in an online survey using RedCap. Demographic variables, years in practice, current referral patterns and local expertise at the participants' institution were collected. Participants' preferences towards three distinct referral models were assessed using Likert scales: no centralization of care, centralization in one or two national centres of excellence, or a consortium-based approach.
RESULTS: There were 82 survey respondents (2/3 were CAPS members, 35.4% female, 72% in practice for >10 years). Although >90% of participants agreed/somewhat agreed that surgical volumes impact outcomes, 58% reported not referring out BECA patients for treatment; about 50% recognized the existence of a local dedicated expert. In terms of referral preferences, 84% of participants favoured identification of a few centres with expertise based on geographic location (a consortium-based approach), while only 7% chose a one or two national centres of excellence model. Over half of participants agreed/somewhat agreed with participating in trials of a consortium-based approach in Canada.
CONCLUSION: Most CAPS and PUC members do not refer BECA patients elsewhere for treatment. Nonetheless, most surgeons recognize the importance of volume to improve outcomes and show willingness to participate in trials to concentrate experience; most participants favour a consortium-based approach through identification of a few centres of excellence based on geographic location.
METHODS: We invited CAPS and PUC members to participate in an online survey using RedCap. Demographic variables, years in practice, current referral patterns and local expertise at the participants' institution were collected. Participants' preferences towards three distinct referral models were assessed using Likert scales: no centralization of care, centralization in one or two national centres of excellence, or a consortium-based approach.
RESULTS: There were 82 survey respondents (2/3 were CAPS members, 35.4% female, 72% in practice for >10 years). Although >90% of participants agreed/somewhat agreed that surgical volumes impact outcomes, 58% reported not referring out BECA patients for treatment; about 50% recognized the existence of a local dedicated expert. In terms of referral preferences, 84% of participants favoured identification of a few centres with expertise based on geographic location (a consortium-based approach), while only 7% chose a one or two national centres of excellence model. Over half of participants agreed/somewhat agreed with participating in trials of a consortium-based approach in Canada.
CONCLUSION: Most CAPS and PUC members do not refer BECA patients elsewhere for treatment. Nonetheless, most surgeons recognize the importance of volume to improve outcomes and show willingness to participate in trials to concentrate experience; most participants favour a consortium-based approach through identification of a few centres of excellence based on geographic location.