JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2023
Physical Examination in Medical Oncology Guiding the Development of a Protocol for Teleoncology Care in a Public Health Care Oncology Service.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Nazareth Aguiar Pedro, Stival Mirella, Magalhães Filho Marcos Aurelio Fonseca, Del Giglio Auro
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We aimed to define clinical variables that could predict changes in physical examination (PE) findings and consequently lead to significant differences in clinical management. This knowledge is important because of the growing popularity of teleoncology consultations, in which there is no possibility of PE, aside from inspection.
METHODS: This prospective study was conducted in two public hospitals in Brazil. Clinical variables and findings of PE, as well as the management plan determined at the end of the medical appointment, were systematically recorded.
RESULTS: A total of 368 in-person clinical evaluations of patients with cancer were included. PE was normal or had alterations already seen in previous consultations in 87% of the cases. Among patients with new changes in PE (n = 49), cancer treatment was maintained in 59%, complementary examinations and specialist appointments were requested in 31%, and oncological therapy was modified directly after PE in 10%. Of the total 368 visits, only 12 (3%) had a change in oncological management, five directly after PE abnormalities and 7 after complementary assessment. The presence of symptoms and reasons for consultation other than follow-up showed a positive association with alterations in PE and consequent changes in clinical management by univariate and multivariate analysis (P < .05).
CONCLUSION: Considering changes in clinical management, PE on every encounter for medical oncology surveillance visits may not be necessary. We envision that teleoncology will be a safe modality in most cases, given the large percentage of asymptomatic patients with no changes in PE during face-to-face care. However, for patients with advanced disease and symptoms, however, we suggest priority for in-person care.
METHODS: This prospective study was conducted in two public hospitals in Brazil. Clinical variables and findings of PE, as well as the management plan determined at the end of the medical appointment, were systematically recorded.
RESULTS: A total of 368 in-person clinical evaluations of patients with cancer were included. PE was normal or had alterations already seen in previous consultations in 87% of the cases. Among patients with new changes in PE (n = 49), cancer treatment was maintained in 59%, complementary examinations and specialist appointments were requested in 31%, and oncological therapy was modified directly after PE in 10%. Of the total 368 visits, only 12 (3%) had a change in oncological management, five directly after PE abnormalities and 7 after complementary assessment. The presence of symptoms and reasons for consultation other than follow-up showed a positive association with alterations in PE and consequent changes in clinical management by univariate and multivariate analysis (P < .05).
CONCLUSION: Considering changes in clinical management, PE on every encounter for medical oncology surveillance visits may not be necessary. We envision that teleoncology will be a safe modality in most cases, given the large percentage of asymptomatic patients with no changes in PE during face-to-face care. However, for patients with advanced disease and symptoms, however, we suggest priority for in-person care.