- Email: [email protected]
71 Improving knowledge of lung cancer using the cancer specialist library
S20 involving radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery, or; at the time when supportive care is recommended. The assessment focuses on all the common physical symptoms, the potential long term side effects of treatment, and the psychological and social concerns of both the patient and carer. The location of the assessment can either be by telephone, home visit, clinic visit, a combination of the above, and involving the co-ordination of other healthcare professionals within the multi-disciplinary team. Timing of the assessment is negotiated between the patient and LCNS. Results: A prospective audit from Jan 2006-Dec 2006 showed that 55 patients had been enrolled onto the follow up programme within the YCN (detail of the data will be in the poster). There have been no recorded critical incidents. Conclusions: The protocol has given additional choice to patients in how their follow up is undertaken. Within the YCN the protocol is now an integral part of the patient pathway. E-mail: [email protected] 71 Improving knowledge of lung cancer using the cancer specialist library M. Peake1 , C. Alcock2 *, S. Hunt2 , G. Healy2 . 1 Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, 2 Oxford Radcliffe NHS Trust, UK Introduction: Implementation of evidence based medicine is an essential part of improving survival and quality of life for patients with lung cancer. The Cancer Specialist Library (CSL), part of the National Library for Health (NLH) provides evidence in an accessible web based format, either as Core Knowledge, Knowledge Updates or a recent initiative the National Knowledge Week (NKW) http://www.library.nhs.uk/cancer/. Methods: The CSL went ‘live’ in 2005 and has collected several thousand systematic reviews and guidelines (including NICE) in the Core Knowledge and Knowledge Update sections. NKWs focus on current issues and best evidence for a specific cancer for one week during the year. The first National Knowledge Week (NKW) for Lung Cancer took place in November 2006 and will be updated annually. The NKW involved a Steering Committee, including the CSL Team, a Clinical ‘Champion’ (M.P.) and Macmillan Cancer Support. A number of health professionals were also invited to form an Advisory Panel. The collaboration resulted in a scoping document, the selection of “hot topics”, identification of best current evidence and the creation of userfriendly summaries available from the CSL, with links to relevant full text documents. Result: The Lung Cancer NKW was publicised with the assistance of the Cancer Networks, Cancer Service Collaborative and Macmillan Cancercare. A web-based evaluation form provides feed back and the National Library for Health provides statistics on the usage of the site overall. A steadily increasing number of people are logging on to the CSL to view resources and NKW content. Conclusion: The Cancer Specialist Library has the potential to become a major route for the dissemination of evidence based practice in Lung Cancer care. 72 A lung cancer/mesothelioma patient information a network wide quality driven project A. Burgoyne, C. Diver, H. Dutton, K. Provan. Tameside Acute Services NHS Trust, UK The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) Guidance on Cancer Services Improving Supportive and Palliative Care for Adults with Cancer (March 2004) calls for cancer networks to develop a co-ordinated approach to providing accessible, high quality and comprehensive packages of information to their patients and carers. This poster describes how a robust system was set up to deliver the above goal. A lung tumour specific group was formed to look at information for lung cancer. The group consisted of clinical nurse specialists, and an information manager, with input from patients and carers.
Posters, 5th Annual BTOG Meeting, 2007 The group mapped what existing information was available, identified gaps, acknowledged information which was thought to be of the highest quality and put together a template which would follow the patient’s journey. Where gaps were identified, information leaflets were written and recommended as best practice. It was recognised that some leaflets would need to be tailored to meet local needs and could be adapted. Information was grouped into seven headings which reflect the patient’s journey. Rigorous mechanisms were established which would review the information so that it would meet with CNST standards, readability measures and ensure high quality. The project is due to be launched on No Smoking Day in March 2007 and will be accessible via an interactive page on the GMCCN Website. This will enable the project to be amended and expanded as more information needs are identified. 73 Can patients and carers have too many telephone contacts? I. Underwood, P. Borgen. Acute and Community Trusts, South Tyneside, UK Introduction: In South Tyneside we are in the unique position of having an Acute and a Community Lung Cancer Nurse Specialist. We wanted patients views about the way they would prefer to contact us. Methodology: Questionnaire given to patients diagnosed between October 05 February 06. Was an answering machine acceptable? Would they prefer: 1. Central number message relayed by message taker to appropriate CNS 2. Direct Line numbers to each of us 3. Direct line numbers plus Bleep/Mobile Results: The response rate at 51% was a good response. On simple analysis the central number was the favourite however it also scored highest for the least favourite. When a scoring system was put in place the direct phone number became the overall favourite. Recommendations: 1. Repeat the audit ensuring the contact choices are accurate. 2. Use a larger sample size e.g. patients diagnosed 6 12 month 3. Answering machine outgoing messages contain quality statements about frequency that messages are retrieved. 74 Northern cancer network lung audit 1999 2004
outcome data:
T. Peel, S. Graham. Wallsend Chest Clinic, NE28 7PB, UK Introduction: The NCN Lung Audit collected data for newly diagnosed lung cancer patients from 1999 2004. We report the outcome data as at November 2006. Methods: Patient data were entered onto a double sided form which was completed by the diagnosing team, and read optically (Formic). The regional lung audit clerk checked the case notes of such patients at 3 monthly intervals to check progress and document outcomes. Results: 7625 patients were documented before entry closed in autumn 2004. Of these, 708 had their cancer resected (9%) and 742 (5%) received radical radiotherapy. A small number of these people received chemotherapy prior to the radical treatment. 1877 (25%) received chemotherapy without subsequent radical treatment. The uptake of chemotherapy increased from 22% in 1999 to 32% in 2004. The remainder of patients had supportive care, palliative radiotherapy or procedures or specialist palliative care. Overall, the median survival varied between 146 and 190 days, without any year on year trend. The median survival for patients treated with chemotherapy varied between 239 and 310 days, again without any year on year trend. Conclusion: This audit does not confirm any change in outcomes over the period studied but will serve as a baseline for future audits of changes in therapeutic practice.
Posters, 5th Annual BTOG Meeting, 2007 The group mapped what existing information was available, identified gaps, acknowledged information which was thought to be of the highest quality and put together a template which would follow the patient’s journey. Where gaps were identified, information leaflets were written and recommended as best practice. It was recognised that some leaflets would need to be tailored to meet local needs and could be adapted. Information was grouped into seven headings which reflect the patient’s journey. Rigorous mechanisms were established which would review the information so that it would meet with CNST standards, readability measures and ensure high quality. The project is due to be launched on No Smoking Day in March 2007 and will be accessible via an interactive page on the GMCCN Website. This will enable the project to be amended and expanded as more information needs are identified. 73 Can patients and carers have too many telephone contacts? I. Underwood, P. Borgen. Acute and Community Trusts, South Tyneside, UK Introduction: In South Tyneside we are in the unique position of having an Acute and a Community Lung Cancer Nurse Specialist. We wanted patients views about the way they would prefer to contact us. Methodology: Questionnaire given to patients diagnosed between October 05 February 06. Was an answering machine acceptable? Would they prefer: 1. Central number message relayed by message taker to appropriate CNS 2. Direct Line numbers to each of us 3. Direct line numbers plus Bleep/Mobile Results: The response rate at 51% was a good response. On simple analysis the central number was the favourite however it also scored highest for the least favourite. When a scoring system was put in place the direct phone number became the overall favourite. Recommendations: 1. Repeat the audit ensuring the contact choices are accurate. 2. Use a larger sample size e.g. patients diagnosed 6 12 month 3. Answering machine outgoing messages contain quality statements about frequency that messages are retrieved. 74 Northern cancer network lung audit 1999 2004
outcome data:
T. Peel, S. Graham. Wallsend Chest Clinic, NE28 7PB, UK Introduction: The NCN Lung Audit collected data for newly diagnosed lung cancer patients from 1999 2004. We report the outcome data as at November 2006. Methods: Patient data were entered onto a double sided form which was completed by the diagnosing team, and read optically (Formic). The regional lung audit clerk checked the case notes of such patients at 3 monthly intervals to check progress and document outcomes. Results: 7625 patients were documented before entry closed in autumn 2004. Of these, 708 had their cancer resected (9%) and 742 (5%) received radical radiotherapy. A small number of these people received chemotherapy prior to the radical treatment. 1877 (25%) received chemotherapy without subsequent radical treatment. The uptake of chemotherapy increased from 22% in 1999 to 32% in 2004. The remainder of patients had supportive care, palliative radiotherapy or procedures or specialist palliative care. Overall, the median survival varied between 146 and 190 days, without any year on year trend. The median survival for patients treated with chemotherapy varied between 239 and 310 days, again without any year on year trend. Conclusion: This audit does not confirm any change in outcomes over the period studied but will serve as a baseline for future audits of changes in therapeutic practice.