RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: National and subspecialty guidelines for lung and esophageal cancers recommend treatment decisions to be made in a multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB). This study prospectively analyzes the actual impact of presentation at the thoracic tumor board on decision making in thoracic cancer cases. METHODS: During the electronic submission process for presentation at MTB managing physicians documented their current treatment plan. The initial treatment plan was compared with the MTB final recommendation. Patient demographics, physician's proposed treatment plan, MTB recommendation, and documentation of application of MTB recommendations were prospectively recorded in an Institutional Review Board approved database. RESULTS: Between June 2010 and December 2012, 185 patients with esophageal and 294 patients with lung cancer were presented at the MTB. One hundred sixty-six patients were presented on more than 1 occasion, resulting in 724 assessments of 479 patients. In 48 esophageal cancer patients (26%) and 118 lung cancer patients (40%) MTB recommendations differed from the initial treatment plan. Overall, a differing MTB recommendation from the primary treatment plan occurred in 330 of 724 case presentations (46%). The MTB recommendations changed treatment plans in 40% and staging and assessment plans in 60% of patients. Follow-up in a cohort of 249 patients confirmed that MTB recommendations were followed in 97% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the impact of the thoracic MTB. Recommendations will differ from the managing providers' initial plan in 26% to 40% of cases. However, MTB recommendations can be successfully initiated in the majority of patients. Complex thoracic cancer patients will benefit from multidisciplinary review and should ideally be presented at tumor board.
Asunto(s)
Comités Consultivos , Consenso , Neoplasias Esofágicas/terapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/terapia , Planificación de Atención al Paciente/organización & administración , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Adulto , Comités Consultivos/organización & administración , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Femenino , Adhesión a Directriz , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Selección de Paciente , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hypobaric hypoxia during commercial air travel has the potential to cause or worsen hypoxemia in individuals with pre-existing cardiopulmonary compromise. Knowledge of cabin altitude pressures aboard contemporary flights is essential to counseling patients accurately about flying safety. The objective of the study was to measure peak cabin altitudes during U.S. domestic commercial flights on a variety of aircraft. METHODS: A handheld mountaineering altimeter was carried by the investigators in the plane cabin during commercial air travel and peak cabin altitude measured. The values were then compared between aircraft models, aircraft classes, and distances flown. RESULTS: The average peak cabin altitude on 207 flights aboard 17 different aircraft was 6341 +/- 1813 ft (1933 m +/- 553 m), significantly higher than when measured in a similar fashion in 1988. Peak cabin altitude was significantly higher for flights longer than 750 mi (7085 +/- 801 ft) compared to shorter flights (5160 +/- 2290 ft/1573 +/- 698 m). Cabin altitude increased linearly with flight distance for flights up to 750 mi in length, but was independent of flight distance for flights exceeding 750 mi. Peak cabin altitude was less than 5000 ft (1524 m) in 70% of flights shorter than 500 mi. Peak cabin altitudes greater than 8000 ft (2438 m) were measured on approximately 10% of the total flights. CONCLUSIONS: Peak cabin altitude on commercial aircraft flights has risen over time. Cabin altitude is lower with flights of shorter distance. Physicians should take these factors into account when determining an individual's need for supplemental oxygen during commercial air travel.