scholarly journals Parent perceptions of pediatric oncology care during the COVID‐19 pandemic: An Australian study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria C. McCarthy ◽  
Jessica Beamish ◽  
Catherine M. Bauld ◽  
India R. Marks ◽  
Tria Williams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pediatric Oncology ◽  
Parent Perceptions ◽  
Australian Study ◽  
Oncology Care

Pseudomonas aeruginosa Outbreak in a Pediatric Oncology Care Unit Caused by an Errant Water Jet Into Contaminated Siphons

2012 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 648-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henriette Schneider ◽  
Gernot Geginat ◽  
Michael Hogardt ◽  
Alexandra Kramer ◽  
Matthias Dürken ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pseudomonas Aeruginosa ◽  
Pediatric Oncology ◽  
Water Jet ◽  
Oncology Care

scholarly journals Mapping child and adolescent self‐reported symptom data to clinician‐reported adverse event grading to improve pediatric oncology care and research

Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 126 (1) ◽  
pp. 140-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly McFatrich ◽  
Jennifer Brondon ◽  
Nicole R. Lucas ◽  
Pamela S. Hinds ◽  
Scott H. Maurer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Pediatric Oncology ◽  
Child And Adolescent ◽  
Oncology Care

The interpreter’s voice: Carrying the bilingual conversation in interpreter-mediated consultations in pediatric oncology care

2019 ◽  
Vol 102 (4) ◽  
pp. 656-662 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Granhagen Jungner ◽  
Elisabet Tiselius ◽  
Klas Blomgren ◽  
Kim Lützén ◽  
Pernilla Pergert
Keyword(s):  
Pediatric Oncology ◽  
Oncology Care

Chemotherapy roadmaps in pediatric oncology: A digital electronic medical record integrated solution

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522110404
Author(s):  
Mary T Field ◽  
Adam J Lamble ◽  
Susan L Holtzclaw ◽  
Sarah A Tucker ◽  
Tyler G Ketterl
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Medical Record ◽  
Electronic Medical Record ◽  
Pediatric Oncology ◽  
Time Scanning ◽  
Build Time ◽  
Oncology Care ◽  
Electronic Medical Record Systems ◽  
Clinical Systems ◽  
Nominal Amount

Background Delivery of antineoplastic regimens in the pediatric setting is facilitated by a paper roadmap. Paper roadmaps are the key safety tool required for safe ordering. Electronic medical record systems offer technological solutions for ordering antineoplastic regimens, however, do not offer a solution that integrates paper roadmaps digitally. Methods A multidisciplinary project team implemented real-time clinician scanning of paper roadmaps into the electronic medical record. Results The rate of missing roadmaps decreased from an average of 1.6 to 0.8 per week. Pharmacists gained 3 h of productivity daily. Providers spend an average of 35–45 s and a total of seven clicks each time a roadmap is scanned. Overall, the clinical systems analyst spent less than 1 h of total build time. Conclusion Implementing roadmap scanning decreased the rate of missing roadmaps, increased pharmacist productivity, and required a nominal amount of analyst and provider time. In addition, this solution allows for concurrent viewing of the roadmap files from any connected computer, facilitating an easier co-signature process for providers, pharmacists, and nurses. Practice Implications These results suggest that implementing real-time scanning of roadmaps can improve oncology care efficiency while maintaining the same safety rigor that paper roadmaps offer.

Feasibility of using data collected through the St. Jude Pediatric Oncology Facility integrated local evaluation (PrOFILE) tool to determine previously defined levels of pediatric hematology-oncology care.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13530-e13530
Author(s):  
Aniekan Udoko ◽  
Pedro Mazotti-Roso ◽  
Enrico Suriano ◽  
Fernando Silva-Perez ◽  
Heather Forrest ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pediatric Oncology ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy ◽  
Lymph Node Biopsy ◽  
Pediatric Hematology ◽  
Resource Group ◽  
Oncology Care ◽  
Content Specificity ◽  
Using Data

e13530 Background: Pediatric hematology and oncology (PHO) facilities are not all equally equipped to diagnose and treat the full range of childhood cancers. Proposed facility tier models have been published to facilitate the context-based adaptation of PHO diagnostic and treatment guidelines. However, a tool to assist facilities in identifying their level of PHO care does not exist. We assessed the feasibility of using the St. Jude Pediatric Oncology Facility Integrated Local Evaluation (PrOFILE) tool to identify (1) facility levels as defined by the International Society of Pediatric Oncology (SIOP) and the Lancet Oncology Commission (LOC) for sustainable care for children with cancer, and (2) treatment strata in the Adapted Resource and Implementation Application (ARIA) Guide. Methods: This study employed a multi-step mapping approach. We mapped the 1,279 PrOFILE tool variables to the nine SIOP service lines, ten LOC domains, and ten ARIA resource groups. Mapping was performed by two teams and carried out in two different rounds. The first round aimed to define if an indicator was fully or partially covered by PrOFILE. Multiple PrOFILE variables could be assigned to each concept to meet its content specificity. Various cut-offs were applied when necessary to assign mutually exclusive responses to each tier. The second round consisted of expert validation for each indicator previously identified. Results: Most (97%) of SIOP’s indicators were partially or fully covered in the PrOFILE tool (Table). Radiation therapy tools and appointment scheduling and call back system could not be mapped. Of the LOC indicators, 89% were covered (Table). Pathology technical staff, chemotherapy complexity (low, moderate, and high), lymph node biopsy, organ preservation, liver transplantation, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and research infrastructure could not be mapped. Finally, 77% of the indicators used by the ARIA Guide were covered (Table). The ophthalmology resource group could not be fully mapped. Conclusions: This exercise demonstrates the feasibility of using PrOFILE tool variables to identify facility PHO care levels as defined by SIOP and LOC. The tool also contains most of the variables necessary to apply the ARIA Guide to diagnose, treat, and manage childhood cancer. Future PrOFILE versions will address concepts that are not covered or are partially covered in its current version.[Table: see text]

Screening and Assessment in Pediatric Psycho-Oncology

2021 ◽  
pp. 687-695
Author(s):  
Darcy E. Burgers ◽  
Sarah J. Tarquini ◽  
Anne E. Kazak ◽  
Anna C. Muriel
Keyword(s):  
Pediatric Oncology ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Psychosocial Needs ◽  
Systematic Screening ◽  
Current Implementation ◽  
Oncology Care ◽  
Different Cultures ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Brief Screening

This chapter provides an overview of current and recommended practices regarding systematic screening and assessment of psychosocial needs in pediatric oncology. The chapter reviews published recommendations from the Psychosocial Standards of Care Project for Childhood Cancer and provides information about validated instruments for brief screening of children and their families. It also describes guidelines for using follow-up symptom-based measures and in-person clinical assessment. It includes a summary of what is known about the current implementation of screening nationally, and possible steps to enhance implementation. There is also special consideration of screening and assessment of unique medical populations within pediatric oncology, children with developmental concerns, and families from different cultures. Future directions include using implementation science to develop models for routine screening and demonstrating the impact of screening on psychosocial outcomes for patients and families and on the system of pediatric oncology care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document