Cargando…

An updated evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark 1 year after the official introduction in the Netherlands

PURPOSE: The definition of rectal cancer based on the sigmoid take-off (STO) was incorporated into the Dutch guideline in 2019, and became mandatory in the national audit from December 2020. This study aimed to evaluate the use of the STO in clinical practice and the added value of online training,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hazen, S. J. A., Sluckin, T. C., Horsthuis, K., Lambregts, D. M. J., Beets-Tan, R. G. H., Tanis, P. J., Kusters, M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10638143/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37184772
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-023-02803-4
_version_ 1785146559359352832
author Hazen, S. J. A.
Sluckin, T. C.
Horsthuis, K.
Lambregts, D. M. J.
Beets-Tan, R. G. H.
Tanis, P. J.
Kusters, M.
author_facet Hazen, S. J. A.
Sluckin, T. C.
Horsthuis, K.
Lambregts, D. M. J.
Beets-Tan, R. G. H.
Tanis, P. J.
Kusters, M.
author_sort Hazen, S. J. A.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The definition of rectal cancer based on the sigmoid take-off (STO) was incorporated into the Dutch guideline in 2019, and became mandatory in the national audit from December 2020. This study aimed to evaluate the use of the STO in clinical practice and the added value of online training, stratified for the period before (group A, historical cohort) and after (group B, current cohort) incorporation into the national audit. METHODS: Participants, including radiologists, surgeons, surgical and radiological residents, interns, PhD students, and physician assistants, were asked to complete an online training program, consisting of questionnaires, 20 MRI cases, and a training document. Outcomes were agreement with the expert reference, inter-rater variability, and accuracy before and after the training. RESULTS: Group A consisted of 86 participants and group B consisted of 114 participants. Familiarity with the STO was higher in group B (76% vs 88%, p = 0.027). Its use in multidisciplinary meetings was not significantly higher (50% vs 67%, p = 0.237). Agreement with the expert reference was similar for both groups before (79% vs 80%, p = 0.423) and after the training (87% vs 87%, p = 0.848). Training resulted in significant improvement for both groups in classifying tumors located around the STO (group A, 69–79%; group B, 67–79%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that after the inclusion of the STO in the mandatory Dutch national audit, the STO was consequently used in only 67% of the represented hospitals. Online training has the potential to improve implementation and unambiguous assessment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10151-023-02803-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10638143
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106381432023-11-14 An updated evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark 1 year after the official introduction in the Netherlands Hazen, S. J. A. Sluckin, T. C. Horsthuis, K. Lambregts, D. M. J. Beets-Tan, R. G. H. Tanis, P. J. Kusters, M. Tech Coloproctol Original Article PURPOSE: The definition of rectal cancer based on the sigmoid take-off (STO) was incorporated into the Dutch guideline in 2019, and became mandatory in the national audit from December 2020. This study aimed to evaluate the use of the STO in clinical practice and the added value of online training, stratified for the period before (group A, historical cohort) and after (group B, current cohort) incorporation into the national audit. METHODS: Participants, including radiologists, surgeons, surgical and radiological residents, interns, PhD students, and physician assistants, were asked to complete an online training program, consisting of questionnaires, 20 MRI cases, and a training document. Outcomes were agreement with the expert reference, inter-rater variability, and accuracy before and after the training. RESULTS: Group A consisted of 86 participants and group B consisted of 114 participants. Familiarity with the STO was higher in group B (76% vs 88%, p = 0.027). Its use in multidisciplinary meetings was not significantly higher (50% vs 67%, p = 0.237). Agreement with the expert reference was similar for both groups before (79% vs 80%, p = 0.423) and after the training (87% vs 87%, p = 0.848). Training resulted in significant improvement for both groups in classifying tumors located around the STO (group A, 69–79%; group B, 67–79%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that after the inclusion of the STO in the mandatory Dutch national audit, the STO was consequently used in only 67% of the represented hospitals. Online training has the potential to improve implementation and unambiguous assessment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10151-023-02803-4. Springer International Publishing 2023-05-15 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10638143/ /pubmed/37184772 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-023-02803-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Hazen, S. J. A.
Sluckin, T. C.
Horsthuis, K.
Lambregts, D. M. J.
Beets-Tan, R. G. H.
Tanis, P. J.
Kusters, M.
An updated evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark 1 year after the official introduction in the Netherlands
title An updated evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark 1 year after the official introduction in the Netherlands
title_full An updated evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark 1 year after the official introduction in the Netherlands
title_fullStr An updated evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark 1 year after the official introduction in the Netherlands
title_full_unstemmed An updated evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark 1 year after the official introduction in the Netherlands
title_short An updated evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark 1 year after the official introduction in the Netherlands
title_sort updated evaluation of the implementation of the sigmoid take-off landmark 1 year after the official introduction in the netherlands
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10638143/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37184772
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-023-02803-4
work_keys_str_mv AT hazensja anupdatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT sluckintc anupdatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT horsthuisk anupdatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT lambregtsdmj anupdatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT beetstanrgh anupdatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT tanispj anupdatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT kustersm anupdatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT anupdatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT hazensja updatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT sluckintc updatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT horsthuisk updatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT lambregtsdmj updatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT beetstanrgh updatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT tanispj updatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT kustersm updatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands
AT updatedevaluationoftheimplementationofthesigmoidtakeofflandmark1yearaftertheofficialintroductioninthenetherlands