Intraoperative Radiation Therapy (IORT)
St. Joseph Hospital has pioneered a new technology that improves breast cancer outcomes, decreases the amount of post-operative radiation required, preserves healthy breast tissue and increases patient comfort.The hospital remains at the forefront of medical innovation with the introduction of Intraoperative Radiation Therapy (IORT), one of the most advanced forms of radiation therapy available in the United States.
IORT delivers highly targeted beams of radiation directly to a tumor site during surgery. In addition to improving patient outcomes, this direct application improves patient comfort by preserving healthy tissue surrounding the tumor and reducing the amount of radiation patients may need after surgery. For patients and their families, this means less stress and more time for healing.Intraoperative Radiation Therapy (IORT) delivers highly targeted beams of radiation during surgery. Studies show that radiating the tumor site in the breast immediately following tumor resection reduces the risk of the cancer returning.
As Orange County’s first hospital to offer this innovative treatment during breast surgery, Stacey Fischer, Breast Program Nurse Navigator, is also available to assist you and your patients should you have any questions concerning IORT or the Breast Program. She can be reached at (714) 734-6233.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Friday, October 09, 2009
Poster on our blog presented at the 2009 ANCC Magnet Conference
Our blog, Nursing Research: Show me the Evidence! was presented as a poster at the 2009 ANCC Magnet Conference Oct 1-3 in Louisville, Kentucky. Dana Rutledge, RN, PhD presented the poster on behalf of Julie Smith, MLS, Library Manager. Be sure to check out our blog out at http://evidencebasednursing.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Commentary on Survey of Public's Knowledge/Attitudes about Resuscitation
Research Abstract with Commentary
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Knowledge and Opinions Among the U.S. General Public.
State of the Science-Fiction
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is undertaken more than 250,000 times annually in the United States. This study was undertaken to determine knowledge and opinions of the general public regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation. DESIGN: Validated multisite community-based cross-sectional survey. OUTCOME MEASURES: Knowledge and opinions about resuscitative practices and outcomes, using hypothetical clinical scenarios and other social, spiritual, and environmental considerations. RESULTS: Among 1831 participants representing 38 states, markedly inaccurate perceptions of cardiac arrest were reported. Participants' mean estimate of predicted survival rate after cardiac arrest was 54% (median 50%, IQR 35-75%), and mean estimated duration of resuscitative efforts in the ED was 28min (median 15min; IQR 10-30). Projected age and health status were independent predictors of resuscitation preferences in a series of 4 hypothetical scenarios. Participants indicated that physicians should consider patient and family wishes as the most important factors when making resuscitation decisions. Participants considered advanced technology and physician communication to be the most important actions during attempted resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: Inaccurate perceptions regarding resuscitation and survival rates exist among the lay public. Participants indicated strong preferences regarding resuscitation and advance directives.
Marco, C. A., & Larkin, G. L. (2008). Cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Knowledge and opinions among the U.S. general public. State of the science-fiction. Resuscitation, 79, 490-498.
Commentary by Dana N. Rutledge, RN, PhD, Nursing Research Facilitator
This interesting study, published in 2008, features data collected in 2000. This is disappointing considering the factors that may have changed since 2000. The researchers surveyed people in airport and bus terminals, hospital waiting rooms, shopping malls, and college campuses in Pennsylvania and Ohio. The participants – while closely resembling the data from the U. S. census – may under-represent Hispanic persons, and over-represent older, single, and highly educated persons who are mobile.
It is interesting to note that respondents overestimated success rates for resuscitation results, and that 91% of them were willing to undergo CPR. However, smaller proportions would find the following procedures acceptable:
74% chest compressions
64% mouth-to-mouth breathing
61% electrical shocks (defibrillation)
54% intravenous medications
42% artificial breathing on a respirator
31% large intravenous lines in the neck or groin
This indicates understanding deficits as to what “resuscitation” actually involves!
Anyone interested in replicating the study with our patients and families? The survey used is published with the article, and is available in Spanish.
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Knowledge and Opinions Among the U.S. General Public.
State of the Science-Fiction
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is undertaken more than 250,000 times annually in the United States. This study was undertaken to determine knowledge and opinions of the general public regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation. DESIGN: Validated multisite community-based cross-sectional survey. OUTCOME MEASURES: Knowledge and opinions about resuscitative practices and outcomes, using hypothetical clinical scenarios and other social, spiritual, and environmental considerations. RESULTS: Among 1831 participants representing 38 states, markedly inaccurate perceptions of cardiac arrest were reported. Participants' mean estimate of predicted survival rate after cardiac arrest was 54% (median 50%, IQR 35-75%), and mean estimated duration of resuscitative efforts in the ED was 28min (median 15min; IQR 10-30). Projected age and health status were independent predictors of resuscitation preferences in a series of 4 hypothetical scenarios. Participants indicated that physicians should consider patient and family wishes as the most important factors when making resuscitation decisions. Participants considered advanced technology and physician communication to be the most important actions during attempted resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: Inaccurate perceptions regarding resuscitation and survival rates exist among the lay public. Participants indicated strong preferences regarding resuscitation and advance directives.
Marco, C. A., & Larkin, G. L. (2008). Cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Knowledge and opinions among the U.S. general public. State of the science-fiction. Resuscitation, 79, 490-498.
Commentary by Dana N. Rutledge, RN, PhD, Nursing Research Facilitator
This interesting study, published in 2008, features data collected in 2000. This is disappointing considering the factors that may have changed since 2000. The researchers surveyed people in airport and bus terminals, hospital waiting rooms, shopping malls, and college campuses in Pennsylvania and Ohio. The participants – while closely resembling the data from the U. S. census – may under-represent Hispanic persons, and over-represent older, single, and highly educated persons who are mobile.
It is interesting to note that respondents overestimated success rates for resuscitation results, and that 91% of them were willing to undergo CPR. However, smaller proportions would find the following procedures acceptable:
74% chest compressions
64% mouth-to-mouth breathing
61% electrical shocks (defibrillation)
54% intravenous medications
42% artificial breathing on a respirator
31% large intravenous lines in the neck or groin
This indicates understanding deficits as to what “resuscitation” actually involves!
Anyone interested in replicating the study with our patients and families? The survey used is published with the article, and is available in Spanish.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
