Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore最新文献

Introduction: Risk-based screening (RBS) has emerged as a promising alternative to age-based cancer screening. However, evidence regarding real-world implementation outcomes remains fragmented. Thus, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the implementation metho-dologies and outcomes of RBS programmes across different cancer types.

Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Scopus were systematically searched from their respective dates of inception up to 8 July 2024. Prospective and rando-mised controlled trials (RCTs), which implement the RBS of cancer in an asymptomatic population, or studies retrospectively evaluating the outcomes of the same were included. Geographic distribution, population characteristics, RBS methodology, diagnostic accuracy and clinical outcomes were narratively synthesised.

Results: Among the 33 included studies (i.e. 21 prospective cohort, 8 RCTs, 3 retrospective and 1 non-RCT), sample sizes ranged from 102 to 1,429,890 participants. Most RBS trials were conducted in China (n=7, 21.2%), followed by the Netherlands (n=4, 12.1%) then the US, Australia and Sweden (n=3, 9.8%). Studies predominantly examined colorectal (27.3%), breast (21.2%) and prostate cancer (18.2%). Three main stratification approaches emerged: algorithmic (48.5%), validated risk models (39.4%) and physician assessment (9.1%). Implementation outcomes showed higher uptake in moderate-risk (75.4%) compared to high-risk (71.3%) and low-risk groups (67.9%). Five studies demonstrated cost-effectiveness with increased quality-adjusted life years, while 12 studies showed superior or non-inferior cancer detection rates compared to traditional screening.

Conclusion: The RBS of cancer has the potential to optimise healthcare resource allocation while minimising harm and increasing receptiveness for patients. More work is needed to evaluate long-term outcomes prior to the scaling of RBS programmes.

Introduction: Despite efforts to improve junior doctors' working conditions, burnout, distress and disillusionment persist, with implications for patient outcomes. This qualitative study analysed factors shaping the lived experiences of junior doctors in Singapore and their changes over time, thereby seeking to inform improvements to working conditions.

Method: Thirty purposively sampled respondents who were junior doctors in Singapore between 1975 and 2022 were interviewed. Respondents were grouped into 3 cohorts: (1) junior, (2) middle and (3) senior. Employing the framework method of qualitative analysis, open coding was performed with reference to the individual, interpersonal, institutional, community and policy levels of the socioecological model (SEM). Four themes emerged: (1) inherent challenges of junior doctorship, (2) exacerbating factors, (3) alleviating factors and (4) responses of junior doctors to their experiences. Codes were reconstructed into a modified SEM, demonstrating trickle-down effects of interpersonal or structural forces on the individual doctor and pertinent factors evolving with time.

Results: Across cohorts, respondents echoed mental and physical challenges. While senior cohort doctors recounted higher patient-to-doctor ratios and longer working hours, junior cohort doctors cited new difficulties. These include a hostile medicolegal landscape, patients' increasingly complex needs and expectations, and higher administrative loads. Amid these difficulties, alleviating factors included good workplace relationships alongside institutional interventions. Doctors responded differently to their challenges. Some externalised difficulties through expression and advocacy; others internalised them, whether into fulfilment or distress.

Conclusion: While some facets of junior doctorship have improved with time, new challenges that warrant consideration are emerging. Junior doctors should be centred, listened to and empowered in shaping improvements to working conditions.

Introduction: Conservative kidney management (CKM) is a recognised treatment option for selected patients with chronic kidney disease stage 5 (CKD G5), but prognostic indicators for mortality and optimal timing for palliative care transition remain uncertain.

Method: This is a single-centre, prospective cohort study of CKD G5 patients who opted for CKM, conducted between April 2021 and September 2024, with longitudinal monitoring of Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised: Renal; Palliative Perfor-mance Scale (PPS); Resources Utilisation Group.Activities of Daily Living (RUG-ADL) scale; Clinical Frailty Score; Karnofsky Performance Score; and clinical and laboratory data. Primary outcomes included identifying baseline mortality predictors and validating the PPS for survival estimation. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify independent predictors of mortality.

Results: Among 109 patients (mean age 79.8±7.3 years, 64.2% female), 62 (56.9%) died during follow-up. Multivariate analysis identified baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08.1.68, P<0.01) and serum albumin (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.08.1.43, P<0.01) as predictors of 1-year mortality. Median survival varied by eGFR: 3.0 months (95% CI 0.6.2) for eGFR .5 mL/min/1.73 m², 13.0 months (95% CI 9.1.16.9) for eGFR 6.10 mL/ min/1.73 m², and 20.0 months (95% CI 16.5.23.5) for eGFR >10 mL/min/1.73 m² (P<0.01). Subsequent PPS correlated strongly with survival, with median survival of 1.8 months for PPS <50, 5.3 months for PPS 50.60, and 7.9 months for PPS 70.80 (P=0.03).

Conclusion: Baseline eGFR and serum albumin predict 1-year mortality in CKM patients. PPS offers a practical tool for identifying patients requiring palliative care transition, supporting personalised care pathways and timely integration of palliative care.