Upload
alina
View
61
Download
6
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Skin services for solid organ transplant recipients. An audit of care in the North of England Cancer Network Katie Blasdale September 2010. Some statistics. UK 10yr incidence of NMSC in SOTRs is 13x normal. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Skin services for solid organ transplant recipients
An audit of care in the North of England Cancer Network
Katie Blasdale September 2010
Some statistics UK 10yr incidence of NMSC in SOTRs is 13x normal
Comparison of incidence of malignancy in recipients of different types of organ: a UK registry audit . Colett D et al Am J Transplant Aug 2010
Biphasic peak in NMSC – age dependant
Direct standardization. All invasive nonmelanoma skin cancers
A population-based study of skin cancer incidence and prevalence in renal transplant recipients F.J. Moloney et al BJD 2006
NICE Guidance 2006Care of transplant patients
Transplant patients who have precancerous skin lesions or who havedeveloped a skin cancer should be seen in a dedicated ‘transplantpatient skin clinic’, either in the transplant centre or in a hospitalcloser to the patient’s home, according to the choice of the patient.
Close links should be established between the transplant centre, localphysician and dermatologist for the management of transplant patientspostoperatively.
Dermatologists managing transplant recipients with multiple and/orrecurrent skin cancers need to liaise with the transplant teamregarding reduction of immunosuppression and the use of systemicretinoids in order to reduce the risk of invasive disease.
Improving Outcomes for People with Skin Tumours including Melanoma
Skin measures 2008
The network board should agree in consultation with the NSSG and cancer lead clinicians of each trust in the network, which localities will staff and run a clinic for immunocompromised patients with skin cancer.
The network should designate at least one such clinic, and (in addition, if necessary) any locality which contains a trust which hosts a centre for renal and/or liver and/or cardiac transplants should be required by the network to run such a clinic.
Manual for Cancer Services 2008
NICE Guidance 2006Care of high risk groups
Specialised services commissioners, together with their cancer network(s), should undertake a needs assessment for these special groups of patients, plan the provision of appropriate specialist care and put in place the necessary commissioning arrangements.
Network-wide protocols should be developed that describe the pathways of care for these special groups of skin cancer patients.
Commissioners should receive results of audits of the care of these special groups.
Information provision for patients in these special groups should be tailored to their specific needs and contain information on their condition and relevant patient support groups. Links should be made to national support groups, to assure the quality of information (see chapter on ‘Patient-centred care’).
Improving Outcomes for People with Skin Tumours including Melanoma
All patients with a high risk of developing skin cancer should be counselled effectively by a dermatologist or a CNS about sun protection before they develop any skin lesions, and should have annual checks carried out thereafter.
All patients in high-risk groups with precancerous skin lesions (e.g. multiple warty lesions and/or AK) should be referred early to a dermatologist for assessment, active treatment and follow-up.
Once patients at high risk start to develop skin lesions they should be offered at least 6-monthly follow-up.
Improving Outcomes for People with Skin Tumours including Melanoma
Audit aims
To quantify roughly the numbers of transplant patients currently receiving care within Skin Cancer MDTs
To assess compliance with NICE guidance and skin measures
Audit design
Prospective data collection Standardised proforma across network Cascaded by MDT lead. Caldicott approval for each trust
Very simplified data collected 2 month data collection period
1/2/10 to 31/3/10
Audit findings
51 patient contacts reported across all sites (48 patients) 20F:28M
Equivalent to 306/year assuming no seasonal variation
10
1220
9 Newcastle
Durham
Sunderland
Middlesborough
Type of transplant
69%
21%
10%
kidney
heart
liver
Type of appointment?
new urgent 4
new routine 3
review urgent 2
review routine 41
Seen in which department?
dermatology 45
maxillofacial surgery 5
plastics 1
Appointment types
0
5
10
15
20
RVI JCUH SRH UHND
new urgent new routine review urgent review routine
Surgery required?
26/51 appointments resulted in surgery 3/4 new urgent 2/3 new routine 1/2 review urgent 20/42 review routine
0
5
10
15
20
RVI JCUH SRH UHND
general Rapid access plasics / max fax
Clinic type
Transplant patients alive with a functioning graft, May 10, in the ‘North of England’
Tx type Area 1* Area 2**
Kidney 1362 1557
Pancreas 239 115
Kidney/pancreas 399 411
Heart 13 12
Lung(s) 80 67
Heart/lungs 10 6
Liver 5 9
Liver/kidney 52 41
Heart/kidney 0 2
Liver/pancreas 0 1
Liver/lung 0 1
Total 2160 2222
* comprises postcode areas CA, DH, DL, LA, NE, SR, TS
Information from NHS Blood and Transplant June 2010
Transplant patients alive with a functioning graft, May 10, in the ‘North
of England’
Tx type / postcode area CA DH DL LA NE SR TSKidney and/or pancreas 130 119 153 107 521 101
296Heart and heart/lung 15 32 28 6 99 22
47Lung(s) 3 6 12 6 25 8
20Liver (inc. liver/kidney) 33 26 35 24 177 34
75
Total 181 183 228 143 822 165438
Information from NHS Blood and Transplant June 2010
Renal transplant patients by site of renal review
renal transplant recipients
Newcastle600
JCUH435
Sunderland / Durham280
Carlisle115
Annual transplant visitIncludes skin check
Referral links to dermatology
Seen in general clinicNo routine skin checks
Informal links with dermatology
Proposed transplant clinicCurrently no links with dermatology
Work in progress
Seen in general clinicNo routine skin checks
Informal links with dermatology
Models of care
Single regional transplant clinic
+ Specialist care+ Potential for education at time of transplant- Travelling distances may reduce accessibility and
compliance- Potentially large numbers- Loss of interface with local physicians- Loss of MDT control
Models of care 2
Local dedicated immuno-suppressed clinic
+ Opportunity for multi-disciplinary care in local setting
+ Linked with local MDT- Numbers likely to be small
Models of care 3
Protected slots within Rapid Access clinic
+ Easy access for both new and review patients+ Facilities for immediate surgery+ Close links with physicians+ MDT centred care- Busy clinic with short time slots
Summary of findings
51 patient episodes involving solid organ transplant recipients were reported within the area studied over a 2 month period.
27% of these were seen within a rapid access clinic; none in a dedicated transplant clinic.
The majority were routine review patients but 51% required surgery
Comments
These numbers are low in comparison to the local population of SOTRs ? underreporting ? Unmet need within the SOTR population
The majority are still seen in general clinics, even in those areas with rapid access clinics
Prompt access to surgery is essential for these high risk patients
Recommendations
Planning for dedicated clinics or rapid access slots essential in all parts of the network
Dialogue with physicians Skin assessment within transplant clinics
? by whom Easy access to skin cancer services Education of new transplant recipients