背景:大多数新诊断的癌症发生在老年人中,在做出治疗决定时,了解患者的基本健康状况是很重要的。因此,临床医生需要增强的能力和技能才能有效地照顾这一人群.然而,大多数临床医生只接受很少的老年病学培训。本研究旨在评估土耳其医生在老年肿瘤学方面的教育和培训水平,并了解影响肿瘤学家对老年癌症患者治疗决策的因素。
方法:准备了24个问题的调查,以获取参与的医生的人口统计信息,以及询问他们在医学教育和住院医师期间是否接受过如何接近老年患者的培训,他们在什么过程中接受了培训,他们目前是否正在治疗老年患者,他们在评估老年患者时关注的是什么,以及他们对接近老年病人的训练和准备的想法。问卷在网上发给放射和医学肿瘤学家,该链接发布在土耳其放射肿瘤学会和土耳其医学肿瘤学会网站上。
结果:两百三位医生参与了调查,其中131人是妇女。中位年龄为41.66岁(24-69岁)。一百五十六名医生(76.1%)在大学医院接受了专业教育。其中一百零三人是放射肿瘤学家,80名是医学肿瘤学家。在医生中,19.7%的人在专攻肿瘤学之前接受了老年病学教育,6.9%的人说他们在专业化之后接受了教育。在确定是否适合放疗时,10.7%的放射肿瘤学家说他们使用老年评估工具。同样,13.8%的医学肿瘤学家声称他们使用老年评估工具来确定是否适合化疗。在医生中,177例(86.3%)认为老年评估可以独立提高患者生存率。此外,患者认知状态,功能状态,生理年龄,多药,老年病专家建议,住院服务,患者亲属,并且发现类似的因素在治疗决策中有用。最后,92.7%的参与者认为接受教育会改变他们对治疗老年患者的看法。
结论:我们的研究结果为发展肿瘤学家的老年培训知识和技能提供了观点。对于更频繁面对老年癌症患者的肿瘤学家来说,学习新方法是必要的。
BACKGROUND: Most newly diagnosed cancers occur in older adults, and it is important to understand a patient\'s underlying health status when making treatment decisions. Therefore, clinicians need enhanced competencies and skills to effectively care for this population. However, most clinicians receive minimal to no training in
geriatrics. This study aims to evaluate the education and training levels in geriatric oncology among Turkish physicians and to understand the factors influencing oncologists\' treatment decisions for geriatric cancer patients.
METHODS: A 24-question survey was prepared to obtain the participating physicians\' demographic information, as well as to inquire whether they had received training during their medical education and residency on how to approach geriatric patients, in what process(es) they had received the training, whether they were currently treating geriatric patients, what they focused on when evaluating geriatric patients, and what they thought about their training and preparedness for approaching geriatric patients. The questionnaire was sent online to radiation and medical oncologists, and the link was published on the Turkish Society of Radiation Oncology and the Turkish Society of Medical Oncology websites.
RESULTS: Two hundred and three physicians participated in the survey, 131 of whom were women. The median age was 41.66 years (24-69 years). One hundred and fifty-six physicians (76.1%) received specialty education at the university hospital. One hundred and three of them were radiation oncologists, and 80 were medical oncologists. Of the physicians, 19.7% received education in
geriatrics before they specialized in oncology, and 6.9% said they were educated after specialization. When determining suitability for radiotherapy, 10.7% of radiation oncologists said that they use geriatric assessment tools. Similarly, 13.8% of medical oncologists claimed that they used geriatric assessment tools in determining suitability for chemotherapy. Of the physicians, 177 (86.3%) thought that geriatric evaluation could independently increase patient survival rate. Furthermore, patient cognitive status, functional status, physiological age, polypharmacy, geriatric specialist recommendations, inpatient services, patient relatives, and similar factors were found to be useful in treatment decisions. Finally, 92.7% of the participants believed that receiving education would have changed their perspectives on treating geriatric patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide perspectives on developing knowledge on and skills in geriatric training among oncologists. Learning new approaches is necessary for oncologists who more frequently confront geriatric patients with cancer.