BackgroundThyroid carcinoma generally responds well to treatment and spinal metastasis is an uncommon feature. Many studies have looked at the management of spinal metastasis and proposed treatments, plans and algorithms. These range from well-established methods to potentially novel alternatives including bisphosphonates and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy, amongst others.The purposes of this systematic review of the literature are twofold. Firstly we sought to analyse the proposed management options in the literature. Then, secondly, we endeavoured to make recommendations that might improve the prognosis of patients with spinal metastasis from thyroid carcinomas.MethodsWe conducted an extensive electronic literature review regarding the management of spinal metastasis of thyroid cancer.ResultsWe found that there is a tangible lack of studies specifically analysing the management of spinal metastasis in thyroid cancer. Our results show that there are palliative and curative options in the management of spinal metastasis, in the forms of radioiodine ablation, surgery, selective embolisation, bisphosphonates and more recently the VEGF receptor targets.ConclusionsThe management of spinal metastasis from thyroid cancer should be multi-disciplinary. There is an absence; it seems, of a definitive protocol for treatment. Research shows increased survival with 131I avidity and complete bone metastasis resection. Early detection and treatment therefore are crucial. Studies suggest in those patients below the age of 45 years that treatment should be aggressive, and aim for cure. In those patients in whom curative treatment is not an option, palliative treatments are available.

Critically ill surgical patients are always at increased risk of actual or potentially life-threatening health complications. Central/peripheral venous lines form a key part of their care. We review the current evidence on incidence of central and peripheral venous catheter-related bloodstream infections in critically ill surgical patients, and outline pathways for prevention and intervention. An extensive systematic electronic search was carried out on the relevant databases. Articles were considered suitable for inclusion if they investigated catheter colonisation and catheter-related bloodstream infection. Two independent reviewers engaged in selecting the appropriate articles in line with our protocol retrieved 8 articles published from 1999 to 2011. Outcomes on CVC colonisation and infections were investigated in six studies; four of which were prospective cohort studies, one prospective longitudinal study and one retrospective cohort study. Outcomes relating only to PICCs were reported in one prospective randomised trial. We identified only one study that compared CVC- and PICC-related complications in surgical intensive care units. Although our search protocol may not have yielded an exhaustive list we have identified a key deficiency in the literature, namely a paucity of studies investigating the incidence of CVC- and PICC-related bloodstream infection in exclusively critically ill surgical populations. In summary, the diverse definitions for the diagnosis of central and peripheral venous catheter-related bloodstream infections along with the vastly different sample size and extremely small PICC population size has, predictably, yielded inconsistent findings. Our current understanding is still limited; the studies we have identified do point us towards some tentative understanding that the CVC/PICC performance remains inconclusive.

BACKGROUND:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused enormous strain on public health. Patients with cancer are particularly susceptible to the disease, and their treatment plans have been threatened by public health restrictions designed to contain the spread. METHODS: This study examined the effects of the pandemic on cancer patients' psychology, knowledge, attitudes, and practices concerning COVID-19 as well as their perceptions of the impact of COVID-19 on their cancer health care services. A survey was sent to 5800 patients at a cancer center in Toronto, Canada. Descriptive results were summarized. Qualitative feedback was coded and summarized. To examine for potential associations, regression models were tested for the outcomes of patient psychological well-being, knowledge, attitudes, and practices, and they accounted for several demographic, health literacy, and disease variables. RESULTS: A total of 1631 surveys were completed. Most patients saw their appointments shifted to virtual visits, and for a substantial minority, there was no change. A majority of the patients (62%) expressed fears about contracting the virus. There were no independent predictors of COVID-19-related knowledge. Fears were more pronounced among patients who did not speak English and those who used social media more often. Female participants, those who scored higher on knowledge questions, and those who used cancer center materials were more likely to take preventative measures against infection. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a snapshot of the state of cancer patient treatment and the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of patients between the first 2 waves of the pandemic. The study's results can inform our understanding of adaptation to conditions during and after the outbreak.

BackgroundThe incidence of head and neck cancer is relatively low in developed countries and highest in South East Asia. Notwithstanding advances in surgery and radiotherapy over the past several decades, the 5-year survival rate for head and neck cancer has stagnated and remains at 50–55%. This is due, in large part, to both regional and distant disease spread, including spinal metastasis. Spinal metastasis from head and neck cancer is rare, has a poor prognosis and can significantly impede end-stage quality of life; normally only palliative care is given.This study aims to conduct a systematic review of the evidence available on management of spinal metastasis from head and neck cancer and to use such evidence to draw up guiding principles in the management of the distant spread.MethodsSystematic review of the electronic literature was conducted regarding the management of spinal metastasis of head and neck malignancies.ResultsDue to the exceptional rarity of head and neck cancers metastasizing to the spine, there is a paucity of good randomized controlled trials into the management of spinal metastasis. This review produced only 12 case studies/reports and 2 small retrospective cohort studies that lacked appropriate controls.ConclusionManagement should aim to improve end-stage quality of life and maintain neurological function. This review has found that radiotherapy +/− medical adjuvant is considered the principle treatment of spinal metastasis of head and neck cancers.There is an absence of a definitive treatment protocol for head and neck cancer spinal metastasis. Our failure to find and cite high-quality scientific evidence only serves to stress the need for good quality research in this area.

Introduction: With the COVID-19 pandemic, most continuing medical education activities became virtual (VCME). The authors conducted a scoping review to synthesize the advantages and disadvantages of VCME to establish the impact of this approach on inequities that physicians face along the intersections of gender, race, and location of practice. Methods: Guided by the methodological framework of Arksey and O’Malley, the search included six databases and was limited to studies published between January 1991 to April 2021. Eligible studies included those related to accredited/non-accredited post-certification medical education, conferences, or meetings in a virtual setting focused on physicians. Numeric and inductive thematic analyses were performed.   Results: 282 studies were included in the review. Salient advantages identified were convenience, favourable learning formats, collaboration opportunities, effectiveness at improving knowledge and clinical practices, and cost-effectiveness. Prominent disadvantages included technological barriers, poor design, cost, lack of sufficient technological skill, and time. Analysis of the studies showed that VCME was most common in the general/family practice specialty, in suburban settings, and held by countries in the Global North. A minority of studies reported on gender (35%) and race (4%).  Discussion: Most studies report advantages of VCME, but disadvantages and barriers exist that are contextual to the location of practice and medical subspecialty. VCME events are largely organized by Global North countries with suboptimized accessibility for Global South attendees. A lack of reported data on gender and race reveals a limited understanding of how VCME affects vulnerable populations, prompting potential future considerations as it evolves.