Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Neoadjuvant chemo-radiation therapy (CRT) dosages in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were traditionally limited to 45 Gray (Gy).

Objectives: To retrospectively analyze outcomes of patients treated with 60 Gy CRT followed by surgery.

Methods: A retrospective chart review identified patients selected for CRT to 60 Gy followed by surgery between August 2012 and April 2016. Selection for surgery was based on the extent of disease, cardiopulmonary function, and response to treatment. Pathological response after neoadjuvant CRT was scored using the modified tumor regression grading. Local control (LC), disease free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method.

Results: Our cohort included 52 patients: 75% (39/52) were stage IIIA. A radiation dose of 60 Gy (range 50–62Gy) was delivered in 82.7%. Surgeries performed included: lobectomy, chest-wall resection, and pneumonectomy in 67.3%, 13.4%, and 19.2%, respectively. At median follow-up of 22.4 months, the 3 year OS was 74% (95% confidence interval [CI] 52–87%), LC was 84% (95%CI 65–93), and DFS 35% (95%CI 14–59). Grade 4–5 postoperative complications were observed in 17.3% of cases and included chest wall necrosis (5.7%), bronco-pleural fistula (7.7%), and death (3.8%). A major pathologic regression with < 10% residual tumor occurred in 68.7% of patients (36/52) and showed a trend to improved OS (P = 0.1). Pneumonectomy cases had statistically worse OS (P = 0.01).

Conclusions: Major pathologic regression was observed 68.7% with 60 Gy neoadjuvant CRT with a trend to improved survival. Pneumonectomy correlated with worse survival.

Background: Understanding discharge instructions is crucial to optimal healing but may be compromised in the hectic environment of the emergency department.

Objectives: To determine parents’ understanding of ED[1] discharge instructions and factors that may affect it.

Methods: A convenience sample of parents of children discharged home from the ED of an urban tertiary care pediatric facility (n=287) and a suburban level II general hospital (n=195) completed a 13-item questionnaire covering demographics, level of anxiety, and quality of physician’s explanation. Parents also described their child’s diagnosis and treatment instructions and indicated preferred auxiliary methods of delivery of information. Data were analyzed using the BMPD statistical package.

Results: Full understanding was found in 72% and 78% of the parents at the respective centers for the diagnosis, and in 82% and 87% for the treatment instructions (P  = NS between centers). There was no statistical correlation between level of understanding and parental age, gender, education, level of anxiety before or after the ED visit, or time of day. The most contributory factor to lack of understanding was staff use of medical terminology. Parents suggested further explanations by a special discharge nurse and written information as auxiliary methods.

Conclusions: Overall, parental understanding of ED discharge instructions is good. However, there remains a considerable number (about 20%) who fail to fully comprehend the diagnosis or treatment directives. This subset might benefit from the use of lay terminology by the staff, institution of a special discharge nurse, or use of diagnosis-specific information sheets.

Background: Burn trauma occurs mostly in young children. Burn injury in the pediatric age group has multiple-aspect sequelae.

Objectives: To characterize the profile of the injured pediatric burn patient, thus targeting the most vulnerable pediatric group.

Methods: Between 1 January and 31 December 1996, a total of 9,235 pediatric patients were admitted for various traumatic injuries (burns, lacerations, fractures, etc.) to the Emergency Medicine Department of Schneider Children’s Medical Center. We conducted a retrospective study of the patients’ charts, including demographic data, which were stored in a computerized database, for statistical evaluation. The characteristics of pediatric burn patients were examined and compared with other pediatric trauma patients.

Results: Of the total patient population, 282 (3.1%) suffered from burns (37% females, 63% males). The most frequent burn injury was scald burn (58%). The pediatric group that was most exposed to burns was 13–18 month old males.

Conclusions: Having identified the high risk group among the pediatric burn patients, we suggest that prevention programs be directed towards this group in order to reduce further risk of burn injury.