A number of provincial online treatment guidelines/protocols exist in Canada, which differ in the information contained and the ease of use. Currently there is no national evidence-based, consensus-driven cancer treatment protocol for use at the point of care. The aim of such a resource would be to support Medical Oncologists (MOs) in the delivery of cancer treatment at the clinic interface and potentially improve patient outcomes by reducing treatment variation across Canada.
The study was conducted in two stages. Available provincial cancer treatment protocols were evaluated with regards to: content for chemotherapy, immunotherapy, ease of use, toxicity, dosing recommendations, reference studies. Canadian MOs were invited to participate in an anonymous survey distributed through the Canadian Association of Medical Oncologists. The assessment included: current online resources (OR) used, information provided, ease of use, relevance to point of care use, need for a national Canadian resource. MOs were asked to review a comparator Pan-Australian OR.
40/327 responded: 28% BC, 26% ON and the rest from other provinces. 82%, 54% and 23% respectively used the BC and ON and other provincial ORs. 50% used ≥2 websites. 62% found the website of choice easy to use, 33% felt it had updated immune therapy information and 26% felt it was updated regularly. The OR used met the MO need for dose/scheduling in 87.5% cases but only 50% and 37.5% cases for AEs and reference information respectively. Criteria evaluated in the ORs included: dosing, toxicity modification, AEs, monitoring, references and other criteria. 95% of MOs felt that a single portal aimed at point of care for Canadian MOs would be of value. 64% felt that the international comparator was better than the current OR being used.
There is variation in the current Canadian OR used by MOs in Canada with a need for national evidence-based, cancer treatment protocols/information for use at the point of care. To develop such a Pan-Canadian website resource, further analysis and infrastructure is required. Such a resource would potentially reduce treatment variability and augment quality of care delivered.
The authors.
Has not received any funding.
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.