IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v9y1989i1p26-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficient Scheduling of Cystoscopies in Monitoring for Recurrent Bladder Cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel L. Kent
  • Ross Shachter
  • Harold C. Sox
  • Ng Seok Hui
  • Linda D. Shortliffe
  • Susan Moynihan
  • Frank M. Torti

Abstract

Proper timing for repeated evaluations is difficult to assess. The authors analyzed scheduling of cystoscopy to monitor patients for detection of recurrent bladder cancer assuming that 1) minimizing tumor detection delay helps prevent cancer morbidities; 2) only limited numbers of cystoscopies are available; 3) prediction of recurrence or progression to invasive cancer is uncertain; 4) future tumors recur according to a Poisson process. Assumptions 3 and 4 permit estimation of each patient's recurrence rate. Thus, patients may be compared ac cording to their relative risks of future tumors. With these assumptions, nonlinear optimization theory was used to calculate monitoring schedules for a model practice. Given 5.4 available visits per week per 100 patients, cystoscopy was recommended in 9-11 weeks for high-risk patients and in 30-40 weeks for low-risk patients, depending on stages, grades, and numbers of previous tumors. In contrast, standard cystoscopy was recommended in 13, 26, or 52 weeks, depending only on time elapsed since last recurrence. The calculated schedule implied an average detection delay for potentially invasive tumors of eight weeks, while standard practice led to detection delays of 11 weeks (38% worse). These results suggest that inclusion of each patient's tumor history in an optimization approach may improve follow-up care for patients who have superficial bladder cancers. This approach is being evaluated in a larger clinical setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel L. Kent & Ross Shachter & Harold C. Sox & Ng Seok Hui & Linda D. Shortliffe & Susan Moynihan & Frank M. Torti, 1989. "Efficient Scheduling of Cystoscopies in Monitoring for Recurrent Bladder Cancer," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 9(1), pages 26-37, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:9:y:1989:i:1:p:26-37
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8900900105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X8900900105
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X8900900105?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:9:y:1989:i:1:p:26-37. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.