Telemedicine for head and neck cancer surveillance in the COVID-19 era: Promise and pitfalls

An insight into the use of telemedicine technology for cancer patients during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

The use of telemedicine technology has significantly increased in recent years, particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic. This study aimed to investigate the use of telemedicine technology for cancer patients during the Covid-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This was a scoping review conducted in 2023. Various databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Ovid, IEEE Xplore, ProQuest, Embase, and Google Scholar search engine were searched. All quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies published in English between 2020 and 2022 were included. Finally, the needed data were extracted, and the results were synthesized and reported narratively.

RESULTS

A total of 29 articles were included in this review. The results showed that teleconsultation, televisit, and telerehabilitation were common telemedicine services, and video conferencing and telephone were common technologies used in these studies. In most cases, patients and healthcare providers preferred these services compared to the face-to-face consultations due to their convenience and advantages. Furthermore, the findings revealed that in terms of clinical outcomes, telemedicine could effectively reduce anxiety, pain, sleep disorders, and hospital admission rates.

CONCLUSION

The findings provided valuable insights into the various telemedicine technologies, services, users' perspectives, and clinical outcomes in cancer patients during the Covid-19 pandemic. Overall, the positive outcomes and users' satisfaction showed that the use of telemedicine technology can be expanded, particularly in cancer care. Future research needs to investigate both clinical and non-clinical effectiveness of using various telemedicine services and technologies for improving cancer care delivery, which can help to develop more successful strategies for implementing this technology.

Travel-associated cost savings to patients and the health system through provision of specialist head and neck surgery outreach clinics in rural New South Wales, Australia

INTRODUCTION

Centralisation of head and neck surgical services means that patients in regional and remote Australia need to travel long distances for treatment and follow-up, imparting a significant financial burden on patients and the health system.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate costs of travel to local outreach clinics and determine potential cost savings to patients and the health system by avoiding patient travel to major cities for head and neck surgical care.

DESIGN

Retrospective audit of three head and neck surgery outreach clinics in New South Wales, Australia over 4 years (2017-2020). Direct costs of travel from a patient's residence to their local outreach clinic were estimated. Costs of travel and accommodation to Sydney for an appointment were calculated for different travel modes. Estimated reimbursements for travel through government support schemes were calculated based on published rates.

FINDINGS

Some 657 patients attended the three clinics, accounting for 1981 appointments. Depending on mode of travel, the estimated median cost of return travel (including accommodation) to Sydney was $379 to $739 per patient per trip and the median government reimbursement ranged from $182 to $279 per trip. In comparison, the cost of return travel by car to local outreach clinics ranged from $28 to $163 per appointment. Outreach clinics were estimated to save patients a median of $285 per trip and avoided government reimbursements of $215 per trip.

DISCUSSION

Despite uptake in telehealth, outreach medical services remain an important asset for people living in regional areas to address inequities in access. However, the cost benefits are likely to be underestimated as our approach did not account for indirect costs associated with travel.

CONCLUSION

Outreach head and neck surgical services located in regional areas can reduce the financial burden on both patients and the healthcare system. Greater investment in outreach clinics could ensure sustainability of services to promote equitable access to specialised surgical services.

Usage of Heat and Moisture Exchange Devices, Virtual Visits, Masking, and Vaccinations Among People With a Laryngectomy During COVID-19

PURPOSE

This study described the COVID-19 risk mitigation actions of people with a total laryngectomy (TL) during the pandemic.

METHOD

An online survey was completed by 215 people with a TL who lived in the United States. The survey was open from December 1, 2021, to January 15, 2022.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in frequency of heat and moisture exchange (HME) device use during the pandemic compared with pre-COVID-19. Frequency of HME use was significantly greater for those who were vaccinated and those who had at least one clinical visit with their speech-language pathologist (SLP). The use of virtual visits increased from 9% pre-COVID-19 to 37% during the pandemic. Seventy percent of respondents were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with virtual visits and 51% judged them "as good as in-person." Eighty percent were vaccinated for COVID-19 and 75% received a booster. One third reported that they did not wear mask over the face or over the tracheostoma. Twenty percent had tested positive for COVID-19 with 70% of these people requiring hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

HME use and virtual SLP visits increased during the pandemic and the vaccination rate was high among this group of respondents. Overall, there were still large percentages of people with a TL who were not using an HME, not vaccinated, and did not wear a mask. SLPs should consider reaching out directly to their TL caseload, particularly those not yet seen during the pandemic, to support uptake of COVID-19 mitigation activities specific to people with a TL as the pandemic persists.

Prioritization of head and neck cancer patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic placed considerable strain on the healthcare system, leading to the re-allocation of resources and implementation of new practice guidelines. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of COVID-19 guideline modifications on head and neck cancer (HNC) care at two tertiary care centers in Canada.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted. HNC patients seen at two tertiary care centers before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (pre-pandemic: July 1st, 2019, to February 29th, 2020; pandemic: March 1st, 2020, to October 31st, 2020) were included. The pre-pandemic and pandemic cohorts were compared according to patient and tumor characteristics, duration of HNC workup, and treatment type and duration. Mean differences in cancer care wait times, including time to diagnosis, tumor board, and treatment as well as total treatment package time and postoperative hospital stay were compared between cohorts. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare characteristics and outcomes between cohorts.

RESULTS

Pre-pandemic (n = 132) and pandemic (n = 133) patients did not differ significantly in sex, age, habits, or tumor characteristics. The percentage of patients who received surgery only, chemo/radiotherapy (CXRT) only, and surgery plus adjuvant CXRT did not differ significantly between cohorts. Pandemic patients experienced a significant time reduction compared to pre-pandemic patients with regards to the date first seen by a HNC service until start of treatment ([Formula: see text] = 48.7 and 76.6 days respectively; p = .0001), the date first seen by a HNC service until first presentation at tumor board ([Formula: see text] = 25.1 and 38 days respectively; p = .001), mean total package time for patients who received surgery only ([Formula: see text] = 3.7 and 9.0 days respectively; p = .017), and mean total package time for patients who received surgery plus adjuvant CXRT ([Formula: see text] = 80.2 and 112.7 days respectively; p = .035).

CONCLUSION

The time to treatment was significantly reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic as compared to pre-pandemic. This transparent model of patient-centered operative-room prioritization can serve as a model for improving resource allocation and efficiency of HNC care during emergency and non-emergency scenarios.

[COVID-19: Collateral damage in head and neck oncology and preventive measures for future pandemics]

The start of the COVID-19 pandemic led to enormous challenges for global healthcare, as capacities and resources had to be made available quickly for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. As a result, restrictions had to be accepted, especially in the care of oncological patients. The collateral damage of these limitations inevitably also affects patients with head and neck cancer. This review article summarizes the development of tumor incidences during the pandemic, internationally developed guidelines for the care of patients with head and neck cancer and studies on the delay in oncological therapies and mortality. In addition, the effects on the mental health of the patients, the psychosocial consequences and ethical issues are examined. In perspective, preventive measures for such negative collateral effects in future pandemics are discussed using the example of a concept for application software (app)-based digital care for patients with head and neck cancer.

Impact of COVID-19 on Head and Neck Cancer Advancement Measured by Increasing Numbers of Urgent Dyspnea Cases-What Could Be Improved in the Event of Subsequent Pandemics?

The COVID-19 pandemic has altered all aspects of the healthcare system's organization and impacted patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) who have experienced delayed diagnosis and treatment. The pandemic resulted in the admission of patients with severe dyspnea and a need for tracheotomy due to extremely advanced HNC. This study's objective was to evaluate the clinical characteristics of two multi-center cohorts, "pre-COVID-19" and "COVID-19", of HNC patients admitted as emergencies for dyspnea. The therapeutic activity of HNC patients in four University Departments of Otolaryngology was studied over two time periods: September-February 2019/2020 and 2020/2021. A group of 136 HNC patients who underwent a tracheotomy in two-time cohorts, pre-COVID-19 (N = 59) and COVID-19 (N = 77), was analyzed. The mean tracheotomies incidence proportion was 1.82 (SD: 1.12) for the pre-COVID-19 and 3.79 (SD: 2.76) for COVID-19 period. A rise in the occurrence of emergency dyspnea was observed in the COVID-19 cohort, and the greatest increase was seen in the centers with the highest limitations on planned surgeries. In the pre-COVID-19 period, 66% of patients presented with symptoms for more than a month in comparison to 78% of patients in the COVID-19 period (p = 0.04). There was a higher incidence of laryngeal and laryngopharyngeal cancer in the COVID-19 period (63% vs. 75%, respectively). The number of tracheotomies performed under general anesthesia dropped in favor of local anesthesia during COVID-19 (64% vs. 56%, respectively) due to extremely advanced HNC. In the COVID-19 cohort, most patients received a telemedicine consultation (N = 55, 71%) in comparison to the pre-COVID-19 period (N = 14, 24%). Reorganization of the referral system, adjustment of treatment capacity for an increased number of HNC, and a reserve for more extensive resection and reconstruction surgeries should be made in the profile of otorhinolaryngological departments, ensuring future HNC treatment is not hampered in case of a new pandemic wave.

Factors Associated With the Utilization of Outpatient Virtual Clinics: Retrospective Observational Study Using Multilevel Analysis

Background

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of telemedicine and virtual consultations worldwide, complex factors that may affect the use of virtual clinics are still unclear.

Objective

This study aims to identify factors associated with the utilization of virtual clinics in the experience of virtual clinic service implementation in Taiwan.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed a total of 187,742 outpatient visits (176,815, 94.2%, in-person visits and 10,927, 5.8%, virtual visits) completed at a large general hospital in Taipei City from May 19 to July 31, 2021, after rapid implementation of virtual outpatient clinic visits due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data of patients’ demographic characteristics, disease type, physicians’ features, and specialties/departments were collected, and physicians’ opinions regarding virtual clinics were surveyed and evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale. Multilevel analysis was conducted to determine the factors associated with the utilization of virtual clinics.

Results

Patient-/visit-, physician-, and department-level factors accounted for 67.5%, 11.1%, and 21.4% of the total variance in the utilization of virtual clinics, respectively. Female sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.27, 95% CI 1.22-1.33, P<.001); residing at a greater distance away from the hospital (OR 2.36, 95% CI 2.15-2.58 if distance>50 km, P<.001; OR 3.95, 95% CI 3.11-5.02 if extensive travel required, P<.001); reimbursement by the National Health Insurance (NHI; OR 7.29, 95% CI 5.71-9.30, P<.001); seeking care for a major chronic disease (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.24-1.42, P<.001); the physician’s positive attitude toward virtual clinics (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.16-1.93, P=.002); and visits within certain departments, including the heart center, psychiatry, and internal medicine (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.46-4.46, P=.004), were positively associated with the utilization of virtual clinics. The patient’s age, the physician’s age, and the physician’s sex were not associated with the utilization of virtual clinics in our study.

Conclusions

Our results show that in addition to previously demonstrated patient-level factors that may influence telemedicine use, including the patient’s sex and distance from the hospital, factors at the visit level (insurance type, disease type), physician level (physician’s attitude toward virtual clinics), and department level also contribute to the utilization of virtual clinics. Although there was a more than 300-fold increase in the number of virtual visits during the pandemic compared with the prepandemic period, the majority (176,815/187,742, 94.2%) of the outpatient visits were still in-person visits during the study period. Therefore, it is of great importance to understand the factors impacting the utilization of virtual clinics to accelerate the implementation of telemedicine. The findings of our study may help direct policymaking for expanding the use of virtual clinics, especially in countries struggling with the development and promotion of telemedicine virtual clinic services.

COVID-19 and the resurgence of telehealth in otolaryngology

The objective of this review is to examine the impact of the ongoing Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the use of telehealth in Otolaryngology. The use of telemedicine rose dramatically during the pandemic to meet the need for continued patient care while allowing for physical separation of providers and patients. Telemedicine has been used to evaluate patients with a variety of pathologies including dysphonia, vertigo, and anosmia. Innovative use of at-home exams, such as video-otoscopy has aided providers in overcoming challenges associated with a highly specialized physical exam. The use of telemedicine in Otolaryngology will likely remain essential in the post-pandemic era and has promising results for improving clinical efficiency.

COVID-19 and head and neck oncology

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated a plethora of unique challenges which have forced Otolaryngologists/Head and Neck Surgeons to adapt the ways in which patients with head and neck cancer are diagnosed and managed. This article aims to describe the impact of COVID-19 on the practice of head and neck oncology, as well as provide evidence-based management recommendations for head and neck cancer during a public health emergency such as the current pandemic.

Patient, physician, and policy factors underlying variation in use of telemedicine for radiation oncology cancer care

BACKGROUND

Oncology telemedicine was implemented rapidly after COVID-19. We examined multilevel correlates and outcomes of telemedicine use for patients undergoing radiotherapy (RT) for cancer.

METHODS

Upon implementation of a telemedicine platform at a comprehensive cancer center, we analyzed 468 consecutive patient RT courses from March 16, 2020 to June 1, 2020. Patients were categorized as using telemedicine during ≥1 weekly oncologist visits versus in-person oncologist management only. Temporal trends were evaluated with Cochran-Armitage tests; chi-squared test and multilevel multivariable logistic models identified correlates of use and outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 33% used telemedicine versus 67% in-person only oncologist management. Temporal trends (ptrend  < 0.001) correlated with policy changes: uptake was rapid after local social-distancing restrictions, reaching peak use (35% of visits) within 4 weeks of implementation. Use declined to 15% after national "Opening Up America Again" guidelines. In the multilevel model, patients more likely to use telemedicine were White non-Hispanic versus Black or Hispanic (odds ratio [OR] = 2.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-4.72; p = 0.04) or receiving ≥6 fractions of RT versus 1-5 fractions (OR = 4.49, 95% CI 2.29-8.80; p < 0.001). Model intraclass correlation coefficient demonstrated 43% utilization variation was physician-level driven. Treatment toxicities and 30-day emergency visits or unplanned hospitalizations did not differ for patients using versus not using telemedicine (p > 0.05, all comparisons).

CONCLUSION

Though toxicities were similar with telemedicine oncology management, there remained lower uptake among non-White patients. Continuing strategies for oncology telemedicine implementation should address multilevel patient, physician, and policy factors to optimize telemedicine's potential to surmount-and not exacerbate-barriers to quality cancer care.

Emerging Disparities in Prevention and Survival Outcomes for Patients with Head and Neck Cancer and Recommendations for Health Equity

Purpose of Review

The aim of this review is to describe less known and emerging disparities found in the prevention and survival outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) that are likely to play an increasingly important role in HNC outcomes and health inequities.

Recent Findings

The following factors contribute to HNC incidence and outcomes: (1) the effect of rurality on prevention and treatment of HNC, (2) dietary behavior and nutritional factors influencing the development of and survival from HNC, and (3) barriers and benefits of telehealth for patients with HNC.

Summary

Rurality, nutrition and diet, and telehealth usage and access are significant contributors to the existing health disparities associated with HNC. Population and culturally specific interventions are urgently needed as well as more research to further define the issues and develop appropriate population and individual level solutions.

Perceptions of telehealth in real-world oncological care: An exploration of matched patient- and clinician-reported acceptability data from an Australian cancer centre

BACKGROUND

Prior to 2020, the use of telehealth in cancer care was limited, but COVID-19 necessitated its rapid and widespread adoption into routine care delivery. This study aimed to evaluate perceptions of telehealth through a dyadic exploration of matched cancer patient- and clinician-reported acceptability data and to explore factors that may predict greater suitability for telehealth.

METHODS

A prospective, cross-sectional, exploratory survey study assessed (matched) patient- and clinician-reported perceptions of telehealth consultations occurring at a metropolitan, tertiary-based cancer centre in Victoria, Australia.

RESULTS

One-hundred and fifty-five matched patient- and clinician-reported data were included. High rates of acceptability with telehealth were reported by patients (93%) and clinicians (91%), who mostly shared concordant views (86%). Factors significantly associated with increased acceptability for telehealth, included, for clinicians, greater familiarity with the patient (OR 8.20, 95% CI: 1.50-45.06, p = 0.02), and younger patient age (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.99-1.13, p = 0.05), and for patients was earlier stage disease (≤stage III) (OR 5.29, 95% CI: 1.08-25.82, p = 0.04). Lower acceptability for telehealth according to clinicians was associated with poorer patient performance status (OR 0.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.08, p = 0.04) and for patients with the need for an interpreter (0R 0.06, 95% CI: 0.008-0.51, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

While overall telehealth is acceptable in cancer care, our findings raise important implications for future service development, notably that it may be less optimal for patients with higher complexity of need-including those with more advanced disease, poorer performance status, those less well known to treating clinicians and those identified to have additional language barriers.

Factors associated with loss to follow-up after radiation therapy for head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVES

Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients are at high risk for late occurring radiation-related morbidity and recurrence, necessitating close long-term medical surveillance. This study identified factors associated with becoming lost to follow-up (LTFU) at a comprehensive cancer center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were drawn from survivors who received radiation for HNC at a single institution between 2001 and 2018. LTFU was defined as living patients without a clinical encounter within 2 years of the data query.

RESULTS

In total, 537 patients met the inclusion criteria and 57 (10.6%) were identified as LTFU. Individual comparisons identified time since completing radiation, non-White race and being unmarried as associated with LTFU. Multiple regression identified time since treatment and being unmarried as factors associated with LTFU. A decision tree correctly sorted 89.4% using time, distance, and marital status.

CONCLUSION

Time since radiation, distance to clinic, and being unmarried were factors associated with becoming LTFU.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Researchers in 2020: A Qualitative Study of Events to Inform Mitigation Strategies

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on global health systems and economies. With ongoing and future challenges posed to the field due to the pandemic, re-examining research priorities has emerged as a concern. As part of a wider project aiming to examine research priorities, here we aimed to qualitatively examine the documented impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer researchers. Materials and Methods: We conducted a literature review with the aim of identifying non-peer-reviewed journalistic sources and institutional blog posts which qualitatively documented the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer researchers. We searched on 12th January 2021 using the LexisNexis database and Google, using terms and filters to identify English-language media reports and blogs, containing references to both COVID-19 and cancer research. The targeted search returned 751 results, of which 215 articles met the inclusion criteria. These 215 articles were subjected to a conventional qualitative content analysis, to document the impacts of the pandemic on the field of cancer research. Results: Our analysis yielded a high plurality of qualitatively documented impacts, from which seven categories of direct impacts emerged: (1) COVID measures halting cancer research activity entirely; (2) COVID measures limiting cancer research activity; (3) forced adaptation of research protocols; (4) impacts on cancer diagnosis, cases, and services; (5) availability of resources for cancer research; (6) disruption to the private sector; and (7) disruption to supply chains. Three categories of consequences from these impacts also emerged: (1) potential changes to future research practice; (2) delays to the progression of the field; and (3) potential new areas of research interest. Discussion: The COVID-19 pandemic had extensive practical and economic effects on the field of cancer research in 2020 that were highly plural in nature. Appraisal of cancer research strategies in a post-COVID world should acknowledge the potential for substantial limitations (such as on financial resources, limited access to patients for research, decreased patient access to cancer care, staffing issues, administrative delays, or supply chain issues), exacerbated cancer disparities, advances in digital health, and new areas of research related to the intersection of cancer and COVID-19.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on head and neck cancer diagnosis: data from a single referral center, South Tyrol, northern Italy

Objective

The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on new diagnoses of head and neck cancer (HNC) in South Tyrol, northern Italy in terms of the number of new diagnoses and worsening disease stage due to diagnostic delay.

Methods

Patients were divided into two groups: the control group with a first diagnosis of HNC in 10 months before the national lockdown (March 9th, 2020) and the study group with a first diagnosis of HNC in 10 months after lockdown.

Results

A total of 124 patients were included in the study. Before the spread of COVID-19, 79 new diagnoses of HNCs were registered, while in the period after the lockdown, 45 new cancers cases were diagnosed and the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.01278). Early clinical T-stage results showed 52 cases in the control group and 21 in the study group, again with a significant difference (p = 0.03711). Advanced T-stage results showed 27 cases in the control group and 24 in the study group.

Conclusions

This study highlights the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HNCs, showing a statistically significant difference in the number of diagnoses before and after the lockdown which was related to the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and with a relevant decrease in early cT-staged HNCs.

Clinical Experiences of People With a Laryngectomy During the SARS COVID-19 Pandemic

Purpose This study described the clinical experiences of patients with a total laryngectomy (TL) during the COVID-19 pandemic and identified changes in communication, tracheostoma care, and heat-moisture exchange (HME) use that were recommended or self-implemented. Method An online survey addressing the study aims was completed by 173 people with a TL who live in the United States. The survey was open from July 5 to August 10, 2020. Results In-person clinic visits, appointment cancellations, and contact from their speech-language pathologists (SLPs) were reported by 42%, 19%, and 54% of the TL respondents, respectively. At clinic visits, 78% were required to wear a mask over their nose/mouth, and 73% were required to wear a mask over their tracheostoma. Masks, gloves, and face shields worn by the SLP at these visits were reported by 84%, 82%, and 70% of the TL patients, respectively. Alaryngeal communication changes were recommended by the SLP for 7%-18% of TL patients, depending on their method of communication, whereas 43%-45% implemented changes on their own. Changes in tracheostoma care and HME use were recommended by the SLP for 27% and 21% of the TL respondents, respectively, whereas 54% and 47% made changes on their own. Conclusions Individuals with a TL will require in-person care even during a pandemic, as reflected in this study. Many had not been contacted by their SLP or otolaryngologist about TL guidelines that were becoming available. Notably, larger percentages of TL patients reported self-initiated changes to their communication, tracheostoma care, and HME use because of the pandemic than their SLP had advised. The types of communication changes varied in part, depending on the method of alaryngeal speech a respondent used. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16807270.