Cancer patient perspective in the arena of COVID-19 pandemic

Perceptions and practices of people with a total laryngectomy during COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed methods analysis

PURPOSE

People with a total laryngectomy (PTL) confront safety threats related to altered airway anatomy and risk of adverse events is amplified during healthcare crises, as exemplified by COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding these challenges, how they are navigated by PTL, and what resources can be deployed to alleviate risk can improve interprofessional care by speech-language pathologists (SLPs), otolaryngologists, and other professionals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey was disseminated to PTL in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, querying participants about safety concerns and sources of information accessed to address care. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square were used to analyze information sources consumed by tracheoesophageal, esophageal, and electrolaryngeal speakers. Content analysis was completed to identify themes and quantify responses by subtheme.

RESULTS

Among 173 respondent PTL, tracheoesophageal speakers preferentially sought otolaryngologist input, whereas esophageal and electrolaryngeal speakers more often chose SLPs (p < .01). Overall, tracheoesophageal speakers had more SLP or otolaryngologist contact. Many PTL reported stringent handwashing, neck cleaning, and hygienic risk mitigation strategies. Six themes emerged in content analysis involving risk of infection/transmission, heightened vigilance, changes to alaryngeal communication, modified tracheostoma coverage, diagnostic testing, and risk from comorbid conditions. Limited provider contact suggested pandemic barriers to healthcare access.

CONCLUSIONS

PTL have a range of laryngectomy-specific needs and concerns, and type of alaryngeal communication was associated with source of information sought. Collaborations among healthcare professionals need to be optimized to improve patient navigation and overall access to specialized care.

Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on good clinical practice trials in oncology

Aim

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) became pandemic on 11th March 2020 and it deeply stressed the healthcare system. Cancer patients represent a vulnerable population, so many recommendations have been approved to ensure optimal management. Clinical research was notably impacted by COVID too. This review aims to analyze the challenges occurred during a pandemic for the management of enrolled patients (enrollment, use of telemedicine visits, study procedures) and for the clinical trials system (from feasibility to selection visit, site initiation visit, monitorings, use of e-signature, deviations and discontinuations).

Methods

The studies included in the present review were selected from PubMed/Google Scholar/ScienceDirect databases.

Results

During the first phase of pandemic many clinical trials were suspended in accrual and, as the pandemic progressed, recommendations were established to guarantee the safety and the continuity of care of enrolled patients. In addition, lot of new strategies was found during the pandemic to reduce the negative consequences on clinical trial performance and to guarantee new opportunities of care in the respect of good clinical practice (GCP) in a bad scenario.

Conclusions

Among all modifiers, investigators would prefer to maintain the positive ones such as pragmatic and simplified trial designs and protocols, reducing in-person visits when not necessary and to minimizing sponsor and contract research organizations (CROs) visits.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care physicians and nurses in Nova Scotia: a qualitative exploratory study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought immense disruption worldwide, dramatically altering the ways we live, work and learn on a day-to-day basis; however, few studies have investigated this from the perspective of primary care providers. In this study, we sought to explore the experiences of primary care providers in the province of Nova Scotia, with the intention of understanding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on primary care providers' ability to provide care, their information pathways, and the personal and professional impact of the pandemic.

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory qualitative research study involving semistructured interviews conducted via Zoom videoconferencing or telephone with primary care providers (physicians, nurse practitioners and family practice nurses) who self-identified as working in primary health care in Nova Scotia from June 2020 to April 2021. We performed a thematic analysis involving coding and classifying data according to themes. Emergent themes were then interpreted by seeking commonalties, divergence, relationships and overarching patterns in the data.

RESULTS

Twenty-four primary care providers were interviewed. Subsequent analysis identified 4 interrelated themes within the data: disruption to work-life balance, disruptions to "non-COVID-19" patient care, impact of provincial and centralized policies, and filtering and processing an influx of information.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings showed that managing a crisis of this magnitude requires coordination and new ways of working, balancing professional and personal life, and adapting to already implemented changes (i.e., virtual care). A specific primary care pandemic response plan is essential to mitigate the impact of future health care crises.

The Experience of COVID-19 in a Sample of Gynecological Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy: A Focus on the Psychological Implications

Cancer patients are at an increased risk of developing severe consequences due to the COVID-19 infection. However, psychological outcomes in this population have been overlooked in the literature. The present study aims to identify significant psychological differences between gynecological cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy before and during the pandemic. Additionally, we explore the correlations between COVID-19-related concerns and anxiety, depression, distress, and quality of life levels. Forty-two patients completed the STAI-Y, the EORTC QLQ-C30, the BDI II, the DT, and an ad-hoc questionnaire that investigated COVID-19-related concerns. The analyses did not show significant differences in the psychometric scales between the two groups, highlighting a considerable resilience against mental health and quality of life deterioration during the COVID-19 pandemic in gynecologic cancer patients. However, COVID-19-related concerns were positively associated with anxiety and inversely related to emotional functioning levels. These results emphasize the importance of a comprehensive patient care and the need to implement a multidisciplinary approach that includes psychological support in the treatment plan. Moreover, it is essential to encourage clear communication to convey comprehensive information about the impact of the pandemic on physical and psychological levels, as well as to offer psychoeducational tools to face the pandemic.

Use of Online Health Forums by People Living With Breast Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Thematic Analysis

BACKGROUND

At the time of the UK COVID-19 lockdowns, online health forums (OHFs) were one of the relatively few remaining accessible sources of peer support for people living with breast cancer. Cancer services were heavily affected by the pandemic in many ways, including the closure of many of the customary support services. Previous studies indicate that loneliness, anxiety, distress, and depression caused by COVID-19 were common among people living with breast cancer, and this suggests that the role of OHFs in providing users with support, information, and empathy could have been of increased importance at that time.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine how people living with breast cancer shared information, experiences, and emotions in an OHF during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This qualitative study thematically analyzed posts from the discussion forums of an OHF provided by the UK charity, Breast Cancer Now. We selected 1053 posts from the time of 2 UK lockdowns: March 16, 2020, to June 15, 2020 (lockdown 1), and January 6, 2021, to March 8, 2021 (lockdown 3), for analysis, from 2 of the forum's boards (for recently diagnosed people and for those undergoing chemotherapy). We analyzed the data using the original 6 steps for thematic analysis by Braun and Clarke but by following a codebook approach. Descriptive statistics for posts were also derived.

RESULTS

We found that COVID-19 amplified the forum's value to its users. As patients with cancer, participants were in a situation that was "bad enough already," and the COVID-19 pandemic heightened this difficult situation. The forum's value, which was already high for the information and peer support it provided, increased because COVID-19 caused some special information needs that forum users were uniquely well placed to fulfill as people experiencing the combined effects of having breast cancer during the pandemic. The forum also met the emotional needs generated by the COVID-19 pandemic and was valued as a place where loneliness during the pandemic may be relieved and users' spirits lifted in a variety of ways specific to this period. We found some differences in use between the 2 periods and the 2 boards-most noticeable was the great fear and anxiety expressed at the beginning of lockdown 1. Both the beginning and end of lockdown periods were particularly difficult for participants, with the ends seen as potentially increasing isolation.

CONCLUSIONS

The forums were an important source of support and information to their users, with their value increasing during the lockdowns for a variety of reasons. Our findings will be helpful to organizations offering OHFs and to health care workers advising people living with breast cancer about sources of support.

Cancer Patients during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mini-Review

Since its emergence, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected the entire world and all commerce and industries, including healthcare systems. COVID-19 adversely affects cancer patients because they are immunocompromised. Increased COVID-19 infection and shortage of medical supplies, beds and healthcare workers in hospitals affect cancer care. This paper includes a description of the existing research that shows the impact of COVID-19 on the management of cancer patients. Aged people with various chronic conditions such as cancer and comorbidities face more challenges as they have a greater risk of disease severity. COVID-19 has affected care delivery, including patient management, and has been responsible for increased mortality among cancer patients. Cancer patients with severe symptoms require regular therapies and treatment; therefore, they have a higher risk of exposure. Due to the risk of transmission, various steps were taken to combat this disease; however, they have affected the existing operational efficiency. Herein, we present the changing priorities during COVID-19, which also affected cancer care, including delayed diagnosis, treatment, and surgeries.

Experiences of patients with cancer and their relatives confronted with COVID-19 related delay or change in care: A qualitative study

AIMS

To provide in-depth insight into how patients and their relatives experienced change or delay in cancer treatment and care due to COVID-19.

DESIGN

A qualitative study including semi-structured interviews with patients with cancer and their relatives.

METHODS

Between July and October 2020, 42 patients who were confronted with a change or delay in cancer treatment or care, and 11 relatives were interviewed. Data collection and analysis were performed according to the most important methods of grounded theory, including iterative data collection and analysis, theoretical sampling, constant comparative analysis and theoretical sensitivity.

RESULTS

This study shows that patients with cancer and relatives experienced paradoxical feelings when confronted with change or delay in treatment or care due to COVID-19. Patients and relatives felt relieved (e.g. less risk of infection), but were also concerned and anxious (e.g. fear for progression, fear for more side effects). Due to these ambivalent feelings, it was difficult for patients and relatives to cope with the change or delay in treatment or care, both when this was decided by the physician and by themselves. In combination with the general impact of COVID-19 on their daily lives, the change or delay led to additional distress. The interviews showed that exploring the meaning of change or delay of care for patients and their relatives and discussing what would help them might prevent or relieve distress.

CONCLUSION

The findings of our study show that COVID-19 and the associated delay or changes in cancer treatment and care had a major impact on the well-being of patients and their relatives. Person-oriented care is even more important during (emergency) situations in which care might be changed or delayed.

Rising incidence of late stage breast cancer after COVID-19 outbreak. Real-world data from the Italian COVID-DELAY study

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

•

COVID-19 impacted on breast cancer (BC) diagnoses with a reduction of 25% in 2020.

•

Fewer early-stage BC and more symptomatic patients were diagnosed during 2020.

•

Timing of access to BC diagnosis, staging and treatment has not been affected by COVID-19.

•

Less BC cases were reviewed in multidisciplinary tumor meetings during 2020.

Decision Conflicts in Clinical Care during COVID-19: A Patient Perspective

(1) Background: Uncertainty is typical for a pandemic or similar healthcare crisis. This affects patients with resulting decisional conflicts and disturbed shared decision making during their treatment occurring to a very different extent. Sociodemographic factors and the individual perception of pandemic-related problems likely determine this decisional dilemma for patients and can characterize vulnerable groups with special susceptibility for decisional problems and related consequences. (2) Methods: Cross-sectional data from the OnCoVID questionnaire study were used involving 540 patients from 11 participating institutions covering all major regions in Germany. Participants were actively involved in clinical treatment in oncology or psychiatry during the COVID-19 pandemic. Questionnaires covered five decision dimensions (conflicts and uncertainty, resources, risk perception, perception of consequences for clinical processes, perception of consequences for patients) and very basic demographic data (age, gender, stage of treatment and educational background). Decision uncertainties and distress were operationalized using equidistant five-point scales. Data analysis was performed using descriptive and various multivariate approaches. (3) Results: A total of 11.5% of all patients described intensive uncertainty in their clinical decisions that was significantly correlated with anxiety, depression, loneliness and stress. Younger and female patients and those of higher educational status and treatment stage had the highest values for these stressors (p < 0.001). Only 15.3% of the patients (14.9% oncology, 16.2% psychiatry; p = 0.021) considered the additional risk of COVID-19 infections as very important for their disease-related decisions. Regression analysis identified determinants for patients at risk of a decisional dilemma, including information availability, educational level, age group and requirement of treatment decision making. (4) Conclusions: In patients, the COVID-19 pandemic induced specific decisional uncertainty and distress accompanied by intensified stress and psychological disturbances. Determinants of specific vulnerability were related to female sex, younger age, education level, disease stages and perception of pandemic-related treatment modifications, whereas availability of sufficient pandemic-related information prevented these problems. The most important decisional criteria for patients under these conditions were expected side effects/complications and treatment responses.

Organisation of cancer care in troubling times: A scoping review of expert guidelines and their implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic

This scoping review mapped the main themes in existing expert guidelines for cancer care issued during the COVID-19 crisis from the period of March 2020-August 2021. The guidelines published during the research period principally relate to the first two waves in Europe and until the beginning of the vaccination campaign. They elaborated recommendations for cancer care reorganisation, in particular triage and quality of care issues. The article highlights the ethical, epistemological, as well as practical reasons that guidelines were not always followed to provide some lessons learned for future crises to enable better guideline development processes. We also elaborate early evidence on the impact of triage decisions and different perspectives on cancer care reorganisation from ethics and social science literature.

Cancer patient perspective in the arena of COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has been declared a global pandemic of unprecedented proportions. Italy is a country which has been heavily affected. Cancer patients are at a higher risk owing to their intrinsic fragility related to their underlying disease and oncologic treatment. Against this backdrop, we conducted a survey to investigate how patients perceived their condition, clinical management and availability of information during the pandemic.

METHODS

Between 15 April and 1 May 2020 a survey was submitted to cancer patients at oncology departments in the Marche region. Questions regarding the perception of personal safety, continuity of cancer care, information quality and psychological distress.

RESULTS

Seven hundred patients participated in the survey; 59% were female and 40% were aged between 46 and 65. The majority of the participants perceived compliance with appropriate safety standards by cancer care providers and 80% were reassured about their concerns during the medical interview. 40% were worried of being at a higher risk of infection and 71% felt they were at a greater risk because of chemotherapy. 55% felt that postponing cancer treatment could reduce its efficacy, however 76% declared they did not feel abandoned at the time of treatment postponement. Patients between 46 and 65 years declared a significant reduction in sleep (p < 0.01) and in concentration (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The emergency care offered to cancer patients has been deemed satisfactory in terms of both safety standards and care management. However, the majority of participants perceived the mutual negative influence between their oncologic disease and the risk of infection highlighting the need for special measures to ensure safe continuity of care.