The efficacy, challenges, and facilitators of telemedicine in post-treatment cancer survivorship care: an overview of systematic reviews

Systemic therapy and radiotherapy related complications and subsequent hospitalisation rates: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hospitalisation  resulting from complications of systemic therapy and radiotherapy places a substantial burden on the patient, society, and healthcare system. To formulate preventive strategies and enhance patient care, it is crucial to understand the connection between complications and the need for subsequent hospitalisation. This review aimed to assess the existing literature on complications related to systemic and radiotherapy treatments for cancer, and their impact on hospitalisation rates.

METHODS

Data was obtained via electronic searches of the PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Google Scholar online databases to select relevant peer-reviewed papers for studies published between January 1, 2000, and August 30, 2023. We searched for a combination of keywords in electronic databases and used a standard form to extract data from each article. The initial specific interest was to categorise the articles based on the aspects explored, especially complications due to systemic and radiotherapy and their impact on hospitalisation. The second interest was to examine the methodological quality of studies to accommodate the inherent heterogeneity. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023462532).

FINDINGS

Of 3289 potential articles 25 were selected for inclusion with ~ 34 million patients. Among the selected articles 21 were cohort studies, three were randomised control trials (RCTs) and one study was cross-sectional design. Out of the 25 studies, 6 studies reported ≥ 10 complications, while 7 studies reported complications ranging from 6 to 10. Three studies reported on a single complication, 5 studies reported at least two complications but fewer than six, and 3 studies reported higher numbers of complications (≥ 15) compared with other selected studies. Among the reported complications, neutropenia, cardiac complications, vomiting, fever, and kidney/renal injury were the top-most. The severity of post-therapy complications varied depending on the type of therapy. Studies indicated that patients treated with combination therapy had a higher number of post-therapy complications across the selected studies. Twenty studies (80%) reported the overall rate of hospitalisation among patients. Seven studies revealed a hospitalisation rate of over 50% among cancer patients who had at least one complication. Furthermore, two studies reported a high hospitalisation rate (> 90%) attributed to therapy-repeated complications.

CONCLUSION

The burden of post-therapy complications is emerging across treatment modalities. Combination therapy is particularly associated with a higher number of post-therapy complications. Ongoing research and treatment strategies are imperative for mitigating the complications of cancer therapies and treatment procedures. Concurrently, healthcare reforms and enhancement are essential to address the elevated hospitalisation rates resulting from treatment-related complications in cancer patients.

Telemedicine in Improving Glycemic Control Among Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is the most common chronic autoimmune disease among children and adolescents. Telemedicine has been widely used in the field of chronic disease management and can benefit patients with T1DM. However, existing studies lack high-level evidence related to the effectiveness of telemedicine for glycemic control in children and adolescents with T1DM.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to systematically review the evidence on the effectiveness of telemedicine interventions compared with usual care on glycemic control among children and adolescents with T1DM.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science (all databases), and CINAHL Complete from database inception to May 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of a telemedicine intervention on glycemic control in children and adolescents with T1DM. In total, 2 independent reviewers performed the study selection and data extraction. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Our primary outcome was glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, self-monitoring of blood glucose, the incidence of hypoglycemia, and cost-effectiveness. A random-effects model was used for this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 20 RCTs (1704 participants from 12 countries) were included in the meta-analysis. Only 5% (1/20) of the studies were at high risk of bias. Compared to usual care, telemedicine was found to reduce HbA1c levels by 0.22 (95% CI -0.33 to -0.10; P<.001; I2=35%). There was an improvement in self-monitoring of blood glucose (mean difference [MD] 0.54, 95% CI -0.72 to 1.80; P=.40; I2=67.8%) and the incidence of hypoglycemia (MD -0.15, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.27; P=.49; I2=70.7%), although this was not statistically significant. Moreover, telemedicine had no convincing effect on the Diabetes Quality of Life for Youth score (impact of diabetes: P=.59; worries about diabetes: P=.71; satisfaction with diabetes: P=.68), but there was a statistically significant improvement in non-youth-specific quality of life (MD -0.24, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.02; P=.04; I2=0%). Subgroup analyses revealed that the effect of telemedicine on HbA1c levels appeared to be greater in studies involving children (MD -0.41, 95% CI -0.62 to -0.20; P<.001), studies that lasted <6 months (MD -0.32, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.17; P<.001), studies where providers used smartphone apps to communicate with patients (MD -0.37, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.21; P<.001), and studies with medication dose adjustment (MD -0.25, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.12; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Telemedicine can reduce HbA1c levels and improve quality of life in children and adolescents with T1DM. Telemedicine should be regarded as a useful supplement to usual care to control HbA1c levels and a potentially cost-effective mode. Meanwhile, researchers should develop higher-quality RCTs using large samples that focus on hard clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life.

Effect of telemedicine use on medical spending and health care utilization among patients with gastrointestinal cancer

BACKGROUND

We sought to assess the impact of telemedicine on healthcare utilization and medical expenditures among patients with a diagnosis of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed GI cancer from 2013 to 2020 were identified from the IBM MarketScan database (IBM Watson Health) . Healthcare utilization, total medical outpatient insurance payments within 1 year post-diagnosis, and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses among telemedicine users and non-users were assessed after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Among the 32,677 patients with GI cancer (esophageal, n = 1862, 5.7%; gastric, n = 2009, 6.1%; liver, n = 2929, 9.0%; bile duct, n = 597, 1.8%; pancreas, n = 3083, 9.4%; colorectal, n = 22,197, 67.9%), a total of 3063 (9.7%) utilized telemedicine. After PSM (telemedicine users, n = 3064; non-users, n = 3064), telemedicine users demonstrated a higher frequency of clinic visits (median: 5.0 days, IQR 4.0-7.0 vs non-users: 2.0 days, IQR 2.0-3.0, P < .001) and fewer potential days missed from daily activities (median: 7.5 days, IQR 4.5-12.5 vs non-users: 8.5 days, IQR 5.5-13.5, P < .001). Total medical spending per month and utilization of emergency room (ER) visits for telemedicine users were higher vs non-users (median: $10,658, IQR $5112-$18,528 vs non-users: $10,103, IQR $4628-$16,750; 46.8% vs 42.6%, both P < .01), whereas monthly OOP costs were comparable (median: $273, IQR $137-$449 for telemedicine users vs non-users: $268, IQR $142-$434, P = .625).

CONCLUSION

Telemedicine utilization was associated with increased outpatient clinic visits yet reduced potential days missed from daily activities among patients with GI cancer. Telemedicine users tended to have more ER visits and total medical spending per month, although monthly OOP costs were comparable with non-users.

Preference of Young Adult Cancer Survivors for In-Person Versus Telemedicine Cancer Survivorship Visits

Young adult (YA) cancer survivors face barriers to follow-up care, which can be exacerbated by living in a rural location. Telemedicine may mitigate these barriers, but little is known about the preferences of YA survivors for telemedicine or in-person survivorship visits. We surveyed 57 YA cancer survivors in a rural state to assess their preference for survivorship visits. Forty-six percent of respondents preferred an in-person visit while 16% preferred telemedicine. The remaining 39% reported "it depends" or were undecided. In-person visits were preferred when stratified by rural versus urban location. This work can be used to inform survivorship delivery systems.

A digital, coach-assisted intervention to address the psychosocial needs of young adult cancer survivors: Randomized controlled trial protocol and intervention adaptation process

BACKGROUND

Given the increasing number of young adult cancer survivors and the impacts of cancer on various life domains, interventions addressing the psychosocial needs of young adult survivors are crucial. However, such intervention research is limited, and the existing literature has often: 1) overlooked young adult survivors' psychosocial needs; 2) targeted depression, anxiety, or fear of recurrence - rather than positive outcomes like well-being; and 3) failed to consider scalable approaches, like digital health.

METHODS

This paper documents the development and refinement of an 8-week digital, coach-assisted intervention targeting hope among young adult cancer survivors (ages 18-39, within 3 years of treatment completion) and presents the protocol of the 2-arm RCT (comparing intervention vs. attention control). The intervention builds upon a 2017-2018 pilot trial (n = 56); intervention refinements were based on subsequent semi-structured interviews among young adult survivors (n = 23).

RESULTS

The pending trial design involves an increased sample size (n = 150) to increase power and diversified recruitment efforts (i.e., clinic-based, social media, community-based organizations, etc.) to facilitate intervention reach, accessibility, and scalability. The intervention was enhanced by integrating highly relevant theoretical and therapeutic frameworks, specifically the concept of hope and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, as well as updating intervention delivery technology. Intervention outcomes include feasibility and acceptability at end-of-treatment and preliminary efficacy on hope (primary outcome) and quality of life measures (secondary outcomes) at end-of-treatment and 16-week follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper may facilitate discussion regarding approaches for addressing the significant psychosocial challenges faced by young adult survivors and catalyze dissemination of trial results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05905250.

Mobile Health System for Meeting Health Information Needs in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer Undergoing Radiotherapy: Development and Feasibility Study

Patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy encounter physical and psychosocial challenges, indicating unmet needs. Mobile health technology can potentially support patients. This single-armed feasibility study included 30 patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy. Patients were asked to use the Health Enjoy System, a mobile health support system that provides a disease-related resource for 1 week. We assessed the usability of the system and its limited efficacy in meeting patients' health information needs. The result showed that the system was well received by patients and effectively met their health information needs. They also reported free comments on the system's content, backend maintenance, and user engagement. This study supplies a foundation for further research to explore the potential benefits of the Health Enjoy System in supporting patients with head and neck cancer.

The Impact of Newly Diagnosed Early Breast Cancer on Psychological Resilience, Distress Levels, and the Perception of Health

Confronting a breast cancer diagnosis, along with complex and challenging treatment procedures, is an extremely stressful experience. Psychological resilience is the ability to maintain or restore normal functioning while facing adversity. We aimed to explore the impact of an early breast cancer diagnosis on psychological resilience, distress, and perception of health. A cross-sectional study was conducted, including 50 patients newly diagnosed with early breast cancer and 67 healthy women with screening mammograms graded 1 or 2 using a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. The levels of distress, perception of health, and psychological resilience were assessed using the depression, anxiety, and stress scale, the SF 36-Item Health Survey 1.0, and the Connor-Davidson RISC-25 scale. Differences between variables were examined using the t-test and chi-square test for interval and categorial variables. The surveys were conducted within four weeks of a breast cancer diagnosis. Patients with breast cancer reported a deterioration of their health relative to the previous year and significantly higher levels of psychological resilience, while there was no significant difference between the groups in levels of stress, anxiety, or depression. The process of diagnosis with early breast cancer may activate psychological dynamic processes which are involved in the effective adaptation to acute stress, leading to higher resilience levels in breast cancer patients compared to healthy controls.

Survivorship Care for People Affected by Advanced or Metastatic Cancer: MASCC-ASCO Standards and Practice Recommendations

PURPOSE

People with advanced or metastatic cancer and their caregivers may have different care goals and face unique challenges compared with those with early-stage disease or those nearing the end of life. These Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)-ASCO standards and practice recommendations seek to establish consistent provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer.

METHODS

A MASCC-ASCO expert panel was formed. Standards and recommendations relevant to the provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer were developed through conducting (1) a systematic review of unmet supportive care needs; (2) a scoping review of cancer survivorship, supportive care, and palliative care frameworks and guidelines; and (3) an international modified Delphi consensus process.

RESULTS

A systematic review involving 81 studies and a scoping review of 17 guidelines and frameworks informed the initial standards and recommendations. Subsequently, 77 experts (including eight people with lived experience) across 33 countries (33% were low- to middle-resource countries) participated in the Delphi study and achieved ≥94.8% agreement for seven standards, (1) Person-Centered Care; (2) Coordinated and Integrated Care; (3) Evidence-Based and Comprehensive Care; (4) Evaluated and Communicated Care; (5) Accessible and Equitable Care; (6) Sustainable and Resourced Care; and (7) Research and Data-Driven Care, and ≥84.2% agreement across 45 practice recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Standards of survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer are provided. These MASCC-ASCO standards support optimization of health outcomes and care experiences by providing guidance to stakeholders (health care professionals, leaders, and administrators; governments and health ministries; policymakers; advocacy agencies; cancer survivors and caregivers). Practice recommendations may be used to facilitate future research, practice, policy, and advocacy efforts.Additional information is available at www.mascc.org, www.asco.org/standards and www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines.

Survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer: MASCC-ASCO standards and practice recommendations

PURPOSE

People with advanced or metastatic cancer and their caregivers may have different care goals and face unique challenges compared to those with early-stage disease or those nearing the end-of-life. These MASCC-ASCO standards and practice recommendations seek to establish consistent provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer.

METHODS

An expert panel comprising MASCC and ASCO members was formed. Standards and recommendations relevant to the provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer were developed through conducting: (1) a systematic review of unmet supportive care needs; (2) a scoping review of cancer survivorship, supportive care, and palliative care frameworks and guidelines; and (3) an international modified Delphi consensus process.

RESULTS

A systematic review involving 81 studies and a scoping review of 17 guidelines and frameworks informed the initial standards and recommendations. Subsequently, 77 experts (including 8 people with lived experience) across 33 countries (33% were low-to-middle resource countries) participated in the Delphi study and achieved ≥ 94.8% agreement for seven standards (1. Person-Centred Care; 2. Coordinated and Integrated Care; 3. Evidence-Based and Comprehensive Care; 4. Evaluated and Communicated Care; 5. Accessible and Equitable Care; 6. Sustainable and Resourced Care; 7. Research and Data-Driven Care) and ≥ 84.2% agreement across 45 practice recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Standards of survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer are provided. These MASCC-ASCO standards will support optimization of health outcomes and care experiences by providing guidance to stakeholders in cancer care (healthcare professionals, leaders, and administrators; governments and health ministries; policymakers; advocacy agencies; cancer survivors and caregivers. Practice recommendations may be used to facilitate future research, practice, policy, and advocacy efforts.

Supporting Cancer Survivors Following Treatment for Non-Hodgkin's and Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A Pilot Study Assessing the Feasibility and Process Outcomes of a Nurse-Led Intervention

OBJECTIVE

Lymphoma is the sixth most common cancer in Australia and comprises 2.8% of worldwide cancer diagnoses. Research targeting development and evaluation of post-treatment care for debilitating complications resulting from the disease and its treatment is limited. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a nurse-led survivorship intervention, post-treatment in Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma survivors.

METHODS

A single-center, prospective, 3-arm, pilot, randomized controlled, parallel-group trial was used. People with lymphoma were recruited and randomized to the intervention (ENGAGE), education booklet only, or usual care arm. Participants receiving ENGAGE received an educational booklet and were offered 3 consultations (via various modes) with a cancer nurse to develop a survivorship care plan and healthcare goals. Participant distress and intervention acceptability was measured at baseline and 12-wk. Acceptability was measured via a satisfaction survey using a 11-point scale. Feasibility was measured using participation, retention rates, and process outcomes. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Thirty-four participants with HL and NHL were recruited to the study (11 = intervention, 11 = information only, 12 = usual care). Twenty-seven participants (79%) completed all time points from baseline to 12 wk. Seven (88%) of the 8 participants receiving ENGAGE completed all consultations using various modes to communicate with the nurse (videoconference 14/23, 61%; phone 5/23, 22%; face-to-face 4/23, 17%). Participants who completed the intervention were highly satisfied with ENGAGE.

CONCLUSION

The ENGAGE intervention is feasible and highly acceptable for lymphoma survivors. These findings will inform a larger trial assessing effectiveness and cost effectiveness of ENGAGE.

Navigating changes: A qualitative study exploring the health-related quality of life of breast cancer survivors during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

AIMS

To explore the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of breast cancer survivors.

DESIGN

We utilized a qualitative descriptive approach to facilitate interviews among 25 participants, all of whom are survivors of breast cancer and have received treatment in Hong Kong within the preceding 3 years.

METHODS

Content analysis was performed to understand how patients' HRQoL views and experiences changed during coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

RESULTS

The results included six themes delineating the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: (i) survivor sensitivities in pandemic times, (ii) coping and conditioning in pandemic times, (iii) transforming work and home dynamics in pandemic times, (iv) cognitive resilience and adaptation to the COVID-19 protective measures, (v) social resilience in pandemic times and (vi) healthcare adaptation and coping in pandemic times.

CONCLUSION

This study provides insights into the experiences and challenges of breast cancer survivors during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Some survivors had new physical and psychological symptoms, including fear and anxiety, isolation, pain, lymphoedema and burnout, which potentially have long-term impact upon HRQoL.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

This study highlights the unique challenges faced by breast cancer survivors during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, including accessing healthcare services and the impact of social isolation. Healthcare providers should consider the holistic needs of breast cancer survivors in the provision of health care and develop supportive interventions, including telehealth services and online support groups, to address these challenges and improve their HRQoL.

IMPACT

Surgery aimed at treating breast cancer or reducing its risk generally influences the appearance of breast areas and donor sites. The continuing effects of these changes on body image and HRQoL are well-reported, although studies have ineffectively examined the initial experiences of women regarding their postoperative appearance, particularly during the pandemic.

REPORTING METHOD

The checklist of consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) was utilized.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

A small selection on breast cancer survivors contributed to the design of this study, in particular the content of the semi-structured interviews.

Cardio-oncology rehabilitation: are we ready?

Cardio-oncology rehabilitation (CORE) is not only an essential component of cancer rehabilitation but also a pillar of preventive cardio-oncology. Cardio-oncology rehabilitation is a comprehensive model based on a multitargeted approach and its efficacy has been widely documented; when compared with an 'exercise only' programme, comprehensive CORE demonstrates a better outcome. It involves nutritional counselling, psychological support, and cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment, and it is directed to a very demanding population with a heavy burden of CV diseases driven by physical inactivity, cancer therapy-induced metabolic derangements, and cancer therapy-related CV toxicities. Despite its usefulness, CORE is still underused in cancer patients and we are still at the dawning of remote models of rehabilitation (tele-rehabilitation). Not all CORE is created equally: a careful screening procedure to identify patients who will benefit the most from CORE and a multidisciplinary customized approach are mandatory to achieve a better outcome for cancer survivors throughout their cancer journey. The aim of this paper is to provide an updated review of CORE not only for cardiologists dealing with this peculiar population of patients but also for oncologists, primary care providers, patients, and caregivers. This multidisciplinary team should help cancer patients to maintain a healthy and active life before, during, and after cancer treatment, in order to improve quality of life and to fight health inequities.

Physical Activity, Sedentary Time, and Psychosocial Functioning among Adults with Cancer: A Scoping Review

The post-treatment period (after the completion of primary cancer treatment) is a phase during which adults with cancer are particularly vulnerable to the physical and psychological side effects of treatment. Adopting healthy lifestyle habits during this time is essential to mitigate these effects. This scoping review investigated the associations of physical activity (PA) and sedentary time (ST) with two post-treatment psychosocial indicators among adults with cancer: psychological functioning and quality of life (QoL). An exhaustive search was performed in January 2023 across five databases, namely APA PsycInfo, MedLine, SPORTDiscuss, SCOPUS, and CINAHL, adhering to PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews. Twenty articles met the inclusion criteria; 16 used a cross-sectional design, while 4 used a longitudinal one. PA and ST were assessed mainly with accelerometers (n = 17), and psychosocial indicators with self-reported questionnaires (n = 20). Most studies linked higher PA levels to reduced anxiety (n = 3) and depression (n = 4) symptoms, and elevated ST to higher psychological symptoms (n = 3). Opposite associations were observed for QoL (n = 5). Altogether, PA appeared to be more strongly related to psychological functioning and QoL than ST. This scoping review highlights associations of PA and ST with psychological functioning and QoL among adults with cancer in the post-treatment period. However, future studies must prioritize longitudinal designs to establish directionality.

Effectiveness of Telemedicine for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Umbrella Review

BACKGROUND

Several systematic reviews (SRs) assessing the use of telemedicine for musculoskeletal conditions have been published in recent years. However, the landscape of evidence on multiple clinical outcomes remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to summarize the available evidence from SRs on telemedicine for musculoskeletal disorders.

METHODS

We conducted an umbrella review of SRs with and without meta-analysis by searching PubMed and EMBASE up to July 25, 2022, for SRs of randomized controlled trials assessing telemedicine. We collected any kind of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), and objective measures, including direct and indirect costs. We assessed the methodological quality with the AMSTAR 2 tool (A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2). Findings were reported qualitatively.

RESULTS

Overall, 35 SRs published between 2015 and 2022 were included. Most reviews (n=24, 69%) were rated as critically low quality by AMSTAR 2. The majority of reviews assessed "telerehabilitation" (n=29) in patients with osteoarthritis (n=13) using PROMs (n=142 outcomes mapped with n=60 meta-analyses). A substantive body of evidence from meta-analyses found telemedicine to be beneficial or equal in terms of PROMs compared to conventional care (n=57 meta-analyses). Meta-analyses showed no differences between groups in PREMs (n=4), while objectives measures (ie, "physical function") were mainly in favor of telemedicine or showed no difference (9/13). All SRs showed notably lower costs for telemedicine compared to in-person visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Telemedicine can provide more accessible health care with noninferior results for various clinical outcomes in comparison with conventional care. The assessment of telemedicine is largely represented by PROMs, with some gaps for PREMs, objective measures, and costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022347366; https://osf.io/pxedm/.

Health Care Access Barriers and Self-Reported Health Among Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors

Purpose: Adolescents and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors (15-39 years at diagnosis) are at risk for treatment-related late effects but face barriers in accessing survivorship care. We examined the prevalence of five health care access (HCA) barriers: affordability, accessibility, availability, accommodation, and acceptability. Methods: We identified AYA survivors from the University of North Carolina (UNC) Cancer Survivorship Cohort who completed a baseline questionnaire in 2010-2016. Participants had a history of cancer, were ≥18 years of age, and receiving care at a UNC oncology clinic. The sample was restricted to AYA survivors who were interviewed ≥1 year postdiagnosis. We used modified Poisson regression to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) for the association between HCA barriers and self-reported fair or poor health, adjusted for sociodemographic and cancer characteristics. Results: The sample included 146 AYA survivors who were a median age of 39 at the time of the survey. The majority (71%)-and 92% of non-Hispanic Black survivors-reported at least one HCA barrier, including acceptability (40%), accommodation (38%), or affordability (31%). More than one-quarter of survivors (28%) reported fair or poor health. Affordability barriers (PR: 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-3.18) and acceptability barriers (PR: 1.60, 95% CI: 0.96-2.66) were associated with a higher prevalence of fair/poor health, as were the cumulative effects of multiple HCA dimensions reported as barriers. Conclusions: Barriers across multiple HCA dimensions were prevalent and associated with worse health in AYA survivors. Findings highlight the need to better understand and target specific barriers to care for diverse AYA survivors to improve their long-term health.

Evaluation of the nurse-assisted eHealth intervention 'eHealth@Hospital-2-Home' on self-care by patients with heart failure and colorectal cancer post-hospital discharge: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with heart failure (HF) and colorectal cancer (CRC) are prone to comorbidity, a high rate of readmission, and complex healthcare needs. Self-care for people with HF and CRC after hospitalisation can be challenging, and patients may leave the hospital unprepared to self-manage their disease at home. eHealth solutions may be a beneficial tool to engage patients in self-care.

METHODS

A randomised controlled trial with an embedded evaluation of intervention engagement and cost-effectiveness will be conducted to investigate the effect of eHealth intervention after hospital discharge on the self-efficacy of self-care. Eligible patients with HF or CRC will be recruited before discharge from two Norwegian university hospitals. The intervention group will use a nurse-assisted intervention-eHealth@Hospital-2-Home-for six weeks. The intervention includes remote monitoring of vital signs; patients' self-reports of symptoms, health and well-being; secure messaging between patients and hospital-based nurse navigators; and access to specific HF and CRC health-related information. The control group will receive routine care. Data collection will take place before the intervention (baseline), at the end of the intervention (Post-1), and at six months (Post-2). The primary outcome will be self-efficacy in self-care. The secondary outcomes will include measures of burden of treatment, health-related quality of life and 30- and 90-day readmissions. Sub-study analyses are planned in the HF patient population with primary outcomes of self-care behaviour and secondary outcomes of medication adherence, and readmission at 30 days, 90 days and 6 months. Patients' and nurse navigators' engagement and experiences with the eHealth intervention and cost-effectiveness will be investigated. Data will be analysed according to intention-to-treat principles. Qualitative data will be analysed using thematic analysis.

DISCUSSION

This protocol will examine the effects of the eHealth@ Hospital-2-Home intervention on self-care in two prevalent patient groups, HF and CRC. It will allow the exploration of a generic framework for an eHealth intervention after hospital discharge, which could be adapted to other patient groups, upscaled, and implemented into clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trials.gov (ID 301472).

Telehealth and Outcomes in Patients With Cancer: Data and Innovation

ABSTRACT

Despite that telehealth has been crucial to the delivery of oncology care during the COVID-19 pandemic, the impact of this care delivery mechanism on outcomes in cancer care has not been rigorously studied relative standard in-person care for patients with cancer. Patient-centered outcomes such as quality of life, patient satisfaction, and symptoms are important outcomes that have been the primary focus of many of the existing studies in this space, yet only a select few have evaluated overall survival and other objective efficacy endpoints. Studies have alluded to positive effects of telehealth on mitigating financial toxicity and enhancing cost-effective care delivery in oncology. Telehealth carries much potential for advancing care for patients with cancer, but future study should focus on additional efficacy endpoints, implementation, and ways to reduce disparities.

Colorectal cancer survivors' experiences and views of shared and telehealth models of survivorship care: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

The number of colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors is increasing and current models of survivorship care are unsustainable. There is a drive to implement alternative models of care including shared care between general practitioners (GPs) and hospital-based providers. The primary objective of this study was to explore perspectives on facilitators and barriers to shared care. The secondary objective was to explore experiences of telehealth-delivered care.

METHOD

Qualitative data were collected via semi-structured interviews with participants in the Shared Care for Colorectal Cancer Survivors (SCORE) randomised controlled trial. Interviews explored patient experiences of usual and shared survivorship care during the SCORE trial. In response to the COVID pandemic, participant experiences of telehealth appointments were also explored. Interviews were recorded and transcribed for thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty survivors of CRC were interviewed with an even number in the shared and usual care arms; 14 (70%) were male. Facilitators to shared care included: good relationships with GPs; convenience of GPs; good communication between providers; desire to reduce public health system pressures. Barriers included: poor communication between clinicians; inaccessibility of GPs; beliefs about GP capacity; and a preference for follow-up care with the hospital after positive treatment experiences. Participants also commonly expressed a preference for telehealth-based follow-up when there was no need for a clinical examination.

CONCLUSIONS

This is one of few studies that have explored patient experiences with shared and telehealth-based survivorship care. Findings can guide the implementation of these models, particularly around care coordination, communication, preparation, and personalised pathways of care.

eHealth interventions to support colorectal cancer patients' self-management after discharge from surgery-an integrative literature review

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) creates elevated self-management demands and unmet support needs post-discharge. Follow-up care through eHealth post-primary surgery may be an effective means of supporting patients' needs. This integrative review describes the evidence regarding eHealth interventions post-hospital discharge focusing on delivery mode, user-interface and content, patient intervention adherence, impact on patient-reported outcomes and experiences of eHealth.

METHODS

A university librarian performed literature searches in 2021 using four databases. After screening 1149 records, the authors read 30 full-text papers and included and extracted data from 26 papers. Two authors analysed the extracted data using the 'framework synthesis approach'.

RESULTS

The 26 papers were published between 2012 and 2022. The eHealth interventions were mainly delivered by telephone with the assistance of healthcare professionals, combined with text messages or video conferencing. The user interfaces included websites, applications and physical activity (PA) trackers. The interventions comprised the monitoring of symptoms or health behaviours, patient information, education and counselling. Evidence showed a better psychological state and improved PA. Patients reported high satisfaction with eHealth. However, patient adherence was inadequately reported.

CONCLUSIONS

eHealth interventions may positively impact CRC patients' anxiety and PA regardless of the user interface. Patients prefer technology combined with a human element.

Moving Forward With Telehealth in Cancer Rehabilitation: Patient Perspectives From a Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the use of telehealth in cancer care and highlighted the potential of telehealth as a means of delivering the much-needed rehabilitation services for patients living with the side effects of cancer and its treatments.

OBJECTIVE

This mixed methods study aims to explore patients' experiences of telehealth and their preferences regarding the use of telehealth for cancer rehabilitation to inform service development.

METHODS

The study was completed in 2 phases from October 2020 to November 2021. In phase 1, an anonymous survey (web- and paper-based) exploring the need, benefits, barriers, facilitators, and preferences for telehealth cancer rehabilitation was distributed to survivors of cancer in Ireland. In phase 2, survivors of cancer were invited to participate in semistructured interviews exploring their experiences of telehealth and its role in cancer rehabilitation. Interviews were conducted via telephone or video call following an interview guide informed by the results of the survey and transcribed verbatim, and reflexive thematic analysis was performed using a qualitative descriptive approach.

RESULTS

A total of 48 valid responses were received. The respondents were at a median of 26 (range 3-256) months after diagnosis, and 23 (48%) of the 48 participants had completed treatment. Of the 48 respondents, 31 (65%) reported using telehealth since the start of the pandemic, 15 (31%) reported having experience with web-based cancer rehabilitation, and 43 (90%) reported a willingness for web-based cancer rehabilitation. A total of 26 (54%) of the 48 respondents reported that their views on telehealth had changed positively since the start of the pandemic. Semistructured interviews were held with 18 survivors of cancer. The mean age of the participants was 58.9 (SD 8.24) years, 56% (10/18) of the participants were female, and 44% (8/18) of the participants were male. Reflexive thematic analysis identified 5 key themes: telehealth improves accessibility to cancer rehabilitation for some but is a barrier for others, lived experiences of the benefits of telehealth in survivorship, the value of in-person health care, telehealth in cancer care and COVID-19 (from novelty to normality), and the future of telehealth in cancer rehabilitation.

CONCLUSIONS

Telehealth is broadly welcomed as a mode of cancer rehabilitation for patients living with and beyond cancer in Ireland. However, issues regarding accessibility and the importance of in-person care must be acknowledged. Factors of convenience, time savings, and cost savings indicate that telehealth interventions are a desirable patient-centered method of delivering care when performed in suitable clinical contexts and with appropriate populations.

Persistence of Telemedicine Usage for Breast and Prostate Cancer after the Peak of the COVID-19 Pandemic

While COVID-19 catalyzed a shift to telemedicine, little is known about the persistence of remote cancer care in non-emergent times. We assessed telemedicine use at a high-volume academic cancer center in New York City and analyzed breast and prostate cancer visits pre-COVID-19, peak COVID-19, and post-peak. Descriptive statistics assessed visit mode (in person, telemedicine) and type (new, follow-up, other) by department/specialty, with Fisher's exact tests comparing peak/post-peak differences. The study included 602,233 visits, with telemedicine comprising 2% of visits pre-COVID-19, 50% peak COVID-19, and 30% post-peak. Notable variations emerged by department/specialty and visit type. Post-peak, most departments/specialties continued using telemedicine near or above peak levels, except medicine, neurology, and survivorship, where remote care fell. In psychiatry, social work, and nutrition, nearly all visits were conducted remotely during and after peak COVID-19, while surgery and nursing maintained low telemedicine usage. Post-peak, anesthesiology and neurology used telemedicine seldom for new visits but often for follow-ups, while nursing showed the opposite pattern. These trends suggest department- and visit-specific contexts where providers and patients choose telemedicine in non-emergent conditions. More research is needed to explore these findings and evaluate telemedicine's appropriateness and impact across the care continuum.

Cancer survivorship at heart: a multidisciplinary cardio-oncology roadmap for healthcare professionals

In cancer, a patient is considered a survivor from the time of initial diagnosis until the end of life. With improvements in early diagnosis and treatment, the number of cancer survivors (CS) has grown considerably and includes: (1) Patients cured and free from cancer who may be at risk of late-onset cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity (CTR-CVT); (2) Patients with long-term control of not-curable cancers in whom CTR-CVT may need to be addressed. This paper highlights the importance of the cancer care continuum, of a patient-centered approach and of a prevention-oriented policy. The ultimate goal is a personalized care of CS, achievable only through a multidisciplinary-guided survivorship care plan, one that replaces the fragmented management of current healthcare systems. Collaboration between oncologists and cardiologists is the pillar of a framework in which primary care providers and other specialists must be engaged and in which familial, social and environmental factors are also taken into account.

A New Framework for Co-Creating Telehealth for Cancer Care with the Patient Community

The increased use of telehealth in cancer care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has added to our knowledge and experience of the modality with benefits in terms of efficacy, cost, and patient and healthcare professional experience reported. However, telehealth has also been found not to be universally available to all patients with cancer, nor to be appropriate for every healthcare interaction; additionally, not all patients prefer it. Now that coronavirus disease restrictions have essentially ended and an opportunity to re-assess telehealth provision in cancer care presents, we offer a framework that aims to ensure that the needs and preferences of the patient community are included in the development of telehealth provision. Stakeholders in this process include patients, patient advocates, healthcare providers, healthcare services commissioners, managers, and policy makers. The framework outlines how patient advocates can work with other stakeholders as equal partners at all stages of telehealth service development. The patient advocate community has a unique understanding of the patient perspective as well as expertise in healthcare design and delivery. This enables advocates to contribute to shaping telehealth provision, from policy and guideline formulation to patient navigation. Appropriate resources, education and training may be needed for all stakeholders to support the development of an effective telehealth system. Together with other stakeholders, patient advocates can make an important contribution to optimizing appropriate patient-centred telehealth provision in cancer care.

Telemedicine in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and Chimeric Antigen Receptor-T Cell Therapy

Telemedicine has played an important role in delivering healthcare for primary care, chronic disease patients, and those with solid organ malignancies. However, its application in subspecialties such as hematologic malignancies, hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), or chimeric antigen receptor-T cell (CAR-T) therapy is not widespread since physical examination is a vital component in delivering care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we widely used telemedicine, since protecting our immunocompromised patients became our top priority. The employment of HCT and CAR-T therapies continues to grow for high-risk hematologic malignancies, particularly in older and frail patients who must visit specialty centers for treatment access. Generally, HCT and CAR-T therapy care is highly complex, necessitating commitment from patients, caregivers, and a multidisciplinary team at specialty academic centers. All healthcare systems adapted to the crisis and implemented rapid changes during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE). Telemedicine, a vital modality for delivering healthcare in underserved areas, experienced rapid expansion, regardless of the geographic region, during the COVID-19 PHE. The data emerging from practices implemented during the PHE are propelling the field of telemedicine forward, particularly for specialties with complex medical treatments such as HCT and CAR-T therapy. In this review, we examine the current data on telemedicine in HCT and cellular therapy care models for the acute and long-term care of our patients.

Telehealth use and perceptions among prostate cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Reasons underlying disparities in telehealth use among cancer survivors are unknown.

METHODS

We surveyed a sociodemographically diverse population-based cohort of 487 prostate cancer survivors regarding their use and perceptions of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Overall, only 28.5% of survivors had used telehealth at the time of survey and just 10% felt care through telehealth is comparable to that of an in-person visit. Still, over 55% felt telehealth is a good option for initial consultations or basic care and 15% felt more likely to use telehealth since the pandemic. After adjusting for other socioeconomic factors, survivors with lower education (≤high school vs. any college) had marginally lower use of telehealth (risk ratio [RR], 0.65 [95% CI, 0.42-1.01]) and lower probability of feeling more likely to use telehealth since the pandemic (RR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.20-0.77]).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in survivor perceptions of telehealth by education level highlight new insights underlying disparities in telehealth use and potential targets for interventions.

The global effect of digital health technologies on health workers' competencies and health workplace: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and lexical-based and sentence-based meta-analysis

Systematic reviews have quantified the effectiveness, feasibility, acceptability, and cost-effectiveness of digital health technologies (DHTs) used by health-care workers. We aimed to collate available evidence on technologies' effect on health-care workers' competencies and performance. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, MEDLINE, Epistemonikos, and Scopus for reviews published from database inception to March 1, 2023. Studies assessing the effects of DHTs on the organisational, socioeconomic, clinical, and epidemiological levels within the workplace, and on health-care workers' performance parameters, were included. Data were extracted and clustered into 25 domains using vote counting based on the direction of effect. The relative frequency of occurrence (RFO) of each domain was estimated using R software. AMSTAR-2 tool was used to appraise the quality of reporting, and the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach developed by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to analyse the certainty of evidence among included studies. The 12 794 screened reviews generated 132 eligible records for assessment. Top-ranked RFO identifiers showed associations of DHT with the enhancement of health-care workers' performance (10·9% [95% CI 5·3-22·5]), improvement of clinical practice and management (9·8% [3·9-24·2]), and improvement of care delivery and access to care (9·2% [4·1-20·9]). Our overview found that DHTs positively influence the daily practice of health-care workers in various medical specialties. However, poor reporting in crucial domains is widely prevalent in reviews of DHT, hindering our findings' generalisability and interpretation. Likewise, most of the included reviews reported substantially more data from high-income countries. Improving the reporting of future studies and focusing on low-income and middle-income countries might elucidate and answer current knowledge gaps.

Telemedicine in Care of Sarcoma Patients beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic: Challenges and Opportunities

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has created a challenging environment for sarcoma patients. Most oncology societies published guidelines or recommendations prioritizing sarcoma patients and established telehealth as an efficient method of approaching them. The aim of this review is the assessment of current evidence regarding the utilization of telemedicine in diagnosis, treatment modalities, telerehabilitation and satisfaction among sarcoma patients and healthcare providers (HP).

METHODS

This systematic review was carried out using the databases PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

RESULTS

The application of telemedicine to the management of sarcoma has yielded improved clinical and psychological outcomes. Specifically, significant progress has been demonstrated in the areas of tele-oncology and telerehabilitation during the last decade, and the COVID-19 outbreak has accelerated this transition toward them. Telehealth has been proven efficient in a wide spectrum of applications from consultations on physical therapy and psychological support to virtual care symptom management. Both HP and patients reported satisfaction with telehealth services at levels comparable to in-person visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Telehealth has already unveiled many opportunities in tailoring individualized care, and its role in the management of sarcoma patients has been established in the post-COVID-19 era, as well.

"Somebody was standing in my corner": a mixed methods exploration of survivor, coach, and hospital staff perspectives and outcomes in an Australian cancer survivorship program

PURPOSE

Cancer survivorship in Australia continues to increase due to new methods for early detection and treatment. Cancer survivors face challenges in the survivorship phase and require ongoing support. A telephone-delivered cancer survivorship program (CSP), including health and mental health coaches, was developed, piloted, and evaluated in Eastern Australia.

METHODS

Cancer survivors' (n = 7), coaches' (n = 7), and hospital staff (n = 3) experiences of the CSP were explored through semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data routinely collected throughout the pilot of the CSP was described (N = 25).

RESULTS

Three syntheses and 11 themes were generated through thematic analysis. The first synthesis centred around operational factors and highlighted a need to streamline communication from the point of recruitment, through to program delivery, emphasising that the program could be beneficial when timed right and tailored correctly. The second synthesis indicated that the CSP focused on appropriate information, filled a gap in support, and met the needs of cancer survivors by empowering them. The third synthesis focussed on the value of mental health support in the CSP, but also highlighted challenges coaches faced in providing this support. Descriptive analysis of quantitative data indicated improvements in self-management, weekly physical activity, and meeting previously unmet needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer survivors expressed appreciation for the support they received through the CSP and, in line with other cancer survivorship research, predominantly valued just having somebody in their corner.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Recommendations are made for improving cancer survivorship programs in the future.

Use of Electronic Communication with Clinicians Among Cancer Survivors: Health Information National Trend Survey in 2019 and 2020

Purpose: To describe cancer survivors' use of electronic communication (e-communication) with clinicians and identify factors associated with their use, including the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Secondary analysis included cancer survivors (N = 1,482) from the combined Health Information National Trends Survey HINTS 5 Cycle 3 and Cycle 4. Survivors' use of e-communication was defined by at least one of four e-communication use behaviors in the past 12 months. Bivariate analysis and logistic regression were conducted to examine factors associated with e-communication use. All analyses considered the complex survey design using the jackknife replication method. Results: The prevalence of e-communication use was 64% among cancer survivors. The overall e-communication use slightly increased after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (63% vs. 64%, p = 0.79). Older adults (≥65 years old) were less likely to use e-communication (odds ratio [OR] = 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.86); survivors who were white (OR = 2.30; 95% CI, 1.36-3.86), living in a metro area (OR = 2.47; 95% CI, 1.44-4.27), diagnosed with breast cancer (OR = 2.03; 95% CI, 1.06-3.88), seeking cancer-related information previously (OR = 2.89; 95% CI, 1.83-4.58), or having a regular health care provider (OR = 2.07,; 95% CI, 1.10-3.88) were more likely to use e-communication. The start of the COVID-19 pandemic was marginally associated with the increased e-communication use (p = 0.053) when other variables were controlled. Conclusion: This nationally representative survey analysis has identified disparities in e-communication use among cancer survivors and revealed the potential increase in e-communication use under the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Additional support is clearly warranted for those older, nonwhite, living in rural areas, or without a regular provider, to promote their e-communication use for the delivery of optimal and high-quality cancer care.

Cancer Survivor Preferences for Models of Breast Cancer Follow-Up Care: Selecting Attributes for Inclusion in a Discrete Choice Experiment

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

It is critical to evaluate cancer survivors' preferences when developing follow-up care models to better address the needs of cancer survivors. This study was conducted to understand the key attributes of breast cancer follow-up care for use in a future discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey.

METHODS

Key attributes of breast cancer follow-up care models were generated using a multi-stage, mixed-methods approach. Focus group discussions were conducted with cancer survivors and clinicians to generate a range of attributes of current and ideal follow-up care. These attributes were then prioritised using an online survey with survivors and healthcare providers. The DCE attributes and levels were finalised via an expert panel discussion based on the outcomes of the previous stages.

RESULTS

Four focus groups were held, two with breast cancer survivors (n = 7) and two with clinicians (n = 8). Focus groups generated sixteen attributes deemed important for breast cancer follow-up care models. The prioritisation exercise was conducted with 20 participants (14 breast cancer survivors and 6 clinicians). Finally, the expert panel selected five attributes for a future DCE survey tool to elicit cancer survivors' preferences on breast cancer follow-up care. The final attributes included: the care team, allied health and supportive care, survivorship care planning, travel for appointments, and out-of-pocket costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Attributes identified can be used in future DCE studies to elicit cancer survivors' preferences for breast cancer follow-up care. This strengthens the design and implementation of follow-up care programs that best suit the needs and expectations of breast cancer survivors.

The Role of Telemedicine for Psychological Support for Oncological Patients Who Have Received Radiotherapy

AIM

In our radiation departments, all patients received psycho-oncological support during RT and during follow-up. Based on the latter, the aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the role of tele-visits and in-person psychological support for cancer patients after RT, and to report a descriptive analysis pointing out the needs of psychosocial intervention in a radiation department during radiation treatment.

METHODS

According to our institutional care management, all patients receiving RT were prospectively enrolled to receive charge-free assessment of their cognitive, emotional and physical states and psycho-oncological support during treatment. For the whole population who accepted the psychological support during RT, a descriptive analysis was reported. For all patients who agreed to be followed up by a psycho-oncologist, at the end of RT, a retrospective analysis was conducted to evaluate the differences between tele-consultations (video-call or telephone) and on-site psychological visits. Patients were followed up by on-site psychological visit (Group-OS) or tele-consult (Group-TC) visit. For each group, to evaluate anxiety, depression and distress, the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS), Distress Thermometer and Brief COPE (BC) were used.

RESULTS

From July 2019 to June 2022, 1145 cases were evaluated during RT with structured psycho-oncological interviews for a median of 3 sessions (range 2-5). During their first psycho-oncological interview, all the 1145 patients experienced the assessment of anxiety, depression and distress levels with the following results: concerning the HADS-A scale, 50% of cases (574 patients) reported a pathological score ≥8; concerning the HADS-D scale, 30% of cases (340 patients) reported a pathological score ≥8, concerning the DT scale, 60% (687 patients) reported a pathological score ≥4. Eighty-two patients were evaluated after RT: 30 in the Group-OS and 52 in the Group-TC. During follow-up, a median of 8 meetings (range 4-28) were performed. Comparing psychological data at baseline (beginning of RT) and at the last follow-up, in the entire population, a significant improvement in terms of HADS-A, global HADS and BC was shown (p 0.04; p 0.05; and p 0.0008, respectively). Compared to baseline, statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of anxiety in favor of on-site visit: Group-OS reported a better anxiety score compared with Group-TC. In each group, a statistical improvement was observed in BC (p 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The study revealed optimal compliance to tele-visit psychological support, even if the anxiety could be better controlled when patients were followed up on-site. However, rigorous research on this topic is needed.

Embedding lifestyle interventions into cancer care: has telehealth narrowed the equity gap?

Lifestyle interventions targeting energy balance (ie, diet, exercise) are critical for optimizing the health and well-being of cancer survivors. Despite their benefits, access to these interventions is limited, especially in underserved populations, including older people, minority populations and those living in rural and remote areas. Telehealth has the potential to improve equity and increase access. This article outlines the advantages and challenges of using telehealth to support the integration of lifestyle interventions into cancer care. We describe 2 recent studies, GO-EXCAP and weSurvive, as examples of telehealth lifestyle intervention in underserved populations (older people and rural cancer survivors) and offer practical recommendations for future implementation. Innovative approaches to the use of telehealth-delivered lifestyle intervention during cancer survivorship offer great potential to reduce cancer burden.

Physical Examination in Medical Oncology Guiding the Development of a Protocol for Teleoncology Care in a Public Health Care Oncology Service

PURPOSE

We aimed to define clinical variables that could predict changes in physical examination (PE) findings and consequently lead to significant differences in clinical management. This knowledge is important because of the growing popularity of teleoncology consultations, in which there is no possibility of PE, aside from inspection.

METHODS

This prospective study was conducted in two public hospitals in Brazil. Clinical variables and findings of PE, as well as the management plan determined at the end of the medical appointment, were systematically recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 368 in-person clinical evaluations of patients with cancer were included. PE was normal or had alterations already seen in previous consultations in 87% of the cases. Among patients with new changes in PE (n = 49), cancer treatment was maintained in 59%, complementary examinations and specialist appointments were requested in 31%, and oncological therapy was modified directly after PE in 10%. Of the total 368 visits, only 12 (3%) had a change in oncological management, five directly after PE abnormalities and 7 after complementary assessment. The presence of symptoms and reasons for consultation other than follow-up showed a positive association with alterations in PE and consequent changes in clinical management by univariate and multivariate analysis (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Considering changes in clinical management, PE on every encounter for medical oncology surveillance visits may not be necessary. We envision that teleoncology will be a safe modality in most cases, given the large percentage of asymptomatic patients with no changes in PE during face-to-face care. However, for patients with advanced disease and symptoms, however, we suggest priority for in-person care.

Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated remote cancer care delivery via the internet and telephone, rapidly accelerating an already growing care delivery model and associated research. This scoping review of reviews characterised the peer-reviewed literature reviews on digital health and telehealth interventions in cancer published from database inception up to May 1, 2022, from PubMed, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Cochrane Reviews, and Web of Science. Eligible reviews conducted a systematic literature search. Data were extracted in duplicate via a pre-defined online survey. Following screening, 134 reviews met the eligibility criteria. 77 of those reviews were published since 2020. 128 reviews summarised interventions intended for patients, 18 addressed family caregivers, and five addressed health-care providers. 56 reviews did not target a specific phase of the cancer continuum, whereas 48 reviews tended to address the active treatment phase. 29 reviews included a meta-analysis, with results showing positive effects on quality of life, psychological outcomes, and screening behaviours. 83 reviews did not report intervention implementation outcomes but when reported, 36 reported acceptability, 32 feasibility, and 29 fidelity outcomes. Several notable gaps were identified in these literature reviews on digital health and telehealth in cancer care. No reviews specifically addressed older adults, bereavement, or sustainability of interventions and only two reviews focused on comparing telehealth to in-person interventions. Addressing these gaps with rigorous systematic reviews might help guide continued innovation in remote cancer care, particularly for older adults and bereaved families, and integrate and sustain these interventions within oncology.

Virtual acupressure for symptom management in cancer populations during COVID-19: a retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

Following the outbreak of COVID-19, access to in-person oncology acupuncture service was temporarily disrupted at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer center. During this period, a virtual acupuncturist-guided session of patient self-acupressure was implemented to provide continuity of supportive care for cancer patients. We provide preliminary findings on the feasibility and potential impact of remotely delivered acupressure on patient-reported symptom burden in cancer populations.

METHODS

This is a retrospective chart review of cancer patients who received virtual acupressure service at a single academic cancer center from May 11 to December 31, 2020. Each telehealth session consisted of a one-on-one appointment between the patient and acupuncturist. A semi-standardized set of acupoints were used, including Yintang, ST36, GB20, PC6, and HT7 as well as Relaxation Point on the ear. At the start of each session, Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) was used to collect patient-reported symptom burden. For patients with at least one follow-up within 14 days of the baseline visit, paired t-test was used to analyze changes in ESAS scores from baseline to first follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 102 virtual acupressure sessions were administered to 32 patients. Most patients were females (90.6%) and white (84.4%), and the mean age was 55.7 (range = 26-82; SD = 15.7). The most common cancer diagnosis was breast (53.1%), followed by pancreatic (12.5%) and lung (9.4%). Baseline ESAS Total, Physical, and Emotional scores were 21.5 (SD = 11.1), 12.4 (SD = 7.5), and 5.2 (SD = 3.8), respectively. Of 32 patients, 13 (41%) had a second acupressure session within 14 days. For these 13 patients, there was a statistically significant reduction in Total symptom burden (-4.9 ± 7.6; p = 0.04) and in Physical (-3.5 ± 5.4; p = 0.04) and Emotional (-1.2 ± 1.8; p = 0.03) subscales from baseline to follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Virtual acupressure was associated with significant reduction in symptom burden among cancer patients from their baseline to follow-up visits. Larger scale randomized clinical studies are needed to confirm these findings and better understand the impact of virtual acupressure on symptom burden in cancer populations.

The Future of Breast Cancer Research in the Survivorship Field

Prevalence of survivors of breast cancer has been steadily increasing in the last 20 years. Currently, more than 90% of women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer are expected to be alive at 5 years from diagnosis thanks to early detection and breakthrough innovations in multimodal treatment strategies. Alongside this advancement in clinical outcomes, survivors of breast cancer might experience several specific challenges and present with unique needs. Survivorship trajectories after diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer can be significantly impacted by long-lasting and severe treatment-related side effects, including physical problems, psychological distress, fertility issues in young women, and impaired social and work reintegration, which add up to patients' individual risk of cancer recurrence and second primary malignancies. Alongside cancer-specific sequelae, survivors still present with general health needs, including management of chronic preexisting or ensuing conditions. Survivorship care should implement high-quality, evidence-based strategies to promptly screen, identify, and address survivors' needs in a comprehensive way and minimize the impact of severe treatment sequelae, preexisting comorbidities, unhealthy lifestyles, and risk of recurrence on quality of life. This narrative review focuses on core areas of survivorship care and discuss the state of the art and future research perspectives in key domains including selected long-term side effects, surveillance for recurrences and second cancers, well-being promotion, and specific survivors' needs.

Psychosocial Impact of Virtual Cancer Care through Technology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

This meta-analysis of RCTs aimed to determine whether replacing face-to-face hospital care with telemedicine deteriorates psychosocial outcomes of adult cancer patients, in terms of quality of life (QoL), anxiety, distress, and depression. RCTs on interventions aimed at improving patient psychosocial outcomes were excluded. MEDLINE, EmBASE, and PsycInfo were searched on 13 May 2022 without language or date restrictions. In total, 1400 records were identified and 8 RCTs included (4434 subjects). Study methodological quality was moderate. Statistically significant improvements were observed in favor of the intervention for QoL (SMD = 0.22, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.43, p = 0.04), anxiety (SMD = −0.17, 95% CI −0.30 to −0.04, p < 0.01), and global distress (SMD = −0.38, 95% CI −0.51 to −0.25, p < 0.01). A meta-analysis on depression could not be performed. In subgroup analyses, the intervention appeared to be more beneficial for patients receiving active treatment vs. follow-up, for “other cancer types” vs. breast cancer, and for “other modes of administration” vs. telephone. Given the many potential advantages of being assisted at home, telemedicine appears to be a viable option in oncology. However, more research is necessary to determine the types of patients who may benefit the most from these alternative care modalities.

Climate toxicity: An increasingly relevant clinical issue in Cancer Care

In recent years the terms time and financial toxicities have entered the vocabulary of cancer care. We would like to introduce another toxicity: climate toxicity. Climate toxicity is a double-edge sword in cancer care. Increasing cancer risk by exposure to carcinogens, and consequently increasing treatment requirements leads to ever growing damage to our environment. This article assesses the impact of climate change on patients, the climate toxicity caused by both healthcare workers and healthcare facilities, and suggests actions that may be taken mitigate them.

Pediatric central nervous system tumor survivor and caregiver experiences with multidisciplinary telehealth

PURPOSE

Telehealth use to facilitate cancer survivorship care is accelerating; however, patient satisfaction and barriers to facilitation have not been studied amongst pediatric central nervous system (CNS) tumor survivors. We assessed the telehealth experiences of survivors and caregivers in the Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Outcomes Clinic at Dana-Farber/ Boston Children's Hospital.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of completed surveys among patients and caregivers with ≥ 1 telehealth multidisciplinary survivorship appointment from January 2021 through March 2022.

RESULTS

Thirty-three adult survivors and 41 caregivers participated. The majority agreed or strongly agreed that telehealth visits started on time [65/67 (97%)], scheduling was convenient [59/61 (97%)], clinician's explanations were easy-to-understand [59/61 (97%)], listened carefully/addressed concerns [56/60 (93%)], and spent enough time with them [56/59 (95%)]. However, only 58% (n = 35/60) of respondents agreed or strongly agreed they would like to continue with telehealth and 48% (n = 32/67) agreed telehealth was as effective as in person office visits. Adult survivors were more likely than caregivers to prefer office visits for personal connection [23/32 (72%) vs. 18/39 (46%), p = 0.027].

CONCLUSION

Offering telehealth multi-disciplinary services may provide more efficient and accessible care for a subset of pediatric CNS tumor survivors. Despite some advantages, patients and caregivers were divided on whether they would like to continue with telehealth and whether telehealth was as effective as office visits. To improve survivor and caregiver satisfaction, initiatives to refine patient selection as well as enhance personal communication through telehealth systems should be undertaken.

A scoping review of applications of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to telehealth service implementation initiatives

BACKGROUND

The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), introduced in 2009, has the potential to provide a comprehensive understanding of the determinants of implementation-effectiveness of health service innovations. Although the CFIR has been increasingly used in recent years to examine factors influencing telehealth implementation, no comprehensive reviews currently exist on the scope of knowledge gained exclusively from applications of the CFIR to telehealth implementation initiatives. This review sought to address this gap.

METHODS

PRISMA-ScR criteria were used to inform a scoping review of the literature. Five academic databases (PUBMED, PROQUEST, SCIDIRECT, CINAHL, and WoS) were searched for eligible sources of evidence from 01.01.2010 through 12.31.2021. The initial search yielded a total of 18,388 records, of which, 64 peer-reviewed articles met the inclusion criteria for the review. Included articles were reviewed in full to extract data, and data collected were synthesized to address the review questions.

RESULTS

Most included articles were published during or after 2020 (64%), and a majority (77%) were qualitative or mixed-method studies seeking to understand barriers or facilitators to telehealth implementation using the CFIR. There were few comparative- or implementation-effectiveness studies containing outcome measures (5%). The database search however, revealed a growing number of protocols for implementation-effectiveness studies published since 2020. Most articles (91%) reported the CFIR Inner Setting domain (e.g., leadership engagement) to have a predominant influence over telehealth implementation success. By comparison, few articles (14%) reported the CFIR Outer Setting domain (e.g., telehealth policies) to have notable influence. While more (63%) telehealth initiatives were focused on specialty (vs primary) care, a vast majority (78%) were focused on clinical practice over medical education, healthcare administration, or population health.

CONCLUSIONS

Organized provider groups have historically paid considerable attention to advocating for telehealth policy (Outer Setting) reform. However, results suggest that for effective telehealth implementation, provider groups need to refocus their efforts on educating individual providers on the complex inter-relationships between Inner Setting constructs and telehealth implementation-effectiveness. On a separate note, the growth in implementation-effectiveness study protocols since 2020, suggests that additional outcome measures may soon be available, to provide a more nuanced understanding of the determinants of effective telehealth implementation based on the CFIR domains and constructs.

Psychosocial Care after Cancer Diagnosis: Recent Advances and Challenges

Psychosocial oncology is coming of age [...].

Teleoncology: A Solution for Everyone? A Single-Center Experience with Telemedicine during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of telehealth was rapidly implemented without previous evidence. The ONCOTELEMD study aimed to evaluate the opinion of patients attended via telemedicine during this period and to study factors that condition patient preferences on its use. Included patients had a confirmed cancer diagnosis and were contacted by telephone between 13 March and 30 April 2020, in the Medical Oncology Service of Hospital Parc Taulí, Sabadell. A 12-question survey was presented to them between 4 February and 19 April 2021. Statistical analysis was carried out using chi-square and multivariable logistic regression tests. Six hundred forty-six patients were included; 487 responded to the survey. The median age was 68 years (27-90), 55.2% were female. Most patients had a surveillance visit (65.3%) and were diagnosed with colorectal or breast cancer (43% and 26.5%, respectively); 91.8% of patients were satisfied, and 60% would accept the use of telemedicine beyond the pandemic. Patients aged more than 50 years (OR 0.40; 95% CI, 0.19-0.81; p = 0.01) and diagnosed with breast cancer (OR 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26-0.69; p < 0.001) were less predisposed to adopt telehealth in the future. Patients agreed to be informed via telehealth of scan or lab results (62% and 84%, respectively) but not of new oral or endovenous treatments (52% and 33.5%, respectively). Additionally, 75% of patients had a medium or low-null technologic ability, and 51.3% would only use the telephone or video call to contact health professionals. However, differences were found according to age groups (p < 0.0001). In total, patients surveyed were satisfied with telemedicine and believed telehealth could have a role following the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, our results remark on the importance of individualizing the use of telehealth, showing relevant data on patient preferences and digital literacy.

Efficacy of Telemedicine Using Videoconferencing Systems in Outpatient Care for Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review aimed to investigate the efficacy of telemedicine (TM) using videoconferencing systems in outpatient care for patients with cancer.

METHODS

We searched six electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov) through June 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of TM using videoconferencing systems compared with usual face-to-face care in outpatient care for patients with cancer. We assessed the certainty of evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

RESULTS

From the 2,400 articles screened, six randomized controlled trials were eligible for this study. Two studies evaluated the use of TM in cancer follow-up and four investigated psychotherapy for cancer. TM using videoconferencing systems may result in no differences in primary outcomes such as patient satisfaction (standardized mean difference, 0.11; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.40) and outpatient attendance complete proportion (risk difference, 0.02%; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.09), and secondary outcomes such as medical professional satisfaction, time devoted to outpatient care, and depression score. The certainty of evidence for these outcomes was low. Although the average money spent on outpatient visit was a primary outcome, the level of evidence was uncertain.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that TM using videoconferencing systems in outpatient care for patients with cancer may be as effective as usual face-to-face care. Use of TM more frequently may be considered for patients with cancer who are expected to obtain benefit from TM using videoconference systems.

Patients' experience and satisfaction using telemedicine for outpatient services in a Tertiary Cancer Center in Qatar during COVID-19: A cross-sectional study

Background and Aim

The coronavirus-19 is an ongoing global pandemic resulting in millions of deaths worldwide. For a patient population at higher risk of infection, telemedicine is a promising means of providing safe and alternative care routes while minimizing their risk of exposure. This study gives insight into patients' experiences and satisfaction with telemedicine during this pandemic.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study on 297 patients (RR: 85%) at the National Center for Cancer Care and Research (NCCCR), Qatar. Data was collected through electronic medical records of the eligibe patient population, and phone calls were made whereby the physician read a standard introductory script followed by a survey questionnaire. We focused on patients' experience with telemedicine services amid the pandemic. This was done using a six-point Likert scoring system of seven questions that were scaled from 1 to 6.

Results

More than 80% of patients somewhat to strongly agreed that telemedicine met their healthcare needs, improved their confidence in their healthcare system, and were generally satisfied with the quality of care provided. Nearly all patients (90%) understood their physicians' recommendations over the phone. In addition, more than half of the patients (89%) felt they could freely communicate their concerns. Patients also showed an inclination towards face-to-face consultations at 68%; however, 90% were willing to participate in future teleconsultations.

Conclusion

Our study indicates an overall positive experience among patients towards the use of telemedicine. Telemedicine is a safe, futuristic approach toward patient care management and, thus, provides healthcare professionals a platform to implement further patient and physician education. Even though our data also showed that patients liked in-person visits to some degree, this needs to be looked into more in future studies.

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2022

The number of cancer survivors continues to increase in the United States due to the growth and aging of the population as well as advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community in better serving these individuals, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate triennially to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using incidence and survival data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries, vital statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics, and population projections from the US Census Bureau. Current treatment patterns based on information in the National Cancer Database are presented for the most prevalent cancer types by race, and cancer-related and treatment-related side-effects are also briefly described. More than 18 million Americans (8.3 million males and 9.7 million females) with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2022. The 3 most prevalent cancers are prostate (3,523,230), melanoma of the skin (760,640), and colon and rectum (726,450) among males and breast (4,055,770), uterine corpus (891,560), and thyroid (823,800) among females. More than one-half (53%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and two-thirds (67%) were aged 65 years or older. One of the largest racial disparities in treatment is for rectal cancer, for which 41% of Black patients with stage I disease receive proctectomy or proctocolectomy compared to 66% of White patients. Surgical receipt is also substantially lower among Black patients with non-small cell lung cancer, 49% for stages I-II and 16% for stage III versus 55% and 22% for White patients, respectively. These treatment disparities are exacerbated by the fact that Black patients continue to be less likely to be diagnosed with stage I disease than White patients for most cancers, with some of the largest disparities for female breast (53% vs 68%) and endometrial (59% vs 73%). Although there are a growing number of tools that can assist patients, caregivers, and clinicians in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship, further evidence-based strategies and equitable access to available resources are needed to mitigate disparities for communities of color and optimize care for people with a history of cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:409-436.

Older cancer survivors' perspectives and use of telehealth in their cancer survivorship care in the United States: A ResearchMatch® sample

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 has resulted in reliance on telecommunication technologies for the provision of supportive cancer care. However, research on the use of these resources among older adults, who are the majority of cancer survivors, is limited. The objective of this study was to gather information on older cancer survivors' perspectives and use of telehealth their cancer survivorship care in the United States.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Potential participants were recruited through ResearchMatch® from December 2020-January 2021. Online semi-structured interviews were conducted. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the participants' demographic and health characteristics. Content analysis were conducted by two independent coders for identification of common themes. Coding agreement was reached through consensus, and count comparisons of participant responses were made.

RESULTS

The majority of respondents (n = 21; mean age = 73.5 ± 4.9) were female (57%), White (90%), and had a variety of cancer diagnoses. Participants reported using a variety of technology devices and telehealth products. Older cancer survivors (n = 10) endorsed telehealth video use for physical health concerns and basic check-ups, but some (n = 4) preferred in-person visits for major concerns and sensitive issues (e.g., mental health). Half of participants reported mobile health app use; however, ten participants did not use these apps as they felt the technology was not useful. Barriers to health technology use included missing face-to-face connections with providers, lack of familiarity with the technology, and perceived lack of utility and personalized telehealth platforms. Lastly, video-based conferencing and social media site use among seventeen participants was reported for social interaction during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DISCUSSION

These findings suggest that older cancer survivors utilize online platforms for their general health; however, they prefer in-person visits for serious issues and value personalization with telehealth. Despite from a highly educated sample of ResearchMatch® participants, these results can be used to inform clinicians and researchers about the appropriateness and provision of telehealth-based supportive care among older cancer survivors.