Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on delivery of and models for supportive and palliative care for oncology patients

Telehealth Preferences Among Patients With Advanced Cancer in the Post COVID-19 Vaccine Era

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined patient preferences for telehealth in palliative care after the availability of COVID-19 vaccines. We examined patient preferences for video versus in-person visits and factors contributing to preferences in the postvaccine era.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional survey of patients who were seen at our palliative care clinic between April 2021 and March 2022. Patients were surveyed directly their preference for either video or in-person visits for outpatient palliative care (primary outcome). We also surveyed preferences including convenience, cost, wait time, and perceptions of COVID-19 safety regarding their palliative virtual-video visit. We examined clinical factors associated with preferences with multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

About 200 patients completed the survey. 132 (67%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 60%, 74%) preferred virtual-video, while 16 (8%) preferred in-person visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. About 120 (61%, 95%CI: 54%, 68%) preferred virtual-video after the pandemic. Patients perceived virtual-video favorably regarding travel and related costs (179 [91%]), convenience (175 [88%]), and wait time (136 [69%]). Multivariable analysis showed concerns for catching COVID-19 from healthcare providers (odds ratio [OR]: 4.20; 95%CI: 1.24-14.25; P = 0.02) and feeling comfortable with computers or mobile devices (OR: 4.59; 95%CI: 1.02, 20.60; P = 0.047) were significantly associated with preferring virtual-video. Patients who were of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (OR: 0.25; 95%CI: 0.09, 0.71) and had increased dypsnea (OR: 0.74; 95%CI: 0.59, 0.93) were less likely to prefer video over in-person.

CONCLUSION

Patients expressed strong preference for video over in-person visits in the outpatient palliative care setting.

Telemedicine Plus Standard Care Versus Standard Care Only in Specialized Outpatient Palliative Care: A Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial

Background: Patients suffering from incurable diseases are more likely to die in the hospital than at home. Specialized outpatient palliative care (PC) may be able to counteract this tendency. Similarly, potential benefits of telemedicine in health care were scientifically reported. The aim of this research was to compare patients receiving specialized outpatient PC plus telemedicine with those receiving standard specialized outpatient PC only. In this study, telemedicine is assumed to decrease the number of home visits and therefore should not be considered a mere add-on. Methods: This is a randomized controlled noninferiority trial. Recruitment lasted between January 2020 and October 2021. Quality of care was evaluated using the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS) at day 0, 7, and 14 after randomization. Change from day 0 to 7 was defined as the primary outcome (noninferiority margin = 4 points). This study was conducted in an urban setting in collaboration with a university hospital and a local specialized outpatient PC service. Results: A total of 196 patients were screened with 34 patients included (18 telemedicine/16 standard care). The mean change in the total score of the IPOS from day 0 to 7 amounted to -1.8 ± 3.9 (telemedicine) versus 1.2 ± 5.7 (standard care). The telemedicine group was statistically not relevantly inferior to the standard care group (t-test for noninferiority, p = 0.005). Conclusions: Although, due to COVID-19, the sample size remained rather small, our findings indicate that telemedical approaches offer a promising and equally effective option to provide specialized outpatient PC. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT06054048.

Supportive Care for Cancer Patients Via Telehealth: Breaking Bad News and Providing Palliative Care Virtually

ABSTRACT

Delivering oncologic care via telemedicine has presented a unique set of benefits and challenges. Discussions of sensitive topics between patients and providers can be difficult on a virtual platform. Although it was imperative to utilize telemedicine to keep cancer patients safe during the height of the pandemic, its continued use in the postvaccination era has provided important conveniences to both providers and patients. In the case of breaking bad news and end-of-life discussions, however, in-person care has remained the overwhelming preference of both groups. If face-to-face consultation is not possible or feasible in these situations, virtual visits are a viable option to connect oncologists with their patients.

Telemedical Consultations in Palliative Care: Benefits through Knowledge Exchange and Intercollegiate Collaboration-Findings from the German oVID Project

(1) Background: As the number of people receiving specialized palliative care (PC) continues to rise, there is a need to ensure the transfer of this expertise from university-based PC departments to primary care hospitals without such in-house access. The present study examines the potential of telemedicine to bridge these gaps. (2) Methods: This is a prospective multi-center feasibility trial. All physicians were appropriately pre-equipped and instructed to conduct telemedical consultations (TCs), which took place within fixed meetings or on-call appointments either related or unrelated to individual patients (allowing TCs also for educational and knowledge exchange purposes). (3) Results: An inquiry for participation was submitted to 11 hospitals, with 5 external hospitals actively cooperating. In the first study section, a total of 57 patient cases were included within 95 patient-related TCs during 80 meetings. Other university disciplines were involved in 21 meetings (26.2%). Therapy adjustments resulted following 25 of 71 affected TCs (35.2%). In 20 cases (21.1%), an on-site consultation at the university hospital was avoided, and in 12 cases (12.6%), a transfer was avoided. Overall, TCs were considered helpful in resolving issues for 97.9% of the cases (n = 93). Yet, technical problems arose in about one-third of all meetings for at least one physician (36.2%; n = 29). Besides, in the second study section, we also conducted 43 meetings between physicians for education and knowledge exchange only. (4) Conclusions: Telemedicine has the potential to transfer university expertise to external hospitals through simple means. It improves collaboration among physicians, may prevent unnecessary transfers or outpatient presentations, and is thus likely to lower costs.