Cancer patients' perspectives on remote monitoring at home during the COVID-19 pandemic- a qualitative study in Norway

Challenges Experienced by Saudi Patients With Cancer and Their Family Caregivers in Using Digital Healthcare Technology Platforms in the COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 has provided a unique boost to the use of digital healthcare technology, putting many vulnerable people at risk of digital exclusion. To promote digital healthcare equity, it is important to identify the challenges that may inhibit cancer patients and family caregivers from benefiting from such technology. This study explored the challenges that cancer patients and family caregivers experience in using digital healthcare technology platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic. A qualitative descriptive study using face-to-face semistructured individual interviews was carried out. A purposive sample of 21 participants was recruited from a public cancer hospital in Saudi Arabia. Qualitative content analysis with an inductive approach was utilized. The factors that challenged the ability of participants to benefit from digital healthcare technology were similar. Four themes related to the challenges the two groups experienced emerged: access to platforms, use of platforms for cancer health-related purposes, attitudes toward these platforms, and individual user preferences. This study identified numerous areas for improvement regarding digital healthcare technology platform implementation, which could increase future benefits and equal use. This study's findings also provide useful information to investigators who intend to create digital nursing interventions for both groups amid COVID-19 and other worldwide health crises.

'I Do It All Alone': The Burdens and Benefits of Being Diagnosed With, and Treated for, Colorectal Cancer During the Covid-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The Covid-19 pandemic dramatically altered the way cancer care services were accessed and delivered, including for colorectal cancer (CRC). In the United Kingdom, patients were discouraged from presenting in primary care, many consultations took place remotely, investigative procedures and screening programmes were temporarily suspended, and fewer operations and treatments were delivered. People had to face the practical consequences of having cancer during a pandemic and navigate never before seen pathways, often alone. We examined the experience of being diagnosed and treated for CRC during the pandemic, and the implications of this on people's cancer journeys.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with people diagnosed with CRC during the Covid-19 pandemic (January 2020-May 2021), in the North East of England. An iterative topic guide was used during interviews, which took place remotely (telephone or Zoom), were audio recorded, pseudo-anonymised and transcribed. Initial transcripts were independently coded by two researchers, and a code 'bank' developed for application across transcripts. Development of themes and overarching analytical constructs was undertaken collaboratively by the research team.

RESULTS

Interviews were conducted with 19 participants, analysed and four key themes identified: (1) The relative threats of Covid-19 and Cancer were not comparable, with cancer seen as posing a far greater risk than Covid-19; (2) Remote consultations were problematic, affecting patients' abilities to build rapport and trust with clinicians, assess nonverbal communication, and feel able to disclose, comprehend and retain information; (3) Stoma follow-up care was seen to be lacking, with long wait times for stoma reversal experienced by some; Finally, (4) Being alone during consultations negatively impacted some peoples' abilities to absorb information, and left them without the support of loved ones at an emotionally vulnerable time. However, some participants preferred being alone at certain points in their pathways, including receiving a diagnosis, and most frequently when receiving in-patient treatment.

CONCLUSION

Being alone brought unexpected benefits, absolving people from undertaking emotions work for others, and instead focus on their recovery, however, remote consultations negatively impacted patients' experiences. This study highlights the complex benefits and burdens of pandemic-located cancer journeys, including how these shifted at different points across cancer pathways.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Lorraine Angell, a cancer survivor, has been central to this study from idea conception, contributing to: development of study focus and design; securing funding; production of patient-facing materials; development of interview topic guides; analysis and interpretation of data; and drafting of key findings and manuscripts.

Is loneliness associated with cancellation of medical appointments during the COVID-19 pandemic? Evidence from the Hamburg City Health Study (HCHS)

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic engendered numerous societal and economic challenges in addition to health-related concerns. Maintenance of healthcare utilization assumed immense significance during this period. However, few studies have examined the association between loneliness and cancelled medical appointments during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to examine whether medical appointments are less likely to be cancelled with increased loneliness during a pandemic. We analyzed the association between loneliness and both patient- and provider-initiated appointment cancellations.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data from the Hamburg City Health Study (HCHS) were collected during April 2020-November 2021. The analytical sample included 1,840 participants with an average age of 55.1 years (standard deviation: 6.5, range 45-76 years). Medical appointments cancelled by individuals-medical appointments in general, and GP, specialist, and dentist appointments-and appointments cancelled by healthcare providers served as outcome measures. Loneliness was quantified using a single item ranging from 0 to 10. Accordingly, we created empirical loneliness tertiles. Covariates were selected based on the Andersen model. Several penalized maximum likelihood logistic regressions were utilized to examine the association between loneliness and cancellation of medical appointments during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

The penalized maximum likelihood logistic regressions showed that, compared to individuals in the lowest loneliness tertiles, individuals in the other two tertiles reported a higher chance of medical appointments cancellation by individuals, particularly driven by cancelled GP appointments. Except for age and sex, none of the covariates were comparably associated with the outcomes. When appointments cancelled by healthcare providers served as outcomes, only a higher number of chronic conditions was significantly positively associated with it.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals scoring higher in loneliness had a greater chance of cancelling medical (particularly GP) appointments. This may contribute to a potential cascade of loneliness and skipped medical appointments in the future, resulting in adverse health outcomes over the medium-to-long term. Future research should examine whether lonely people are more likely to lack the social motivation to visit the doctor.

Person-Centeredness in Digital Primary Healthcare Services-A Scoping Review

Background: Transformation toward digital services offers unique opportunities to meet the challenges of responding to changing public healthcare needs and health workforce shortages. There is a knowledge gap regarding digital health and person or patient-centered care. Aim: The aim of the current scoping review was to obtain an overview of existing research on person or patient centeredness in digital primary healthcare services. Design: A scoping review following the five stages by Arksey and O'Malley. Methods: Literature searches were conducted in the databases PubMed, Scopus (Elsevier), APA PsychInfo (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cinahl (Ovid) and Cochrane Library in June 2022. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyzes extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist was followed. Results: The electronic database searches identified 782 references. A total of 116 references were assessed in full text against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, a total of 12 references were included. The included papers represent research from 2015 to 2021 and were conducted in eight different countries, within a variety of populations, settings and digital solutions. Four themes providing knowledge about current research on patient or person centeredness and digital primary health care were identified: 'Accessibility', 'Self-management', 'Digitalization at odds with patient centeredness' and 'Situation awareness'. The review underlines the need for further research on these issues.