Telemedicine in Cancer Care

Outcomes following off-site remote systemic cancer therapy administration

BACKGROUND

The Veterans Affairs Nebraska Western Iowa Health Care System (VA-NWIHCS) uses teleoncology and remote systemic cancer therapy services to expand care to veterans in rural Nebraska via remote sites in Lincoln and Grand Island. This study compares clinical outcomes in patients receiving care at these remote sites to those at the primary site in Omaha.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively reviewed for 151 patients who received first-line systemic therapy at VA sites in Omaha, Lincoln, or Grand Island between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020. This included patient demographics, malignancy type and stage, survival, systemic therapy received, treatment intent and toxicities, missed or delayed cycles, and frequency of hospitalizations or emergency department visits. SAS version 9.4 was used for analysis.

RESULTS

The study population included 108 patients who received their systemic therapy in Omaha, whereas 43 received therapy at the remote sites. The demographic of both populations was predominantly male with a median age of 69 years and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of 0 to 1. The two groups were comparable in terms of comorbidities. Both populations had a similar distribution of cancer types, proportion of patients with stage IV disease, and treatment with curative intent. There was no difference in 1- and 2-year survival, systemic therapy-related toxicity classification and prevalence, number of delayed/missed cycles, and hospitalization/emergency department visits.

CONCLUSION

Evaluated outcomes in patients treated in Omaha versus remote sites via teleoncology under the same providers were similar. Effective oncology care, including systemic therapy, can be provided via teleoncology, and this model can help mitigate issues with access to care.

Cost of care associated with utilization of telehealth in clinical trials

Objective

Due to COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, telehealth was incorporated into standard oncologic care and clinical trial operations. We sought to analyze whether telehealth changed cost of care compared to traditional clinical trial operations.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of gynecologic oncology patients enrolled in therapeutic clinical trials at a National Cancer Institute designated center, comparing the cost of cancer care on trial pre-TELEhealth (9/30/2019 to 3/15/2020) versus during TELEhealth (3/16/2020 to 8/20/2020). Inclusion required trial participation during both study periods, ≥1 telehealth visit, and identifiable billing records. The analysis was from a healthcare sector perspective. Cost per patient per month on trial was calculated for scheduled (per protocol) and unscheduled (non-protocol) encounters using 2020 national Medicare reimbursement rates, not institution-specific prices. Pairwise t-tests between pre-TELE and TELE periods were performed.

Results

Twenty-eight patients were included in the study. The majority of patients (93 %) had ovarian cancer. One patient (4 %) had uterine and 1 (4 %) had concurrent ovarian/uterine cancer. Most patients had advanced-stage disease at diagnosis (93 %). Mean cost per patient per month was similar in pre-TELE and TELE periods ($3797 vs. $4720, p = 0.064). There were no cost differences among scheduled or unscheduled encounters, office or ED visits, admissions, outpatient procedures, nor those billed to study sponsors or patient's insurer.

Conclusions

Incorporating telehealth in gynecologic cancer clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic did not increase cost of care and may be a mechanism for decentralizing clinical trials, reducing barriers to trial participation, and improving the value of cancer care.

The Relationship Between Travel Distance for Treatment and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Radiation Therapy: A Systematic Review

Purpose

Although recent technological advances in radiation therapy have significantly improved treatment outcomes, the global distribution of radiation therapy is unbalanced, making access especially challenging for patients in rural or low-resource settings because of travel burden. This systematic review aimed to explore the impact of geographic distance to treatment facilities on survival, as well as other treatment outcomes, among patients undergoing radiation therapy.

Methods and Materials

A search of four databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science) was performed. Studies were included if they were primary literature, published between May 2000 and May 2023, and reported the travel distances for patients undergoing radiation therapy for malignant conditions and its influence on survival outcomes. Studies were excluded if they did not report primary outcomes, were published before 2000, or were non-English.

Results

After review, 23 studies were included. Most studies were conducted in the United States, with cervical cancer being the most frequently studied disease site. Data suggested that travel distances vary significantly, with patients often traveling a median distance of 20 miles to radiation therapy. Among the studies, 5 reported a negative impact on overall survival, often associating greater travel with nonadherence to recommended care. Other survival metrics, including progression-free survival and all-cause mortality, were also assessed, demonstrating similar variability in relation to travel distance. Conversely, seven studies found no significant impact on overall survival, and four suggested a positive impact on overall survival, with improved outcomes at centers with higher case volumes. Some data also revealed an inverse correlation between travel distance and the likelihood of receiving guideline-concordant radiation therapy.

Conclusions

The impact of travel distance on radiation therapy outcomes is varied. Our findings underscore the challenges posed by travel in accessing radiation therapy and the disparities affecting particular patient demographic groups. Additional studies are needed to thoroughly assess the impacts of geographic disparities and to identify effective measures to address these challenges.

The impact of internet connectivity when conducting a virtual clinical trial with participants living in rural areas

Aim

The purpose of this secondary analysis was to describe issues related to internet connections during a virtual randomized clinical trial (v-RCT) that included family caregiver participants living in rural areas.

Background

Success of v-RCTs depends on reliable, high-quality internet access, which can be problematic in rural areas.

Methods

Interventionists documented connectivity issues and corrections made to address connectivity in a narrative note after each virtual visit with family caregivers enrolled in a v-RCT. Notes were reviewed for descriptions of the internet connection during the visit and then coded into those with and without connectivity problems. Two investigators reviewed notes and codes to assure reliability. Discrepancies in codes were discussed or arbitrated by a third investigator until consensus was reached. Analysis was completed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Of the 1003 visits reviewed, only 11 % of visits (115/1003) contained a documented problem with internet connectivity. Visits with documented connectivity problems were experienced by 27 % of participants (58/215). However, 60 % (35/58) of participants with a documented issue had a problem with only one visit. None of the participants withdrew from the v-RCT due to problems with their internet connections.

Conclusions

The findings support the effective use of virtual visits in research involving participants living in rural locations. V-RCTs provide a strategy that enables participation for individuals who may not otherwise have access to clinical trials conducted in-person in urban settings. Utilizing internet access to connect with and support people who live in rural areas is critically needed to advance clinical research.

Patient-reported convenience and effectiveness of telehealth for breast cancer management

BACKGROUND

Before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telehealth was rarely used for breast cancer management at tertiary care centers. We sought to examine patient satisfaction, experiences, preferences, and perceived effectiveness and technical quality of telehealth visits in follow-up patients receiving routine outpatient care in the breast medical oncology practice at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

METHODS

We administered a survey to 60 follow-up patients for a duration of 9 months (January 5, 2021 to October 27, 2021) who had at least one telehealth consultation during the COVID-19 pandemic, from April 10, 2020 to October 21, 2021. Descriptive statistics were then generated for each question, each domain, and overall survey scores. Subgroup comparisons within patient populations were done using the chi-square or t-test when appropriate.

RESULTS

Among the 60 participants, 49 (82%) were undergoing standard follow-up during active treatment for either early-stage or metastatic breast cancer. Telehealth and in-person office visits were considered equivalent in terms of quality of communication by 43 participants (72%). Most participants (n = 49, 82%) felt equally cared for during telehealth and in-person visits, and 40 participants (67%) reported feeling connected to their healthcare professional during both telehealth and in-person visits. In addition, 28 participants (47%) felt that the duration of telehealth visits was similar to in-person visits, 46 (77%) found both telehealth and in-person visits equally comfortable for discussing sensitive topics, 39 (65%) considered telehealth visits convenient, and 42 (70%) perceived the overall quality of care for telehealth to be similar to that of in-person visits. Participants expressed high satisfaction with telehealth appointments, with 42 (70%) rating their experience as very satisfying. Most participants (n = 44, 73%) expressed a strong likelihood of participating in telehealth appointments for breast cancer follow-up care in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that telehealth can serve as an effective and satisfactory approach for delivering healthcare services to patients with breast cancer requiring follow-up care. The positive experiences and willingness to continue using telehealth indicate its potential for improving access to care and patient outcomes.

Telehealth Utilization in Neuro-Oncology: Commentary on a Single Institution Experience After the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

During the COVID-19 pandemic, regulatory and reimbursement policy changes provided patients improved access to neuro-oncology by telehealth. Here we discuss benefits and limitations of telehealth use in neuro-oncology. We review utilization of telemedicine services following the COVID-19 pandemic.

RECENT FINDINGS

Utilization of telemedicine by neuro-oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic was 52%, compared to 27-29% for other solid tumors groups. Following the pandemic, between January 2021 and April 2024, telehealth utilization has remained high in neuro-oncology with approximately 30% of all visits completed by telemedicine, compared to 10-15% for other solid tumor groups. The striking difference between telehealth visit utilization in neuro-oncology and general medical oncology even after expiration of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency expiration and end of pandemic-related restrictions, underscores the potential value of convenient access to care for patients with central nervous system tumors. Given widespread use of telehealth in neuro-oncology, prospective evaluation to determine the safety, usability, and acceptance of video-enabled, telehealth visits is critical. Such data may lead to broader adoption of telehealth, lead to regulatory and reimbursement reform for telehealth sustainability, and improve clinical trial access and accruals.

Disparities in the Care Disruption During COVID-19 and in its Impacts on the Mental and Physical Well-Being of Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE

Our study explores cancer care disruption among different demographic subgroups. It also investigates these disruptions' impacts on cancer survivors' mental and physical well-being.

DESIGN

Pooled cross-sectional survey data.

SETTING

Health Information Trends Survey for Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results, HINTS-SEER.

PARTICIPATION

n = 1234 cancer survivors participated in the study and completed the survey.

MEASURES

Outcome variables were treatment disruption in cancer care, mental health and physical health perceptions, age, race, education, income, and sexual orientation.

ANALYSIS

Multiple imputations were used to address missing data. Descriptive statistics were conducted to understand the perceptions of care disruption. Partial least squares structural equation models were employed for data analysis, adjusted for socio-demographics.

RESULTS

COVID-19 impacted cancer treatment and follow-up appointments (69.45%), routine cancer screening (60.70%), and treatment plans (73.58%), especially among elderly patients. It changed the interactions with health care providers (HCP) for 28.03% of the participants. Older adults were 2.33 times more likely to experience treatment appointment disruptions. People who thought their contact with their doctors changed during COVID-19 were more likely to be older adults (65 or more) (OR = 3.85, P = .011), white (OR >1, P = .002), and with higher income (OR = 1.81, P = .002). The changes to cancer treatment and follow-up medical appointments negatively impacted the well-being of the patients (mental: β = -.006, P = .043; physical: β = -.001, P = .006), routine screening and preventative care visits (mental: β = -.029, P = .031; physical: β = -.003, P = .008), and cancer treatment plans (mental: β = -.044, P = .024; physical: β = -.021, P = .040).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings underscore the crucial requirement for implementing focused interventions aimed at alleviating the discrepancies in the accessibility of cancer care across diverse demographic groups, particularly during times of emergency, in order to mitigate any potential disruptions in care.

Unleashing the potential of eHealth in outpatient cancer care for patients undergoing immunotherapy-a quantitative study considering patients' needs and current healthcare challenges

Background

The use of online information and communication is globally increasing in the healthcare sector. In addition to known benefits in other medical fields, possible specific potentials of eHealth lie in the monitoring of oncological patients undergoing outpatient therapy. Specifically, the treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) requires intensive monitoring due to various possible negative side effects. The present study explores cancer patients' perspectives on eHealth and demonstrates how eHealth applications, from the patients' point of view, can contribute to further improving outpatient immunotherapy.

Methods and findings

Our multicenter study was executed at the university hospitals in Bonn and Aachen. A structured questionnaire was distributed to patients receiving outpatient immunotherapy. Contents addressed were (1) the patients' attitude towards eHealth applications, (2) the use of modern information and communications technologies (ICT) in (2a) everyday life and (2b) health-related information search including eHealth literacy, (3) the use of internet-enabled devices as well as (4) socio-demographic data. 164 patients were included in the study, of whom 39.0% were female and 61.0% male and the average age was 62.8 years. Overall, there was a high distribution of internet-enabled devices for everyday use and a great interest in integrating eHealth applications into outpatient immunotherapy. The assessment of eHealth potentials significantly depended on age. The younger participants demonstrated a broader use of modern ICT and a higher affinity for its use in outpatient immunotherapy. In some aspects, level of education and gender were also relevant factors influencing the patients' view on eHealth.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates the potential for further integration of eHealth applications into outpatient immunotherapy from the patients' perspective. It indicates a dependency on age and educational level for the further integration of eHealth into patient care in oncology. Due to particular patient needs regarding age, level of education, gender and other subgroups, specific education and training as well as target-group specific digital health interventions are necessary to fully utilize the potentials of eHealth for outpatient immunotherapy. Future studies are required to specifically address target-group specific usability of eHealth applications and eHealth literacy, as well as to address information security and data protection.

Determinants of the implementation of eHealth-based long-term follow-up care for young cancer survivors: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

eHealth may help closing gaps in the long-term follow-up care of former young age cancer patients. While its introduction to medical aftercare appears promising, it also faces obstacles in the course of its implementation. This study explored what prospective eHealth applications have to achieve and what facilitating and hindering factors are associated with the implementation of them.

METHODS

A qualitative, explorative-descriptive design involving semi-structured interviews was used in this study. General practitioners (GPs) from urban and rural areas as well as former cancer patients were recruited and interviewed. The interview guide focused on expectations of telemedical care services for the patient group of children and adolescents as well as potential facilitating and hindering factors of the implementation of telemedical care services for former cancer patients. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed on the basis of qualitative content analysis as described by Kuckartz.

RESULTS

Empiric saturation was reached after 25 interviews, respectively. The age of the physicians surveyed at the time of the interviews ranged from 27 to 71 years, with an average of 42 years. The former patients ranged in age from 21 to 43 at the time of participation, with an average age of 34. The age at diagnosis ranged from 3 to 31 years. eHealth services were considered an effective way to maintain continuity of care and improve the health literacy of cancer survivors. Cooperation with health insurance companies and gamification-elements were regarded as beneficial for the introduction of eHealth structures. Poor interface compatibility, insufficient network coverage and lack of digital literacy were valued as potential barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

If properly introduced, eHealth shows the potential to provide stakeholders with tools that increase their self-efficacy and ability to act. As the technology continues to advance, our data provides application-oriented factors for tailored implementation strategies to bring eHealth into the field.

Palliative Care Research and Clinical Practice Priorities in the United States as Identified by an Interdisciplinary Modified Delphi Approach

Background: Palliative care demands in the United States are growing amid a comparatively small workforce of palliative care clinicians and researchers. Therefore, determining research and clinical practice priorities is essential for streamlining initiatives to advance palliative care science and practice. Objectives: To identify and rank palliative care research and clinical practice priority areas through expert consensus. Design: Using a modified Delphi method, U.S. palliative care experts identified and ranked priority areas in palliative care research and clinical practice. Priorities were thematically grouped and analyzed for topic content and frequency; univariate analysis used the median of each priority item ranking, with a cutoff median of ≤8 indicating >76% agreement for an item's ranking. Results: In total, 27 interdisciplinary pediatric and adult palliative care experts representing 19 different academic institutions and medical centers participated in the preliminary survey and the first Delphi round, and 22 participated in the second Delphi round. The preliminary survey generated 78 initial topics, which were developed into 22 priority areas during the consensus meeting. The top five priorities were (1) access to palliative care, (2) equity in palliative care, (3) adequate financing of palliative care, (4) provision of palliative care in primary care settings, and (5) palliative care workforce challenges. Conclusions: These expert-identified priority areas provide guidance for researchers and practitioners to develop innovative models, policies, and interventions, thereby enriching the quality of life for those requiring palliative care services.

Decentralized Clinical Trials in Early Drug Development-A Framework Proposal

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a rethinking of clinical trial design to maintain clinical research activity, with regulatory changes allowing for the wider implementation and development of decentralized design models. Evidence of the feasibility and benefits associated with a remote design comes mainly from observational studies or phase 2 and 3 clinical trials, in which implementation is easier with a better-established safety profile. Early drug development is a slow and expensive process in which accrual and safety are key aspects of success. Applying a decentralized model to phase 1 clinical trials could improve patient accrual by removing geographic barriers, improving patient population diversity, strengthening evidence for rare tumors, and reducing patients' financial and logistical burdens. However, safety monitoring, data quality, shipment, and administration of the investigational product are challenges to its implementation. Based on published data for decentralized clinical trials, we propose an exploratory framework of solutions to enable the conceptualization of a decentralized model for phase 1 clinical trials.

A comparative cohort study of gastrointestinal oncology patients: Impact of a shift to telehealth on delivery of interprofessional cancer care

Early studies of oncology visits performed via telehealth demonstrate patient and provider satisfaction; however, understanding of the impact of telehealth on clinic workflows is limited. The incorporation of telehealth visits into an interprofessional model of oncology care was evaluated to assess for changes in care delivery and patient engagement. New patients with a gastrointestinal cancer diagnosis who were actively undergoing treatment and followed for at least three months were divided into two cohorts based on telehealth utilization. Individual patient charts were reviewed by touchpoint, consisting of in-person visits, telehealth visits, phone calls, and patient portal messages. A total of 28 patient charts were analyzed, 11 pre-telehealth conventional care patients, and 17 telehealth patients. Telehealth cohort patients demonstrated an increased average number of total touchpoints when compared to the pre-telehealth cohort (p-value = 0.008) and had an increased number of patient portal and phone call touchpoints (p-value = 0.00 and  0.002). Telehealth provided more interactions between patients and providers demonstrating increased connectivity between a patient and their care team throughout their complex cancer journey. Clinic workflows may need to adjust to account for the increased demand of unscheduled patient interactions.

When Is Telemedicine Appropriate in the Management of Head and Neck Cancer? A Mixed-Methods Assessment Among Patients and Physicians

PURPOSE

Evidence suggests that oncology patients are satisfied with and sometimes prefer telemedicine compared with in-person visits; however, data are scarce on when telemedicine is appropriate for specific cancer populations. In this study, we aim to identify factors that influence patient experience and appropriateness of telemedicine use among a head and neck cancer (HNC) population.

METHODS

We performed a mixed-methods study at a multisite cancer center. First, we surveyed patients with HNC and analyzed factors that may influence their telemedicine experience using multivariate regression. We then conducted focus groups among HNC oncologists (n = 15) to evaluate their perception on appropriate use of telemedicine.

RESULTS

From January to December 2020, we collected 1,071 completed surveys (response rate 24%), of which 551 first unique surveys were analyzed. About half of all patients (56%) reported telemedicine as "same or better" compared with in-person visits, whereas the other half (44%) reported "not as good or unsure." In multivariate analyses, patients with thyroid cancer were more likely to find telemedicine "same or better" (adjusted odds ratio, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.35 to 3.25]) compared with other HNC populations (mucosal/salivary HNC). Consistently, physician focus group noted that patients with thyroid cancer were particularly suited for telemedicine because of less emphasis on in-person examinations. Physicians also underscored factors that influence telemedicine use, including clinical suitability (treatment status, visit purpose, examination necessity), patient benefits (travel time, access), and barriers (technology, rapport-building).

CONCLUSION

Patient experience with telemedicine is diverse among the HNC population. Notably, patients with thyroid cancer had overall better experience and were identified to be more appropriate for telemedicine compared with other patients with HNC. Future research that optimizes patient experience and selection is needed to ensure successful integration of telemedicine into routine oncology practice.

Patient perspectives on cancer care during COVID-19: A qualitative study

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic posed unique challenges to cancer-related care as health systems balanced competing risks of timely delivery of care and minimizing exposure to infection in a high-risk, immunocompromised patient population. This study aimed to better understand how pandemic-related factors affected the patient experience of cancer care during this time.

METHODS

We conducted fifteen semi-structured interviews with adults from rural counties in Maryland who were diagnosed with and/or actively treated for cancer at the TidalHealth healthcare network between January 2020 and October 2022.

RESULTS

Interviews from fifteen participants were analyzed. Two major themes emerged including COVID Impact on Care, and COVID Impact on Mental Health. Subthemes under COVID Impact on Care include Staffing Shortages, Hospital Regulations, Visitation, Importance of Advocacy, and Telehealth Utilization, and subthemes under COVID Impact on Mental Health include Loneliness, Support Networks, and Perceptions of COVID and Personal Protection. Overall, participants described positive care experiences despite notable delays, disruptions to continuity of care, difficult transitions to telemedicine, visitation policies that limited patient support, increased mental health struggles related to social distancing measures, and greater desire for patient advocacy.

CONCLUSION

Our findings reveal significant impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on experiences of cancer treatment and survivorship in a more vulnerable, rural patient population with lower healthcare access and income level. Our findings suggest areas for targeted interventions to limit disruptions to quality care in future public health emergencies.

Using telehealth for people at the end of life with chronic illness in Australia

BACKGROUND

Traditional models of palliative care have been tested by the challenges of caring for increasing numbers of people at the end stages of a chronic non-malignant illness. The COVID-19 pandemic and consequent reliance on telehealth services, has enabled the development of creative models of care.

AIMS

To improve home-based palliative care for people with chronic illness using telehealth, and this was demonstrated using quality-of-life measures.

METHODS

A total of 35 non-cancer referrals to a community palliative care service were recommended for the pilot project, with one specialist palliative care nurse as their contact. All were offered a telehealth service with a specially designed app to self-monitor their symptoms, a session on advance care directives, and self-rated quality-of-life measures using the RAND 36-Item Health Survey (Version 1.0), consisting of 36 items that cover nine domains. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software.

FINDINGS

Over the 21 months of the pilot study, 13 people chose to participate in the pilot. For participants, telehealth meant more control over their symptoms, fewer emergency presentations and appointment travel time was alleviated. Quality-of-life surveys highlighted physical impairments, which did not change over time.

CONCLUSION

This pilot programme demonstrated an innovative approach to addressing the demands of people dying of chronic illness, with further work required to explore the place of telehealth consultations in the overall healthcare system.

Health Care Contact Days Among Older Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE

Health care contact days-days spent receiving health care outside the home-represent an intuitive, practical, and person-centered measure of time consumed by health care.

METHODS

We linked 2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey and traditional Medicare claims data for community-dwelling older adults with a history of cancer. We identified contact days (ie, spent in a hospital, emergency department, skilled nursing facility, or inpatient hospice or receiving ambulatory care including an office visit, procedure, treatment, imaging, or test) and described patterns of total and ambulatory contact days. Using weighted Poisson regression models, we identified factors associated with contact days.

RESULTS

We included 1,168 older adults representing 4.51 million cancer survivors (median age, 76.4 years, 52.8% women). The median (IQR) time from cancer diagnosis was 65 (27-126) months. In 2019, these adults had mean (standard deviation) total contact days of 28.4 (27.6) and ambulatory contact days of 24.2 (23.6). These included days for tests (8.0 [8.8]), imaging (3.6 [4.1]), visits with any clinicians (12.4 [11.5]), and visits with primary care clinicians (4.4 [4.7]), and nononcology specialists (7.1 [9.4]) specifically. Sixty-four percent of days with a nonvisit ambulatory service (eg, a test) were not on the same day as a clinician visit. Factors associated with more total contact days included younger age, lower income, more chronic conditions, poor self-rated health, and tendency to "go to doctor as soon as feel bad."

CONCLUSION

Older adult cancer survivors spent nearly 1 month of the year receiving health care outside the home. This care was largely ambulatory, often delivered by nononcologists, and varied by factors beyond clinical characteristics. These results highlight the need to recognize patient burdens and improve survivorship care delivery, including through care coordination.

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.

[eHealth applications for promotion of physical activity after visceral surgery : A systematic review]

BACKGROUND

eHealth applications can support early mobilization and physical activity (PA) after surgery. This systematic review provides an overview of eHealth services to enhance or record PA after visceral surgery interventions.

METHODS

Two electronic databases (MEDLINE PubMed and Web of Science) were systematically searched (November 2023). Articles were considered eligible if they were controlled trials and described digital devices used to promote PA after visceral surgery. The Cochrane risk of bias (RoB-2) tool was used to determine the methodological quality of studies.

RESULTS

A total of nine randomized controlled studies (RCT) were included in this systematic review. The studies differed with respect to the interventions, surgical indications and evaluation variables. The risk of bias of the individual studies was moderate. The six studies using activity trackers (AT) predominantly showed insignificant improvements in the postoperative step count. The more complex fitness applications could partially reveal significant advantages compared to the control groups and the home-based online training also showed a significant increase in functional capacity.

CONCLUSION

Activity tracking alone has so far failed to show clinically relevant effects. In contrast, the more complex eHealth applications revealed advantages compared to usual postoperative care. More high-quality studies are needed for evidence-based recommendations for eHealth services in conjunction with visceral surgery.

Agreement between face-to-face and tele-assessment of upper limb disability in lung cancer survivors during COVID-19 era

INTRODUCTION

Upper limb disability can limit the quality of life of lung cancer survivors. The COVID-19 era has required a finding of alternatives to attend the monitoring of presented disturbances with the minor risk of spread. Tele-assessment offers new possibilities for clinical assessment demonstrating good reliability compared to traditional face-to-face assessment in a variety of patients. No previous study has applied this type of assessment in lung cancer survivors. For this reason, the aim of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement between upper limb disability assessment using tele-assessment and the face-to-face method in lung cancer survivors.

METHODS

A reliability study was conducted with 20 lung cancer survivors recruited from the Oncological Radiotherapy Service of the "Hospital PTS" (Granada). Patients attended a session for clinical face-to-face and real-time online tele-assessment. The main outcome measurements of the study included upper limb function (shirt task) and musculoskeletal disturbances (active range of movement and trigger points), and these outcomes were recorded by two independent researchers.

RESULTS

The outcome measures showed good agreement between both assessments. The active range of movement presented heterogeneous results, being excellent reliability (ρ > 0.75) in extension, internal rotation, homolateral adduction, and contralateral abduction, good (0.4 < ρ < 0.75) for flexion, homolateral abduction, contralateral adduction and contralateral external rotation, and poor (ρ < 0.4) for homolateral external rotation. The measure evaluating upper limb function and trigger points show the highest interrater reliability with confidence interval lower limits ≥0.99.

DISCUSSION

The tele-assessment of upper limb function and musculoskeletal disorders of lung cancer survivors present a good interrater reliability compared to face-to-face assessment. It could be useful for monitoring the disability presented by cancer survivors whose access is difficult by the residential situation, physical limitations or the risk of COVID-19 spread.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Quality of life in the digital age: young adult hematopoietic stem cell transplantation patients and healthcare providers' views of telehealth

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic shifted the healthcare field from in-person clinic visits to virtual-based telehealth appointments. This study explored young adult (YA) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) patient and physician communication preferences and quality of life.

METHODS

One researcher conducted semi-structured interviews with n = 10 YA HSCT patients and n = 10 healthcare providers (HPs). HPs included physicians (n = 5) and advanced practice provider (APP) (nurse practitioners and physician assistants) (n = 5). Interviews lasted approximately 10-15 min, were held over Zoom®, and were audio-recorded. Interviews were professionally transcribed verbatim, and two independent researchers conducted a thematic analysis using Dedoose®.

RESULTS

Common themes included the following: (1) convenience, (2) improved communication, (3) technology issues, and (4) quality of life for patients and physicians. In general, most patients (n = 7; 70%) preferred in-person visits over telehealth for initial appointments, stating they chose the "social connection" and "engagement" associated with in-person visits. For "check-ins" and follow-up appointments (n = 5; 50%), patients preferred hybrid appointments. Physicians (n = 4; 80%) preferred telehealth stating it was "convenient," "timesaving," and improved "compliance." In contrast, all APP staff (n = 5; 100%) preferred in-person visits, stating in-person improved "relationships" with patients and was more "convenient" than using electronic devices for telehealth.

CONCLUSION

Providers differed in preference. APP personnel preferred in-person visits and HSCT physicians preferred telehealth appointments. YA HSCT patients preferred in-person for initial appointments and hybrid clinic visits for follow-up appointments.

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.

Telemedicine and patients with heart failure: evidence and unresolved issues

BACKGROUND

Heart failure is the leading cause of cardiac-related hospitalizations. Limited access to reevaluations and outpatient appointments restricts the application of modern therapies. Telemedicine has become an essential resource in the healthcare system because of its countless benefits, such as higher and more frequent appointments and faster titration of medications. This narrative review aimed to demonstrate the evidence and unresolved issues related to the use of telemedicine in patients with heart failure. No studies have examined heart failure prevention; however, several studies have addressed the prevention of decompensation with positive results. Telemedicine can be used to evaluate all patients with heart failure, and many telemedicine platforms are available. Several strategies, including both noninvasive (phone calls, weight measurement, and virtual visits) and invasive (implantable pulmonary artery catheters) strategies can be implemented. Given these benefits, telemedicine is highly desirable, particularly for vulnerable groups. Although some questions remain unanswered, the development of new technologies can complement remote visits and improve patient care.

Implementing a Patient-Reported Outcome Dashboard in Oncology Telemedicine Encounters: Clinician and Patient Adoption and Acceptability

PURPOSE

Telemedicine provides numerous benefits to patients, yet effective communication and symptom assessment remain a concern. The recent uptake of telemedicine provided an opportunity to use a newly developed dashboard with patient-reported outcome (PRO) information to enhance communication and shared decision making (SDM) during telemedicine appointments. The objective of this study was to identify barriers to using the dashboard during telemedicine, develop implementation strategies to address barriers, and pilot test use of this dashboard during telemedicine appointments in two practice settings to evaluate acceptability, adoption, fidelity, and effectiveness.

METHODS

Patients and clinicians were interviewed to identify determinants to dashboard use in telemedicine. Implementation strategies were designed and refined through iterative feedback from stakeholders. A pilot study of dashboard use was conducted from March to September 2022. Acceptability, adoption, and fidelity were evaluated using mixed methods. SDM was evaluated using the collaboRATE measure.

RESULTS

One hundred two patient encounters were evaluated. Most patients (62; 60%) had completed some PRO data at the time of their telemedicine encounter. Most (82; 80%) encounters had clinician confirmation that PRO data had been reviewed; however, collaborative review of the dashboard was documented in only 27%. Degree of SDM was high (mean collaboRATE score 3.40; SD, 0.11 [95% CI, 3.17 to 3.63] out of a maximum score of 4). Implementation strategies focused on patient engagement, education, and remote PRO completion. Clinician-facing strategies included education, practice facilitation, and small tests of change.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that implementation of a PRO-based dashboard into telemedicine appointments was feasible and had acceptable adoption and acceptability by patients and clinicians when several strategies were used to engage end users. Strategies targeting both patients and clinicians are needed to support routine and effective PRO integration in telemedicine.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Stem Cell Transplant Patients during the COVID-19 Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify the outcomes of stem cell transplant (SCT) patients during the COVID-19 era. Pooled event rates (PER) were calculated, and meta-regression was performed. A random effects model was utilized. In total, 36 eligible studies were included out of 290. The PER of COVID-19-related deaths and COVID-19-related hospital admissions were 21.1% and 55.2%, respectively. The PER of the use of hydroxychloroquine was 53.27%, of the receipt of immunosuppression it was 39.4%, and of the use of antivirals, antibiotics, and steroids it was 71.61%, 37.94%, and 18.46%, respectively. The PER of the time elapsed until COVID-19 infection after SCT of more than 6 months was 85.3%. The PER of fever, respiratory symptoms, and gastrointestinal symptoms were 70.9, 76.1, and 19.3%, respectively. The PER of acute and chronic GvHD were 40.2% and 60.9%, respectively. SCT patients are at a higher risk of severe COVID-19 infection and mortality. The use of dexamethasone improves the survival of hospitalized SCT patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen or ventilation. The SCT patient group is a heterogeneous group with varying characteristics. The quality of reporting on these patients when infected with COVID-19 is not uniform and further prospective or registry studies are needed to better guide clinical care in this unique setting.

A systematic review on the qualitative experiences of people living with lung cancer in rural areas

PURPOSE

To synthesize the qualitative literature exploring the experiences of people living with lung cancer in rural areas.

METHODS

Searches were performed in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Articles were screened independently by two reviewers against pre-determined eligibility criteria. Data were synthesized using Thomas and Harden's framework for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research. The CASP qualitative checklist was used for quality assessment and the review was reported in accordance with the ENTREQ and PRISMA checklists.

RESULTS

Nine articles were included, from which five themes were identified: (1) diagnosis and treatment pathways, (2) travel and financial burden, (3) communication and information, (4) experiences of interacting with healthcare professionals, (5) symptoms and health-seeking behaviors. Lung cancer diagnosis was unexpected for some with several reporting treatment delays and long wait times regarding diagnosis and treatment. Accessing treatment was perceived as challenging and time-consuming due to distance and financial stress. Inadequate communication of information from healthcare professionals was a common concern expressed by rural people living with lung cancer who also conveyed dissatisfaction with their healthcare professionals. Some were reluctant to seek help due to geographical distance and sociocultural factors whilst others found it challenging to identify symptoms due to comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by people with lung cancer in rural settings, through which future researchers can begin to develop tailored support to address the existing disparities that affect this population.

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.

Telehealth in Cancer Care: Inequities, Barriers, and Opportunities

ABSTRACT

Telecommunications technology began to be integrated into health care delivery by the mid-1900s, with the goal of increasing access to care including access to cancer care.There have been at least 3 significant telehealth expansion periods, with the most recent related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Technology uptake increased in the 1990s as quality improved, costs came down, and usability factors were addressed. As telehealth practice transitioned to use of personal devices, the COVID-19 pandemic arose, and necessity compelled widespread telehealth uptake. Most patients and clinicians entered the pandemic with little if any telehealth experience and often no training on using personal devices to access health care. Teleoncology data reveal cancer care feasibility and acceptability with generally high levels of satisfaction for both patients and clinicians. Sustaining the progress made in telehealth uptake requires ongoing insurance coverage with parity in coverage, licensure facilitation, and ongoing development of technology that is easy to use. In addition, to tele-cancer care appointments, the technology may be used for care coordination, education, and increased access to cancer clinical trials.

Leveraging e-health for enhanced cancer care service models in middle-income contexts: Qualitative insights from oncology care providers

Background

Global cancer research has predominantly favoured high-income countries (HICs). The unique challenges in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) demand tailored research approaches, accentuated further by the disparities highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aim and objectives

This research endeavoured to dissect the intricacies of cancer care in LMICs, with Jordan serving as a case study. Specifically, the study aimed to conduct an in-depth analysis of the prevailing cancer care model and assess the transformative potential of eHealth technologies in bolstering cancer care delivery.

Methods

Utilising a qualitative methodology, in-depth semi-structured interviews with oncology healthcare professionals were executed. Data underwent inductive thematic analysis as per Braun and Clarke's guidelines.

Results

From the analysed data, two dominant themes surfaced. Firstly, "The current state of cancer care delivery" was subdivided into three distinct subthemes. Secondly, "Opportunities for enhanced care delivery via e-health" underscored the urgency of digital health reforms.

Conclusion

The need to restrategise cancer care in LMICs is highlighted by this study, using the Jordanian healthcare context as a reference. The transformative potential of e-health initiatives has been illustrated. However, the relevance of this study might be limited by its region-specific approach. Future research is deemed essential for deeper exploration into the integration of digital health within traditional oncology settings across diverse LMICs, emphasising the significance of telemedicine in digital-assisted care delivery reforms.

Virtual Care? Telepharmacy in Critical Care Settings for Patient-Centered Care and Multidisciplinary Collaboration: A Scoping Review of Activities, Benefits, Economic Impact, Challenges, and Knowledge Gaps

Background: Very few studies have investigated telepharmacy (TP) in critical care. This scoping review undertook this task. Methods: We searched the following five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, WoS, Scopus, CINAHL). Data were extracted from the articles and mapped out. Arksey and O'Malley's 6-step framework was used, and data synthesis identified activities, benefits, economic impact, challenges, and knowledge gaps of TP in critical care. Results: Out of 77 reports retrieved, 14 were included in the review as per inclusion criteria. Eight studies (57%) were published since 2020, and 9 (64%) were from the United States. Tele-ICU was in place before TP implementation in six studies (43%). TP used a range of synchronous/asynchronous communications. Studies reported wide assortment of reactive/scheduled TP activities. Patient outcomes were evaluated in one study of sedation-related TP interventions but they were not different despite improved compliance with sedation protocol. Most common clinical interventions/drugs included glycemic, electrolyte, and antimicrobial therapy management and antithrombotic agents among others. Acceptance of TP interventions was 75% or more in four studies and 51-55% in two studies. Benefits of TP included resolved drug-related problems, increased compliance with guidelines, maintained interactions with other health care providers, and patient safety among others. Three studies (21%) reported cost avoidance with TP interventions. Challenges included communication, intervention documentation, tracking implementation of recommendations, and monetary/financial and legislative/regulatory issues. Knowledge gaps comprised lack of frameworks for implementation/evaluation of TP in critical care, methodological aspects, lack of patient-specific outcomes, as well as institution/health-system aspects, and documentation systems, cost, legislative, and sustainability issues. Conclusions: TP in critical care is underpublished, and comprehensive frameworks for its implementation and evaluation remain lacking. Assessments are needed to evaluate the effect of TP in critical care on patient-specific outcomes, its economic and legal dimensions, methods to sustain it, as well as the role of documentation systems, collaboration models, and institutional characteristics.

Experiences of individuals with rheumatoid arthritis interacting with health care and the use of a digital self-care application: a qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVES

Over the last few decades, there have been significant improvements in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with the development of new treatments and guidelines for teamwork and patient self-care and access to digital tools. This study aimed to explore the experiences of individuals with RA interacting with healthcare. It also looked at how a self-care application, an educational programme called the 'healthcare encounter', improved patient-doctor communication.

DESIGN

Semistructured interviews were conducted, and qualitative content analysis was performed.

SETTING

The potential participants, individuals with established, or under investigation for, RA diagnosis at rheumatology clinics in Sweden, were asked to participate in the study via a digital self-care application called the Elsa Science Self-care app.

PARTICIPANTS

Ten interviews were performed with participants from nine clinics following a meeting with the rheumatologist or other healthcare personnel between September 2022 and October 2022. Phrases, sentences or paragraphs referring to experiences from healthcare meetings and opinions about the digital programme were identified and coded. Codes that reflected similar concepts were grouped; subcategories were formulated, and categories were connected to their experiences and opinions.

RESULTS

Among our participants, three main categories emerged: the availability of healthcare, individual efforts to have a healthier life and personal interaction with healthcare. Participants described that the 'healthcare encounter' educational programme can be a source of information, which confirms, supports and creates a sense of control.

CONCLUSION

The participants valued being seen and taking part in a dialogue when they had prepared themselves (observed symptoms over time and prepared questions). The implementation of digital self-care applications might need to be incorporated into the healthcare setting, so that both the patients and the healthcare personnel have a shared understanding. Collaboration is essential in this context.

Utilization of cancer survivorship services during the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND

All Commission on Cancer-accredited comprehensive cancer centers offer survivorship programs (SPs) to women upon completion of treatment. These SPs can include clinical and non-clinical programming such as physical rehabilitation, emotional and psychosocial support, nutrition, and exercise programming. Concern about the availability and access to these programs during the COVID-19 pandemic has been described in recent literature. We sought to identify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on participation in these supportive services for breast cancer patients within a single institution.

METHODS

The Ohio State University tertiary care center offers clinical and non-clinical breast cancer support services. Descriptive statistics were utilized to summarize referral and patient participation data from January 2019 through July 2021. Data from calendar year 2019 was used as a normative comparison for pre-COVID-19. In-person and telehealth use was tracked longitudinally.

RESULTS

During the lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic (March through May 2020), provider referrals to SPs declined by 10%, while the overall total for the calendar year modestly increased from 1195 in 2019 to 1210 in 2020, representing a 1.3% increase. Psycho-oncology referrals increased from 280 to 318 (13.5%). The most significant change of participation rates in non-clinical SPs during the pandemic was utilization of exercise content, which increased by 220% from 2019 to 2020. The total proportion of breast cancer participants choosing an exercise program increased from 16.8% in 2019 to 42.2% in 2021, making it the most selected program area overall. Previously, nutrition was the most selected program area as it comprised 42.5% of overall utilization in 2019.

CONCLUSION

The pandemic's potential to place barriers to participation in SPs is a legitimate concern. We found a modest decline in provider referrals to clinical services during the lockdown period, while patient-directed participation increased with more survivors engaging in exercise-based programs. Transitioning to virtual platforms served to maintain access for patients.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

As we grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with cancer deserve increased attention due to the expected stressors associated with the diagnosis. Those in the survivorship stage utilize services for psychosocial support, and the observed increase in utilization of SPs suggests an elevated need for connectivity. To meet this need, telehealth platforms have been expanded to allow for continued participation. It remains to be seen whether this will be sustained post-COVID-19 or whether reduced human contact will create new needs for programming.

Patients' perspectives and preferences toward telemedicine versus in-person visits: a mixed-methods study on 1226 patients

INTRODUCTION

Despite the fact that telemedicine can eliminate geographical and time limitations and offer the possibility of diagnosing, treating, and preventing diseases by sharing reliable information, many individuals still prefer to visit medical centers for in-person consultations. The aim of this study was to determine the level of acceptance of telemedicine compared to in-person visits, identify the perceived advantages of telemedicine over in-person visits, and to explore the reasons why patients choose either of these two types of visits.

METHODS

We developed a questionnaire using the rational method. The questionnaire consisted of multiple-choice questions and one open-ended question. A total of 2059 patients were invited to participate in the study. Chi-square tests and descriptive statistics were employed for data analysis. To analyze the data from the open-ended question, we conducted qualitative content analysis using MAXQDA 18.

RESULTS

Out of the 1226 participants who completed the questionnaire, 865 (71%) preferred in-person visits, while 361 (29%) preferred telemedicine. Factors such as education level, specific health conditions, and prior experience with telemedicine influenced the preference for telemedicine. The participants provided a total of 183 different reasons for choosing either telemedicine (108 reasons) or in-person visits (75 reasons). Avoiding infectious diseases, saving cost, and eliminating and overcoming geographical distance barriers were three primary telemedicine benefits. The primary reasons for selecting an in-person visit were: more accurate diagnosis of the disease, more accurate and better examination of the patient by the physician, and more accurate and better treatment of the disease.

CONCLUSION

The results demonstrate that despite the numerous benefits offered by telemedicine, the majority of patients still exhibit a preference for in-person visits. In order to promote broader acceptance of telemedicine, it becomes crucial for telemedicine services to address patient preferences and concerns effectively. Employing effective change management strategies can aid in overcoming resistance and facilitating the widespread adoption of telemedicine within the population.

Telehealth Availability for Cancer Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Telehealth was an important strategy for maintaining continuity of cancer care during the coronavirus pandemic and has continued to play a role in outpatient care; however, it is unknown whether services are equally available across cancer hospitals.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess telehealth availability at cancer hospitals for new and established patients with common cancers to contextualize the impact of access barriers to technology on overall access to health care.

METHODS

We conducted a national cross-sectional secret shopper study from June to November 2020 to assess telehealth availability at cancer hospitals for new and established patients with colorectal, breast, and skin (melanoma) cancer. We examined facility-level factors to determine predictors of telehealth availability.

RESULTS

Of the 312 investigated facilities, 97.1% (n=303) provided telehealth services for at least 1 cancer site. Telehealth was less available to new compared to established patients (n=226, 72% vs n=301, 97.1%). The surveyed cancer hospitals more commonly offered telehealth visits for breast cancer care (n=266, 85%) and provided lower access to telehealth for skin (melanoma) cancer care (n=231, 74%). Most hospitals (n=163, 52%) offered telehealth for all 3 cancer types. Telehealth availability was weakly correlated across cancer types within a given facility for new (r=0.16, 95% CI 0.09-0.23) and established (r=0.14, 95% CI 0.08-0.21) patients. Telehealth was more commonly available for new patients at National Cancer Institute-designated facilities, medical school-affiliated facilities, and major teaching sites, with high total admissions and below-average timeliness of care. Telehealth availability for established patients was highest at Academic Comprehensive Cancer Programs, nongovernment and nonprofit facilities, medical school-affiliated facilities, Accountable Care Organizations, and facilities with a high number of total admissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an increase in telehealth services for patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic, we identified differences in access across cancer hospitals, which may relate to measures of clinical volume, affiliation, and infrastructure.

Out-of-pocket costs sustained in the last 12 months by cancer patients: an Italian survey-based study on individual expenses between 2017 and 2018

PURPOSE

Out of Pocket costs (OOP) sustained by cancer patients also in public NHS contribute to disease-related financial toxicity. Aim of the study was to investigate the amount and the types of OOP sustained by Italian cancer patients for care services.

METHODS

A sample survey was conducted by FAVO in December 2017-June 2018, in 39 adhering hospitals and 1289 patients diagnosed from 1985 to 2018, by standardized questionnaire inquiring on: yearly expenditure by cancer service, age, year of diagnosis, disease phase, cancer site, sex, marital status, education, residence. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed between OOP and each variable. Multilevel mixed-effects negative binomial regression was used to assess the combined effects of patients characteristics on the differences in acquiring health services.

RESULTS

The yearly average OOP was 1841.81€, with the highest values for transports (359.34€) and for diagnostic examinations (259.82€). Significantly higher OOP were found in North and Centre than South and Islands (167.51 vs. 138.39). In the fully adjusted multivariable analysis, the variables significantly associated with higher than reference expenditure were: medium/high education (OR 1.22 [1.05-1.42], upper gastrointestinal tract cancer (OR 1.37 [1.06-1.77]), disease phase of treatments for cancer progression or pain therapy (OR 1.59 [1.30-1.93]).

CONCLUSION

Italian cancer patients in 2018 sustained OOP quite similar to those measured in 2012 to supplement NHS services. The main component of the OOP costs were diagnostic examination and transportation. The NHS should pay attention to potentiate its ability to answer unmet needs of patients with advanced cancer who are the most fragile ones.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Reinforcing the services where the main OOP expenses are located can help in promoting public health actions and reduce socio-economic needs that could compromise the receipt of optimal care along the whole disease course, from diagnosis to rehabilitation.

Assessing real-world implementability of a multimodal group-based tele-prehabilitation program in cancer care: a pragmatic feasibility study

Introduction

Multimodal prehabilitation is intended to optimize a patient's mental and physical health prior to surgery. Most multimodal prehabilitation interventions are delivered on a one-on-one format, which may limit benefits associated with social interactions that can be achieved in a group context, and are delivered in-person, which may limit the accessibility. The purpose of this study was to develop a group-based, multimodal, tele-prehabilitation intervention for individuals diagnosed with cancer (iACTIF) and assess its implementability in a "real-world" clinical setting by measuring feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and preliminary effects.

Methods

A prospective, single-group, pragmatic feasibility study was conducted with assessments at baseline, pre-surgery, and 12-weeks post-surgery. iACTIF consisted of three 90-min live videoconference sessions per week, including exercise and educational components. Descriptive statistics were used to document feasibility, acceptability, and fidelity indicators. Paired t-test, Wilcoxon test, and Cohen's D-test were conducted to assess changes in health-related outcomes.

Results

A total of 25 participants (mean age ± SD= 60.2 ± 14.0) were recruited. The feasibility assessment revealed a low referral rate (31.4%) and a high study retention (98%) and program attendance [session attended/possible session] (70.2%), with a prehabilitation window of 32.7 days (SD= 20.9, median= 28). Acceptability was high (84%-100%) according to satisfaction, utility and safety, delivery modality, and intention to continue physical activity and to recommend iACTIF to a relative. Pre-post-intervention assessments suggest positive changes on physical functional capacity based on the 2-min step test (mean difference= +18.9 steps, p=0.005), the 30-s sit-to-stand (mean difference= +1.1 repetition, p=0.011), and volume of moderate intensity physical activity per week (mean difference= +104.8 min, p<0.001). Fidelity was supported by conformity and coherence, with only minimal adjustments required to meet participants' needs.

Discussion

iACTIF implementability in a "real-world" clinical setting is promising, and preliminary outcomes suggest moderate benefits on physical health and small increase in mental health indicators.

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.

Role of digital health in coordinating patient care in a hub-and-spoke hierarchy of cancer care facilities: a scoping review

Background

Coordinating cancer care is complicated due to the involvement of multiple service providers which often leads to fragmentation. The evolution of digital health has led to the development of technology-enabled models of healthcare delivery. This scoping review provides a comprehensive summary of the use of digital health in coordinating cancer care via hub-and-spoke models.

Methods

A scoping review of the literature was undertaken using the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley. Research articles published between 2010 and 2022 were retrieved from four electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Reviews and Global Health Library). The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for the scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist were followed to present the findings.

Result

In total, 311 articles were found of which 7 studies that met the inclusion criteria were included. The use of videoconferencing was predominant across all the studies. The number of spokes varied across the studies ranging from 1 to 63. Three studies aimed to evaluate the impact on access to cancer care among patients, two studies were related to capacity building of the health care workers at the spoke sites, one study was based on a peer review of radiotherapy plans, and one study was related to risk assessment and patient navigation. The introduction of digital health led to reduced travel time and waiting period for patients, and standardisation of radiotherapy plans at spokes. Tele-mentoring intervention aimed at capacity-building resulted in higher confidence and increased knowledge among the spoke learners.

Conclusion

There is limited evidence for the role of digital health in the hub-and-spoke design. Although all the studies have highlighted the digital components being used to coordinate care, the bottlenecks, Which were overcome during the implementation of the interventions and the impact on cancer outcomes, need to be rigorously analysed.

Cancer Patients' Preferences and Perceptions of Advantages and Disadvantages of Telehealth Visits During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

We aimed to ascertain oncology patients' perceptions of telehealth versus in-person (IP) visits for different types of clinical encounters.

METHODS

We surveyed adults undergoing cancer treatment at Kaiser Permanente Northern California infusion centers between November 2021 and May 2022 using a self-administered questionnaire. Patients were asked about visit modality preferences (video, phone, and IP) for six types of clinical discussions, overall advantages and disadvantages of telehealth (video or phone) versus IP modalities, and barriers to video visit use.

RESULTS

The 839 patients who completed surveys in English were 63% female; median age 63 years; 64% White; and 73% college-educated (45% ≥bachelor's degree). For the first postdiagnosis discussion visit, 83% of patients preferred IP, followed by video (27%) and phone (18%). For follow-up visits, 52% of patients preferred IP, 50% video, and 37% phone. For discussions of bad news and sensitive topics, respectively, 68% and 62% preferred IP, 44% and 48% video, and 32% and 41% phone visits. Delivery of good news was acceptable through IP (49%), video (52%), or phone (49%) visits. Perceived advantages of IP visits were greater feelings of connection with their doctor (58%), confidence in physical examinations (73%), and ease in showing things (67%) and talking (51%) to the doctor. Advantages of telehealth visits included saved time (72%) and money (38%), less infection exposure (64%), less travel concerns (45%), and ability to include more people (28%). Of 24% of patients who felt video visits would be hard, 51% cited poor internet, 41% lack of an adequate device, and 28% difficulty signing on.

CONCLUSION

Our results support continued use and reimbursement for telehealth visits with patients with cancer for most types of clinical encounters, including clinical trials.

Telemedicine in Neuro-Oncology-An Evaluation of Remote Consultations during the COVID-19 Pandemic

In order to minimize the risk of infections during the COVID-19 pandemic, remote video consultations (VC) experienced an upswing in most medical fields. However, telemedicine in neuro-oncology comprises unique challenges and opportunities. So far, evidence-based insights to evaluate and potentially customize current concepts are scarce. To fill this gap, we analyzed >3700 neuro-oncological consultations, of which >300 were conducted as VC per patients' preference, in order to detect how both patient collectives distinguished from one another. Additionally, we examined patients' reasons, suitable/less suitable encounters, VC's benefits and disadvantages and future opportunities with an anonymized survey. Patients that participated in VC had a worse clinical condition, higher grade of malignancy, were more often diagnosed with glioblastoma and had a longer travel distance (all p < 0.01). VC were considered a fully adequate alternative to face-to-face consultations for almost all encounters that patients chose to participate in (>70%) except initial consultations. Most participants preferred to alternate between both modalities rather than participate in one alone but preferred VC over telephone consultation. VC made patients feel safer, and participants expressed interest in implementing other telemedicine modalities (e.g., apps) into neuro-oncology. VC are a promising addition to patient care in neuro-oncology. However, patients and encounters should be selected individually.

Availability of cancer care services and the organization of care delivery at critical access hospitals

INTRODUCTION

Critical access hospitals (CAHs) provide an opportunity to meet the needs of individuals with cancer in rural areas. Two common innovative care delivery methods include the use of traveling oncologists and teleoncology. It is important to understand the availability and organization of cancer care services in CAHs due to the growing population with cancer and expected declines in oncology workforce in rural areas.

METHODS

Stratified random sampling was used to generate a sample of 50 CAHs from each of the four U.S. Census Bureau-designated regions resulting in a total sample of 200 facilities. Analyses were conducted from 135 CAH respondents to understand the availability of cancer care services and organization of cancer care across CAHs.

RESULTS

Almost all CAHs (95%) provided at least one cancer screening or diagnostic service. Forty-six percent of CAHs reported providing at least one component of cancer treatment (chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery) at their facility. CAHs that offered cancer treatment reported a wide range of health care staff involvement, including 34% of respondents reporting involvement of a local oncologist, 38% reporting involvement of a visiting oncologist, and 28% reporting involvement of a non-local oncologist using telemedicine.

CONCLUSION

Growing disparities within rural areas emphasize the importance of ensuring access to timely screening and guideline-recommended treatment for cancer in rural communities. These data demonstrated that CAHs are addressing the growing need through a variety of approaches including the use of innovative models that utilize non-local providers and telemedicine to expand access to crucial services for rural residents with cancer.

Information Technology and Telemedicine Services in Community Oncology Practices

PURPOSE

We described information technology support and use of telemedicine for cancer care and research purposes at community oncology practices within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP).

METHODS

We used data from the NCORP 2017 and 2022 Landscape Assessments. Separate logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with the use of telemedicine for delivery of cancer care in 2017 and for research purposes in 2022 (cancer care delivery not assessed in 2022).

RESULTS

Information was available from 210 and 259 practice groups excluding pediatric-only groups in 2017 and 2022, respectively. In 2017, 30% of practice groups used telemedicine for delivery of cancer care; half of these (15% overall) could use telemedicine for research purposes. In 2022, telemedicine was used for research purposes in 73% of practice groups. In multivariable models, self-identifying as a safety-net hospital was associated with a lower odd of telemedicine use for delivery of cancer care (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.93), whereas affiliation with a designated critical access hospital was associated with a higher odd of telemedicine use for delivery of cancer care (AOR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.10 to 4.76). Having a general survivorship clinic (AOR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.04 to 3.54) and number of oncology providers (increase per 10 providers; AOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.65) were associated with telemedicine use for research purposes.

CONCLUSION

Almost one third of NCORP practice groups used telemedicine for cancer care delivery in 2017. In 2022, there is high capacity among NCORP practices (almost three-quarters) to use telemedicine for research purposes, especially among practices with a general survivorship clinic and a greater provider number.

Teleoncology: Novel Approaches for Improving Cancer Care in North America

Due to widespread healthcare workforce shortages, many patients living in remote and rural North America currently have reduced access to various medical specialists. These shortages, coupled with the aging North American population, highlight the need to transform contemporary healthcare delivery systems. The exchange of medical information via telecommunication technology, known as telemedicine, offers promising solutions to address the medical needs of an aging population and the increased demand for specialty medical services. This progressive movement has also improved access to quality health care by mitigating the current shortage of trained subspecialists. Minimizing the effects of these shortages is particularly urgent in the care of cancer patients, many of whom require regular follow-up and close monitoring. Cancer patients living in remote areas of North America have reduced access to specialized care and, thus, have unacceptably high mortality and morbidity rates. Teleoncology, or the use of telemedicine to provide oncology services remotely, has the ability to improve access to high-quality care and assist in alleviating the burden of some of the severe adverse events associated with cancer. In this review, the authors describe how recent advances in teleoncology can reduce healthcare disparities and improve future cancer care in North America.

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.

Transportation barriers, emergency room use, and mortality risk among US adults by cancer history

BACKGROUND

Lack of safe, reliable, and affordable transportation is a barrier to medical care, but little is known about its association with clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We identified 28 640 adults with and 470 024 adults without a cancer history from a nationally representative cohort (2000-2018 US National Health Interview Survey) and its linked mortality files with vital status through December 31, 2019. Transportation barriers were defined as delays in care because of lack of transportation. Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards models estimated the associations of transportation barriers with emergency room (ER) use and mortality risk, respectively, adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, health insurance, comorbidities, functional limitations, and region.

RESULTS

Of the adults, 2.8% (n = 988) and 1.7% (n = 9685) with and without a cancer history, respectively, reported transportation barriers; 7324 and 40 793 deaths occurred in adults with and without cancer history, respectively. Adults with a cancer history and transportation barriers, as compared with adults without a cancer history or transportation barriers, had the highest likelihood of ER use (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.34 to 3.27) and all-cause mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.94 to 2.68), followed by adults without a cancer history with transportation barriers (ER use aOR = 1.98, 95% CI =1.87 to 2.10; all-cause mortality aHR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.46 to 1.70) and adults with a cancer history but without transportation barriers (ER use aOR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.44; all-cause mortality aHR = 1.59, 95% CI = 1.54 to 1.65).

CONCLUSION

Delayed care because of lack of transportation was associated with increased ER use and mortality risk among adults with and without cancer history. Cancer survivors with transportation barriers had the highest risk.

Telehealth Utilization Among Occupational Therapists in Oncology: Results From a National Survey

While the COVID-19 pandemic introduced wide expansion of telehealth access in health care, evidence concerning telehealth use in occupational therapy (OT) for cancer survivors remains limited. The objective of this study was to identify the prevalence and perceptions of telehealth services among occupational therapy practitioners (OTPs) in oncology. Descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis were used to analyze data from a pre-pandemic national survey of OTPs (n = 126) focusing on telehealth. Most OTPs in oncology settings support telehealth use, despite a dearth of access prior to the pandemic. The highest levels of telehealth endorsement among OTPs related to ease of accessibility (48%). Treatments rated as best suited for OT oncology telehealth sessions included education (41%), quality of life/well-being/lifestyle (21%), and psychosocial interventions (19%). These data suggest widespread benefits of telehealth-delivered OT treatment in oncology. Advocacy is needed to ensure the continuation of legislation allowing expanded telehealth access and reimbursement for OT.

Perceptions and Attitudes of Patients and Health Care Stakeholders on Implementing a Telehealth Service for Preoperative Evaluation: A Qualitative Analysis

Background

Studies suggest that preoperative evaluation can be effectively conducted through telehealth. As the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated digital transformation, we hypothesize that a new telehealth model of care may be feasibly implemented for preoperative evaluation at our institution. This qualitative study seeks to evaluate the attitudes and perception of elective surgery patients and health care providers toward telehealth conducted for preanesthesia evaluation.

Methods

At a tertiary women's hospital in Asia, health care providers and elective surgery patients were recruited by convenience and snowball sampling to undergo one-on-one semistructured interviews regarding a new telehealth model of care for preanesthesia evaluation, under-pinned by the Normalization Process Theory. Data were analyzed, coded, and consolidated into themes using the framework analysis method by a team of four researchers from diverse backgrounds.

Results

Twenty-five interviews were conducted among 10 patients and 15 health care participants. Ninety-five codes were identified, consolidated into four themes that connect to guide the implementation of a new telehealth pathway for preoperative care, mapped to the Normalization Process Theory. The themes pertain to advantages of telehealth workflow (coherence), requisites for new telehealth workflow (coherence, collective action), barriers to implementation (cognitive participation, collective action), and enablers of implementation (cognitive participation, collective action). All participants were receptive to telehealth, but health care participants expressed concern about the impact of additional tasks on current clinical workload. Training in videoconferencing was deemed essential by both patients and health care providers.

Conclusions

The study has provided insights into levels of coherence and cognitive participation among patients and health care providers. The telehealth workflow should be redesigned, considering systems' constraints and stakeholders' needs. Greater buy-in is needed to gain health care providers' commitment for collective action. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05781789.

Types of usual sources of care and their association with healthcare outcomes among cancer survivors: a Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) study

PURPOSE

To assess associations between usual source of care (USC) type and health status, healthcare access, utilization, and expenses among adult cancer survivors.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional analysis using 2013-2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey included 2690 observations representing 31,953,477 adult cancer survivors who were currently experiencing cancer and reporting one of five USC types: solo practicing physician (SPP), a specific person in a non-hospital facility, a specific person in a hospital-based facility, a non-hospital facility, and a hospital-based facility. We used logistic regressions and generalized linear models to determine associations of USC type with health status, healthcare access, utilization, and expenses, adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

All non-SPP USC types were associated with reporting more difficulties contacting USC by telephone during business hours (p < 0.05). Compared to SPP, non-hospital facility was associated with more difficulty getting needed prescriptions (OR: 1.81, p = 0.036) and higher annual expenses ($5225, p = 0.028), and hospital-based facility was associated with longer travel time (OR: 1.61, p = 048), more ED visits (0.13, p = 0.049), higher expenses ($6028, p = 0.014), and worse self-reported health status (OR: 1.93, p = 0.001), although both were more likely to open on nights/weekends (p < 0.05). Cancer survivors with a specific person in a hospital-based facility (vs. SPP) as USC were > twofold as likely (p < 0.05) to report difficulty getting needed prescriptions and contacting USC afterhours.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adult cancer survivors who were currently experiencing cancer, having a non-SPP type of UCS was associated with reporting more difficulties accessing care, worse health, more ED visits, and higher total expenses.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Transitioning to SPP type of USC may result in better healthcare outcomes.

Implementation of a teleprehabilitation program for oncosurgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: perspectives and user satisfaction

INTRODUCTION

Many rehabilitation services in the face of the COVID-19 health emergency have had to adapt face-to-face interventions with remote care through teleprehabilitation. We aim to describe the implementation of a teleprehabilitation program during the COVID-19 pandemic for patients who are candidates for elective cancer surgery in a low-income Chilean public hospital. Secondarily, describe the perspectives and satisfaction of patients with the program.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Correspond to a descriptive and retrospective pre-habilitation telemedicine intervention study. Implementation was measured in terms of, recruitment rate, retention, dropouts, and occurrence of adverse events. User perspectives and satisfaction were evaluated through a survey composed of nine items on a Likert scale with five response options. Descriptive analyses were considered with mean, standard deviation, minimum, maximum, as well as absolute and relative frequency. For patients' perspectives on the program, a qualitative analysis was considered to describe them. The most relevant domains were identified in a text box to illustrate the results.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-five patients were referred to the teleprehabilitation program, with 99.3% recruitment, a retention rate of 46.7%, and no adverse events reported. In relation to user satisfaction, in general, patients showed good satisfaction with the teleprehabilitation program except items related to "access to the teleprehabilitation program connection" and "number of sessions." Thirty-three patients reported their perspectives on the intervention, represented in 12 domains.

CONCLUSION

It is possible to implement a teleprehabilitation program for oncosurgical patients in the context of preoperative care during the COVID-19 pandemic, with good user satisfaction. Likewise, this study provides guidance for other health institutions that wish to implement a teleprehabilitation program.