Impact of COVID-19 on the Organization of Cancer Care in Belgium: Lessons Learned for the (Post-)Pandemic Future

The role of area deprivation index in health care disruptions among cancer survivors during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

To examine the associations between demographic/medical and geographic factors with follow-up medical care and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among cancer survivors during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to cancer survivors between May 2020 and January 2021, exploring their experience with SARS-CoV-2, follow-up care, and HRQoL. PolicyMap was used to geocode home addresses. Both geographic and demographic/medical factors were examined for their associations with SARS-CoV-2 experience, follow-up care, and HRQoL (FACT-G7).

RESULTS

Geographic data were available for 9651 participants. Patients living in the highest area deprivation index (ADI) neighborhoods (most deprived) had higher odds of avoiding in-person general (odds ratio [OR] = 7.20; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.79-18.60), cancer (OR = 8.47; 95% CI = 3.73-19.30), and emergency (OR = 14.2; 95% CI = 5.57-36.30) medical care, as well as lower odds of using telemedicine (OR = 0.61; 95% CI = 0.52-0.73) compared to the lowest ADI group. Race/ethnicity was not associated with follow-up care after controlling for ADI. The effect of ADI on HRQoL was generally in the expected direction, with higher ADI being associated with worse HRQoL.

CONCLUSIONS

ADI influenced follow-up medical care more than age, race/ethnicity, or health insurance type. Healthcare providers and institutions should focus on decreasing barriers to in-person and telemedicine health care that disproportionally impact those living in more deprived communities, which are exacerbated by health care disruptions like those caused by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Lessons learned from COVID-19: improving breast cancer care post-pandemic from the patient perspective

BACKGROUND

Since the onset of the pandemic, breast cancer (BC) services have been disrupted in most countries. The purpose of this qualitative study is to explore the unmet needs, patient-priorities, and recommendations for improving BC healthcare post-pandemic for women with BC and to understand how they may vary based on social determinants of health (SDH), in particular socio-economic status (SES).

METHODS

Thirty-seven women, who were purposively sampled based on SDH and previously interviewed about the impact of COVID-19 on BC, were invited to take part in follow-up semi-structured qualitative interviews in early 2023. The interviews explored their perspectives of BC care since the easing of COVID-19 government restrictions, including unmet needs, patient-priorities, and recommendations specific to BC care. Thematic analysis was conducted to synthesize each topic narratively with corresponding sub-themes. Additionally, variation by SDH was analyzed within each sub-theme.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight women (mean age = 61.7 years, standard deviation (SD) = 12.3) participated in interviews (response rate = 76%). Thirty-nine percent (n = 11) of women were categorized as high-SES, while 61% (n = 17) of women were categorized as low-SES. Women expressed unmet needs in their BC care including routine care and mental and physical well-being care, as well as a lack of financial support to access BC care. Patient priorities included the following: developing cohesion between different aspects of BC care; communication with and between healthcare professionals; and patient empowerment within BC care. Recommendations moving forward post-pandemic included improving the transition from active to post-treatment, enhancing support resources, and implementing telemedicine where appropriate. Overall, women of low-SES experienced more severe unmet needs, which in turn resulted in varied patient priorities and recommendations.

CONCLUSION

As health systems are recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, the emphasis should be on restoring access to BC care and improving the quality of BC care, with a particular consideration given to those women from low-SES, to reduce health inequalities post-pandemic.

The Inflow, Throughput and Outflow of COVID-19 Patients in Dutch Hospitals: Experiences from Experts and Middle Managers

At the beginning of 2020, the large and unforeseen inflow of COVID-19 patients had a deep impact on the healthcare operations of Dutch hospitals. From a patient flow logistics perspective, each hospital handled the situation largely in its own particular and improvised way. Nevertheless, some hospitals appeared to be more effective in their dealing with this sudden demand for extra care than others. This prompted a study into the factors which hindered and facilitated effective operations during this period. We provide an overview of actions and measures for organizing and managing the inflow, throughput and outflow of COVID-19 patients within Dutch hospitals from various types of departments in a large number of hospitals in The Netherlands, based on interviews with nine experts and twelve hospital managers. Ten actions or measures have been identified, which have been divided into the following three dimensions: Streamlining of the underlying in- and external processes, reducing unnecessary or undesirable inflow of patients and increasing or making more adequate use of the available (human) capacity. The main lessons learned are the importance of integral tuning in the care process, giving up habits and self-interest, good information provision and the middle manager as a linking pin.

The cocreation of care pathways for patients treated with oral anticancer drugs: From assessment data to an actual care pathway

RATIONALE

Due to the emergence of oral anticancer therapies, existing care processes in oncology - that are mainly focused on in-hospital treatments - must be rethought. The development of a care pathway is a well-known methodology to reorganise and standardise care for a specific patient group. However, care pathway development might be complex and burdensome for healthcare teams, requiring a well-thought-out methodology that provides guidance to the teams.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

In 10 Belgian oncology departments, multidisciplinary teams developed a tailored care pathway, aimed to offer high-quality patient-centred care. Each department followed a cocreation methodology, consisting of a current practice assessment, a priority setting, and the actual development of the care pathway. The aim of this study was to investigate how and to which extent underperformed evidence-based key elements (KEs), identified in the current practice assessment, guided the development of the care pathway, and how compliant the final care pathways are with the list of evidence-based KEs.

METHODS

A qualitative content analysis was conducted to describe and compare the results of each phase of the cocreation methodology.

RESULTS

This study shows that much of the evidence and feedback on current practice that was used as a starting point, got lost throughout the cocreation process. Only a limited proportion of the (seriously) underperformed KEs were prioritised by the multidisciplinary teams. Furthermore, several prioritised KEs could not be retrieved in the care pathway documents. Also, the final care pathways were not fully compliant with existing evidence.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings, a more rigorous cocreation methodology seems needed, offering very concrete support for multidisciplinary teams to integrate the prioritised KEs in the care process (e.g., by using a model care pathway). Next to the selfreported performance data from healthcare professionals and patients, more objective data (e.g., walkthrough, medical records) and more extensive patient involvement should be considered in the priority setting.