scholarly journals The experience of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522110668
Author(s):  
Melanie Dalby ◽  
Nikant Ailawadi

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the care of many cancer patients in a variety of ways. This study was conducted to understand the experience cancer patients have had during the pandemic. Method: Cancer patients who were under the care of the Trust between September 2020 – January 2021 were invited to take part in a survey sent through as a text message. Results: A total of 600 patients were sent a text message with a link to an online survey. There were 82 patients who responded. The data has been divided into three themes of information provision and safety around COVID-19, impact on cancer care and feeling supported by staff. Conclusion: It was encouraging to see that patients felt safe coming into the hospitals if it was required and they received appropriate information about changes to their care and how to protect themselves against COVID-19. Most patients stated that the pandemic had not influenced their cancer care. Of those that did experience delays most were understanding of this. There was a mixture of responses in terms of patients feeling supported by staff, most inpatients did feel supported and 75% of patients were able to contact their specialist nurse.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14138-e14138
Author(s):  
Hoda Jradi ◽  
Alanood Abdulaziz Alharbi ◽  
Maali Omar Alrashed ◽  
Mishael Ali Alshoaibi ◽  
Mohammad Alkaiyat ◽  
...  

e14138 Background: Diagnosis and treatment of cancer are regarded as stressful experiences impacting the patients and their families. This study aims at comparing the Saudi cancer patient experience with the United Kingdom cancer patient experience throughout their continuum of care. Methods: Results from the United Kingdom (UK) National Cancer Patient Experience Survey (NCPES 2017) were compared to the reported results from the experience of 100 cancer patients for the same year at the National Guard Health affairs Health system in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Similar concepts relating to the experience were investigated and compared. Results: Compared to the UK survey, the Saudi survey had mainly higher score regarding receiving an overall positive cancer care. Scores related to provision of clear answers to all important questions, judging the hospital staff as always working well together, and family members being given the opportunity to communicate with the doctor were significantly higher among Saudis. The UK patient scored significantly higher on receiving information about diagnostic tests, treatment side effects, and discharge instructions, and being informed about support groups and on-going cancer research. Conclusions: The overall experience of the Saudi cancer patients compared favorably to the UK cancer patients; however, in the domain of information provision as an essential part of the cancer experience is still lacking in the Saudi cancer care approach. Quality improvement should focus on the findings of this study for better health outcomes. [Table: see text]


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Urska Kosir ◽  
Maria Elizabeth Loades ◽  
Jennifer Wild ◽  
Milan Wiedemann ◽  
Alen Krajnc ◽  
...  

Background: Due to the global spread of COVID-19, oncology departments across the world rapidly adapted their cancer care protocols, balancing the risk of delaying cancer treatments and risk of COVID-19 exposure. COVID-19 and associated changes may have an impact on psycho-social functioning of cancer patients and survivors. We wanted to understand the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on young people living with and beyond cancer.Method: In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed 177 individuals, aged 18 - 39 years, about the impact of COVID-19 on their cancer care and psychological wellbeing. Participants also reported their information needs relating to COVID-19. Responses were summarized using content analysis approach. Results: This is the first study to examine psychological functioning of young patients and survivors during the first weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic. Close to a third of respondents reported increased levels of psychological distress, and as many as 60% reported feeling more anxious than they did prior to COVID-19. More than half also wanted more information tailored to them as young cancer patients. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic is rapidly evolving and changing the landscape of cancer care. Young people living with cancer are a unique population and might be more vulnerable during this time compared to their healthy peers. There is a need to screen for psychological distress and attend to young people whose cancer care has been delayed. As the lockdown begins to ease, the guidelines about cancer care should be updated according to this population’s needs.


2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 1056-1066
Author(s):  
Rohini D. Naipaul ◽  
Rebecca E. Mercer ◽  
Kelvin K. W. Chan ◽  
Lyndee Yeung ◽  
Leta Forbes ◽  
...  

The COVID-19 pandemic has a significant impact on cancer patients and the delivery of cancer care. To allow clinicians to adapt treatment plans for patients, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) issued a series of interim funding measures for the province’s New Drug Funding Program (NDFP), which covers the cost of most hospital-delivered cancer drugs. To assess the utility of the measures and the need for their continuation, we conducted an online survey of Ontario oncology clinicians. The survey was open 3–25 September 2020 and generated 105 responses. Between April and June 2020, 46% of respondents changed treatment plans for more than 25% of their cancer patients due to the pandemic. Clinicians report broad use of interim funding measures. The most frequently reported strategies used were treatment breaks for stable patients (62%), extending dosing intervals (59%), and deferring routine imaging (56%). Most clinicians anticipate continuing to use these interim funding measures in the coming months. The survey showed that adapting cancer drug funding policies has supported clinical care in Ontario during the pandemic.


Author(s):  
Shirley Lewis ◽  
Lavanya Gurram ◽  
Umesh Velu ◽  
Krishna Sharan

Abstract Introduction: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has significantly challenged the access to cancer care and follow-up for a patient with cancer. Methods: Based on published literature and our experiences, it is reasonable to presume that clinical examination and follow-up visits have been significantly curtailed worldwide in order to adhere to the new norms during the pandemic. Although telephonic and telemedicine consultations may help bridge a few gaps, completely dispensing with in-person consultation has its challenges, especially in low middle-income countries. Telephonic consultations could facilitate triaging of ambulatory cancer patients and allocation of face-to-face consultations for high priority patients. Conclusions: We propose a telephonic consultation-based triaging approach for ambulatory cancer patients in order to identify those needing in-hospital consultations.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (03) ◽  
pp. 260-263
Author(s):  
Monica Irukulla ◽  
Palwai Vinitha Reddy

AbstractOutcomes in cancer patients are strongly influenced by timeliness and quality of multidisciplinary interventions. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to severe disruption in cancer care in many countries. This has necessitated several changes in clinical care and workflow, including resource allocation, team segregation and deferment of many elective procedures. Several international oncological societies have proposed guidelines for the care of patients afflicted with breast cancer during the pandemic with a view to optimize resource allocation and maximize risk versus benefit for the individual and society. Clinicians may utilize these recommendations to adapt patient care, based on the current availability of resources and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in each region. This article discusses the guidelines for care of patients afflicted with breast cancer during the pandemic.


2021 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-165
Author(s):  
Ilaria Pergolini ◽  
I. Ekin Demir ◽  
Christian Stöss ◽  
Klaus Emmanuel ◽  
Robert Rosenberg ◽  
...  

Background: This survey aimed to register changes determined by the COVID-19 pandemic on pancreatic surgery in a specific geographic area (Germany, Austria, and Switzerland) to evaluate the impact of the pandemic and obtain interesting cues for the future. Methods: An online survey was designed using Google Forms focusing on the local impact of the pandemic on pancreatic surgery. The survey was conducted at 2 different time points, during and after the lockdown. Results: Twenty-five respondents (25/56) completed the survey. Many aspects of oncological care have been affected with restrictions and delays: staging, tumor board, treatment selection, postoperative course, adjuvant treatments, outpatient care, and follow-up. Overall, 60% of respondents have prioritized pancreatic cancer patients according to stage, age, and comorbidities, and 40% opted not to operate high-risk patients. However, for 96% of participants, the standards of care were guaranteed. Discussion/Conclusions: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had an important impact on pancreatic cancer surgery in central Europe. Guidelines for prompt interventions and prevention of the spread of viral infections in the surgical environment are needed to avoid a deterioration of care in cancer patients in the event of a second wave or a new pandemic. High-volume centers for pancreatic surgery should be preferred and their activity maintained. Virtual conferences have proven to be efficient during this pandemic and should be implemented in the near future.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12062-12062
Author(s):  
Paris A. Kosmidis ◽  
Christie Lagogianni ◽  
Thanos Kosmidis

12062 Background: Public health authorities advocate vaccinations for the general population, including cancer patients and survivors. Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, its vaccine has been eagerly awaited, but the extent of cancer patients’ willingness to get vaccinated is not clear. As health promotion is crucial for these individuals, it is important to measure and analyze their willingness to receive the vaccine. Methods: A few days after the regulatory approval for the first COVID-19 vaccine, the CareAcross online interactive platforms were used to evaluate the willingness of patients to get vaccinated. Through an online survey, within a few hours, 1106 cancer patients selected either “Yes, I plan to get the vaccine” or “No, I will not get the vaccine”. The patients were from the UK, Germany, France, Spain or Italy; they had been diagnosed with breast, lung, prostate or colorectal cancer. Their responses were analyzed to determine how their cancer diagnosis (including date, metastatic status, and other aspects), and their country of origin, affected their reported willingness to get vaccinated. Results: Overall, 70.6% of patients indicated willingness to get the vaccine (WTV), and 29.4% reported the opposite (NWTV). The strongest determinant of WTV was the patient’s country of origin: patients in the UK, Spain, Italy, Germany and France reported WTV of 84.1%, 64.2%, 58.7%, 47.4% and 38.3%, respectively. The next strongest determinant was the time elapsed since the patient’s diagnosis: for the largest population with available diagnosis date (451 UK patients), the average time since diagnosis for patients with WTV vs NWTV was: breast, 3.5 vs 2.5 years; lung, 1.6 vs 1.4 years; prostate, 2.4 vs 3.3 years; colorectal, 1.9 vs 1.5 years. Among patients from other countries with available diagnosis date: as the time since diagnosis increased, among 148 Italian patients WTV gradually increased; among 94 Spanish patients, WTV substantially decreased; among 85 French patients, WTV gradually decreased; among 50 German patients, WTV substantially increased. There was no significant correlation of WTV percentages with cancer type; metastatic status; triple negative vs non-triple negative among breast cancer patients; non-small cell vs small cell among lung cancer patients. Conclusions: Despite long-standing efforts of the scientific community for health promotion through the COVID-19 vaccine, a substantial percentage of cancer patients reported no willingness to get vaccinated. This appeared to depend on each patient’s country of origin, and the time elapsed since their diagnosis. This patient input was collected shortly after the first vaccine’s approval. With increasing evidence of efficacy and safety through more vaccinations of citizens and patients, willingness is expected to increase. We are in the process of conducting a follow-up survey to track these changes and update the results to be reportable during ASCO.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10549-10549
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Ligibel ◽  
Lori J. Pierce ◽  
Catherine M. Bender ◽  
Tracy E Crane ◽  
Christina Marie Dieli-Conwright ◽  
...  

10549 Background: Obesity and related factors are increasingly associated with increased risk of developing and dying from cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) conducted a survey of cancer patients to assess their experience in receiving recommendations and referrals related to weight, diet and exercise as a part of their cancer care. Methods: An online survey was distributed to potential participants between March and June 2020 via ASCO channels and patient advocacy organizations, with an estimated reach of over 25,000 individuals. Eligibility criteria included being 18 years, living in the US, and having been diagnosed with cancer. Logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with recommendation and referral patterns. Results: In total, 2419 individuals responded to the survey. Most respondents were female (75.5%), 61.8% had an early-stage malignancy, 38.2% had advanced disease, and 49.0% were currently receiving treatment. Breast cancer was the most common cancer type (36.0%). Average BMI was 25.8 kg/m2. The majority of respondents consumed £2 servings of fruits and vegetables per day (50.9%) and exercised £2 times per week (50.4%). Exercise was addressed at most or some oncology visits in 57.5% of respondents, diet in 50.7%, and weight in 28.4%. Referrals were less common: 14.9% of respondents were referred to an exercise program, 25.6% to a dietitian and 4.5% to a weight management program. In multiple regression analyses, racial and ethnicity minority respondents were more likely to receive advice about diet (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.92, 95% CI 1.56-2.38) and weight (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.23-2.17) compared to non-Hispanic whites, individuals diagnosed with cancer in the past 5 yrs (vs > 5 yrs) were more likely to receive advice about exercise (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.23-1.79), and breast cancer patients were more likely to receive advice about exercise (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.11-1.68) and weight (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.03-2.07) than other cancer patients. Overall, 74% of survey respondents had changed their diet or exercise after cancer diagnosis. Respondents reporting that their oncologist spoke to them about increasing exercise or eating healthier foods were more likely to report a change in behavior than those whose oncologists did not (exercise: 79.6% vs 69.0%, P < 0.001; diet 81.1% vs 71.4%, P < 0.001). Respondents whose oncologist had spoken to them about exercise were more likely to exercise > 2 times per week compared to respondents whose oncologists did not address exercise (53.5% vs 44.1%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: In a national survey of oncology patients, slightly more than half of respondents reported attention to diet and exercise during oncology visits. Provider recommendations for diet and exercise were associated with positive changes in these behaviors. Additional attention to diet and exercise as part of oncology visits is needed to help support healthy lifestyle change in cancer patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6594-6594
Author(s):  
Sandeep Sai Voleti ◽  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Carolyn Mead-Harvey ◽  
Rahma M. Warsame ◽  
Rafael Fonseca ◽  
...  

6594 Background: Patient reported financial hardship (FH) in cancer care is a growing challenge for patients, their caregivers and healthcare providers. As treatment costs escalate, it is imperative to develop effective strategies to proactively recognize and mitigate FH within oncology practice. Using automated processes to screen and refer patients to appropriate resources is a potential option. At Mayo Clinic, screening for FH involves using a single financial strain question ‘ How hard is it for you to pay for the very basics like food, housing, medical care, and heating?’ completed by all cancer patients annually as part of the Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) assessment. In this study, we describe the prevalence and predictors for FH (denoted by the answer ‘hard and very hard’) in our patient population. Methods: Patients receiving cancer care at the three Mayo Clinic sites (Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida) who completed the FH screen at least once were included in this study. Demographics (age, gender, race/ ethnicity, insurance, employment status, marital status, and zip code) and disease state data for included patients was extracted from the EMR and Mayo Clinic Cancer Registry. Disease state was categorized by type of cancer (hematological or solid malignancy) and cancer stage. Zip code was used to derive median income, rural/urban residence and distance from the cancer center. Multivariable logistic regression models were utilized to examine factors associated with FH. Results: The final study cohort included 31,969 patients with median age 66 years (IQR 57,73), 51% females, and 76% married. Race/ethnicity composition was 93% White, 3% Black, and 4% Hispanic. 52% of patients had Medicare and 43% had commercial insurance. Other notable factors included 48% retired, 41% working/ students, 76% married, and 72% urban residents. Median time from cancer diagnosis was 1.1 year (IQR 0.1, 3.8) and median income was $64,406 (IQR 53,067, 82,038). 31% of patients had hematological malignancies, 20% of the cancers for which staging information was available were metastatic. FH was reported by 4% (n = 1194) of the patients. A significantly higher likelihood of endorsing FH (p < 0.001 for all) was noted in Hispanic (OR 1.64), Black (OR 1.84), American Indian/Alaskan native (OR 2.02), below median income (OR 1.48), rural (OR 1.17), self-pay (OR 2.77), Medicaid (OR 2.29), Medicare (OR 1.43), unemployed/disabled (OR 2.39), single (OR 2.07), or divorced (OR 2.43) patients. Older age, being retired, and living farther from the cancer center were associated with significantly less likelihood of endorsing FH. Conclusions: Our study successfully leveraged the EMR to identify key sociodemographic groups more likely to report FH. An electronic trigger to flag such patients at high-risk of FH and proactively address FH is currently being developed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document