Covid-19: What is the best approach in gynecological oncology patient management during the coronavirus pandemic?

Effects of COVID-19 fear and anxiety on attitudes towards complementary and alternative medicine use in women with gynecological cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Patients with gynecological cancer commonly use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) methods to cope with the disease. However, despite the existence of treatment strategies, the effect of fear and anxiety caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on attitudes about CAM use is unclear. This study was carried out to investigate the effect of fear and anxiety experienced by patients with gynecological cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic on their attitudes towards the use of CAM.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional and descriptive study that included 177 women with gynecological cancer; participants were recruited from a social networking site for cancer patients in Turkey between June and December 2021. Data were collected using an online survey that included the Personal Information Form, the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale, and the Attitude Towards Holistic Complementary and Alternative Medicine Scale. Descriptive statistics, t-test, Pearson's correlation test, and simple linear and multiple regression analyses were performed to analyze the data.

RESULTS

During the pandemic, 55.4% of the participants reported using CAM methods, but only 22.6% were using CAM before the pandemic. The participants who used CAM during the pandemic also scored higher on the fear of COVID-19 and coronavirus anxiety scales (20.69 ± 5.37 and 13.09 ± 6.29, respectively) compared to the participants who did not use CAM (9.29 ± 2.72 and 6.35 ± 2.06, respectively). Fear of COVID-19 accounted for 52% of the CAM attitude score, while coronavirus anxiety accounted for 15% of the CAM attitude score. Fear of COVID-19 and coronavirus anxiety together accounted for 53% of CAM attitude.

CONCLUSION

Gynecological cancer patients with high levels of COVID-19-related anxiety and fear during the pandemic used CAM more. Given that the psychological effects of the pandemic will continue in the coming years, CAM use should be evaluated as a coping strategy, especially due to the COVID-19-related anxiety and fear experienced by patients with gynecological cancer. While the rational and effective CAM methods should be supported, strategies should be developed to prevent misuse of CAM and its interference in prescribed medical treatments.

Impact of COVID-19 on management of urogynaecology patients: a rapid review of the literature

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted health systems worldwide. There is a continuing need for clinicians to adapt practice to facilitate timely provision of medical care, whilst minimising horizontal transmission. Guidance and recommendations are increasingly available, and this rapid review aimed to provide a timely evidence synthesis on the current recommendations surrounding urogynaecological care.

METHODS

We performed a literature review using PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane and a manual search of national and international societies for management recommendations for urogynaecological patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Nine guidance documents and 17 articles, including 10 reviews, were included. Virtual clinics are recommended for new and follow-up patients, to assess and initiate treatment, as well as triage patients who require face-to-face appointments. Outpatient investigations such as urodynamics and cystoscopy for benign indications can be deferred. Prolapse and continence surgery should be suspended, except in specific circumstances such as procidentia with upper tract complications and failed pessaries. There is no evidence to support a particular route of surgery, but recommendations are made to minimise COVID-19 transmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Urogynaecological patients face particular challenges owing to inherent vulnerabilities of these populations. Behavioural and medical therapies should be recommended as first line options and initiated via virtual or remote clinics, which are integral to management during the COVID-19 pandemic. Expanding the availability and accessibility of technology will be increasingly required. The majority of outpatient and inpatient procedures can be deferred, but the longer-term effects of such practices are unclear.

Nationwide Survey of German Outpatient Gynecologic Oncology Practices during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: Reactions to the First Wave and Future Perspectives

Introduction

In the spring of 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 posed a substantial challenge for countries and their healthcare systems. In Germany, over 70% of all cancer patients are treated in an outpatient setting, so gynecologic oncology practices are the guarantors of optimal patient care. We developed a survey to evaluate the management of gynecologic oncology patients.

Methods

The survey consisted of 38 questions and was sent to the members of the Berufsverband Niedergelassener Gynäkologischer Onkologen in Deutschland e.V. (BNGO), a professional association of gynecologic oncologists in the outpatient sector in Germany.

Results

The survey was completed by 54 out of 133 (41%) gynecologic oncologists from 14 out of 15 (93%) federal states where the BNGO is represented. Facing the pandemic, popular measures were mask requirements (100%), restriction of access to practices (94%), increased number of disinfectant dispensers (85%), installment of panes of acrylic glass (76%), or spatial alterations (67%). For most patients the pandemic had no influence on prioritization of therapies (82%) or prescribed systemic treatments (87%). Despite an increase in perceived psychological burden among the staff (72%), 85% (45/54) of the practices were not offered any additional psychological support.

Discussion and Conclusion

As most cancer patients in Germany are treated in an outpatient setting, a suitable reaction of oncology centers to the new circumstances was crucial to secure optimal treatment and patient care. Nevertheless, the low prioritization of mental health or distress of healthcare workers poses a serious threat to the maintenance of optimal medical care in further waves of the pandemic.