Telemedicine in Community Cancer Care: How Technology Helps Patients With Cancer Navigate a Pandemic

Researcher Experience and Comfort With Telemedicine and Remote Patient Monitoring in Cancer Treatment Trials

BACKGROUND

Since the onset of COVID-19, oncology practices across the US have integrated telemedicine (TM) and remote patient monitoring (RPM) into routine care and clinical trials. The extent of provider experience and comfort with TM/RPM in treatment trials, however, is unknown. We surveyed oncology researchers to assess experience and comfort with TM/RPM.

METHODS

Between April 10 and June 1, 2022, we distributed email surveys to US-based members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) whose member records indicated interest or specialization in clinical research. We collected respondent demographic data, clinical trial experience, workplace characteristics, and comfort and experience with TM/RPM use across trial components in phase I and phase II/III trials. TM/RPM was defined as clinical trial-related healthcare and monitoring for patients geographically separated from trial site.

RESULTS

There were 141 surveys analyzed (5.1% response rate). Ninety percent of respondents had been Principal Investigators, 98% practiced in a norural site. Most respondents had enrolled patients in phase I (82%) and phase II/III trials (99%). Across all phases and trial components, there was a higher frequency of researcher comfort compared to experience. Regarding remote care in treatment trials, 75% reported using TM, RPM, or both. Among these individuals, 62% had never provided remote care to trial patients before the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 spurred the rise of TM/RPM in cancer treatment trials, and some TM/RPM use continues in this context. Among oncology researchers, higher levels of comfort compared with real-world experience with TM/RPM reveal opportunities for expanding TM/RPM policies and guidelines in oncology research.

Telemedicine with special focus on allergic diseases and asthma-Status 2022: An EAACI position paper

Efficacious, effective and efficient communication between healthcare professionals (HCP) and patients is essential to achieve a successful therapeutic alliance. Telemedicine (TM) has been used for decades but during the COVID-19 pandemic its use has become widespread. This position paper aims to describe the terminology and most important forms of TM among HCP and patients and review the existing studies on the uses of TM for asthma and allergy. Besides, the advantages and risks of TM are discussed, concluding that TM application reduces costs and time for both, HCP and patients, but cannot completely replace face-to-face visits for physical examinations and certain tests that are critical in asthma and allergy. From an ethical point of view, it is important to identify those involved in the TM process, ensure confidentiality and use communication channels that fully guarantee the security of the information. Unmet needs and directions for the future regarding implementation, data protection, privacy regulations, methodology and efficacy are described.

Supportive Care for Cancer Patients Via Telehealth: Breaking Bad News and Providing Palliative Care Virtually

ABSTRACT

Delivering oncologic care via telemedicine has presented a unique set of benefits and challenges. Discussions of sensitive topics between patients and providers can be difficult on a virtual platform. Although it was imperative to utilize telemedicine to keep cancer patients safe during the height of the pandemic, its continued use in the postvaccination era has provided important conveniences to both providers and patients. In the case of breaking bad news and end-of-life discussions, however, in-person care has remained the overwhelming preference of both groups. If face-to-face consultation is not possible or feasible in these situations, virtual visits are a viable option to connect oncologists with their patients.

Telemedicine and Cancer Care: Barriers and Strategies to Optimize Delivery

ABSTRACT

Telemedicine holds the potential to transform cancer care delivery and optimize value, access, and quality of care. A transformed regulatory environment coupled with the need to continue medical care despite operational limitations led to the rapid expansion of telemedicine in cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Its utilization has since varied, and it has faced significant challenges. In this review, we will explore the state of telemedicine in cancer care delivery, the challenges it faces, and strategies to enhance its successful implementation.

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.

A pragmatic dialogue amongst stakeholders on the impact of COVID-19 on Irish cancer patients and healthcare services and lessons learned

PURPOSE

COVID-19 disrupted cancer care services in Ireland, from screening and diagnostics to treatments, possibly impacting physical health outcomes owing to delayed diagnosis and treatment changes. This study explores how cancer care and patients in Ireland were affected by COVID-19 from the perspective of Irish policy, clinical and patient stakeholders using a qualitative approach. The findings could inform future strategic and implementation plans for the current challenges faced and lessons learned will be identified.

METHODS

A thematic analysis of a multi-stakeholder online workshop representing policy and clinical and patient stakeholders was completed.

RESULTS

The pandemic exasperated prior challenges including under-resourced services, access barriers, staff shortages and lack of interoperability in information technology (IT) systems. Overall, the measures implemented protected cancer patients from COVID-19; however, some groups were more vulnerable, with apparent demographic and socio-economic inequalities. Many hard-fought gains from the previous decade, in terms of cancer screening, diagnosis and survivorship, were eroded. As we transition to the peri-COVID-19 period, staff burnout, poor IT infrastructure and lack of good quality data must be addressed to minimise further disruptions and restore and enhance cancer services.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, innovations and measures adopted during the pandemic protected cancer patients; however, some groups were particularly vulnerable, and inequalities may have widened further. Only proven effective and efficient innovations introduced during the pandemic should be retained and enhanced. Good quality data is needed to inform such decisions when choosing amongst them.

Sociodemographic Inequities in Telemedicine Use Among US Patients Initiating Treatment in Community Cancer Centers During the Ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic, 2020-2022

PURPOSE

Although telemedicine was seen as a way to improve cancer care during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, there is limited information regarding inequities in its uptake. This study assessed sociodemographic factors associated with telemedicine use among patients initiating treatment for 20 common cancers.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used deidentified electronic health record-derived patient data from a nationwide network of community cancer practices, linked to area-level Census information. We included adults (age 18 years and older) who initiated first-line systemic cancer treatment between March 2020 and December 2022 (follow-up through March 2023). Exposures include race/ethnicity, insurance status, and area-level social determinants of health (eg, block group socioeconomic status [SES]). The outcome was telemedicine use within 90 days after treatment initiation. Associations were examined using logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, performance status, stage, and cancer type.

RESULTS

This study included 36,993 patients (48.6% women; median age, 69 years), of whom 15.1% used telemedicine services. Black (12.2%; odds ratio [OR], 0.78 [95% CI, 0.70 to 0.88]) and uninsured (9.2%; OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.73]) patients were less likely to use telemedicine services than their White and well-insured counterparts (14.5% and 15.0%, respectively). Patients in rural (9.7%; OR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.46 to 0.57]), suburban (11.8%; OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.74]), and low SES areas (9.9%; OR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.43]) were less also likely to use telemedicine than their counterparts in urban (16.6%) or high SES (21.6%) areas.

CONCLUSION

Nearly one sixth of patients initiating cancer treatment during the pandemic used telemedicine, but there were substantial inequities. The proliferation of telemedicine may perpetuate cancer care inequities if marginalized populations do not have equitable access.

COVID-19 preparedness and response in rural and remote areas: A scoping review

This scoping review used the Arksey and O'Malley approach to explore COVID-19 preparedness and response in rural and remote areas to identify lessons to inform future health preparedness and response planning. A search of scientific and grey literature for rural COVID-19 preparedness and responses identified 5 668 articles published between 2019 and early 2022. A total of 293 articles were included, of which 160 (54.5%) were from high income countries and 106 (36.2%) from middle income countries. Studies focused mostly on the Maintenance of Essential Health Services (63; 21.5%), Surveillance, epidemiological investigation, contact tracing and adjustment of public health and social measures (60; 20.5%), Coordination and Planning (32; 10.9%); Case Management (30; 10.2%), Social Determinants of Health (29; 10%) and Risk Communication (22; 7.5%). Rural health systems were less prepared and national COVID-19 responses were often not adequately tailored to rural areas. Promising COVID-19 responses involved local leaders and communities, were collaborative and multisectoral, and engaged local cultures. Non-pharmaceutical interventions were applied less, support for access to water and sanitation at scale was weak, and more targeted approaches to the isolation of cases and quarantine of contacts were preferable to blanket lockdowns. Rural pharmacists, community health workers and agricultural extension workers assisted in overcoming shortages of health professionals. Vaccination coverage was hindered by weaker rural health systems. Digital technology enabled better coordination, communication, and access to health services, yet for some was inaccessible. Rural livelihoods and food security were affected through disruptions to local labour markets, farm produce markets and input supply chains. Important lessons include the need for rural proofing national health preparedness and response and optimizing synergies between top-down planning with localised planning and coordination. Equity-oriented rural health systems strengthening and action on rural social determinants is essential to better prepare for and respond to future outbreaks.

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.

Patient and carer experiences of lung cancer referral pathway in a regional health service: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer referral pathways aim to reduce delays and improve referral patterns of people with suspected lung cancer.

AIM

As part of implementing a lung cancer referral pathway at a regional Australian hospital, this study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of people with lung cancer and their carers.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were used to elicit data for thematic analysis in this cross-sectional descriptive qualitative study. Patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer and their carers at a regional academic cancer centre were invited to participate in interviews. Five interviews were conducted face-to-face, and 14 interviews were conducted by telephone (as per interviewee preference). Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed and qualitatively analysed. Descriptive phrases were used to generate initial inductive codes and themes.

RESULTS

Nineteen participants approached agreed to take part in the study. Factors that positively impacted the care experience were good communication, timeliness and patient advocacy and support. Improper communication, long waiting times for investigations and appointments, uncertainty about the process and inconsistent advice from providers negatively impacted the care experience. Participants preferred face-to-face or video-linked consultations over telephone consultations.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the experiences of rural and regional patients and carers with the lung cancer referral pathway is important to improve quality of care. Implementing changes to the referral pathway to improve patient and carer experiences needs to be an ongoing quality improvement exercise.

Exploring the Use of a Digital Platform for Cancer Patients to Report Their Demographics, Disease and Therapy Characteristics, Age, and Educational Disparities: An Early-Stage Feasibility Study

INTRODUCTION

The increasing burden of cancer, the development of novel therapies, and the COVID-19 pandemic have made cancer care more complex. Digital innovation was then pushed toward developing platforms to facilitate access to cancer care. Age, education, and other disparities were, however, shown to limit the use of the digital health innovation. The aim of this early-stage feasibility study was to assess whether Greek cancer patients would register at CureCancer and self-report their demographics, disease and therapy characteristics, and socioeconomic issues. The study was organized by the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncology.

METHODS

Patients from nine cancer centers were invited to register on the CureCancer platform and complete an anonymous questionnaire on demographics, disease and therapy characteristics, and socioeconomic issues. Patients were also encouraged to upload, in a secure area for them, their medical files and share them with their physicians. They were then asked to comment on their experience of registration and how easy it was to upload their medical files.

RESULTS

Of the 159 patients enrolled, 144 (90.56%) registered, and 114 of those (79.16%) completed the questionnaire, suggesting that the study is feasible. Users' median age was 54.5 years, and 86.8% of them were university and high school graduates. Most patients (79.8%) reported their specific type of cancer diagnosis, and all reported their therapy characteristics. Breast and lung cancers were the most common. A total of 87 patients (76.3%) reported being on active cancer therapy, 46 (40.4%) had metastatic disease, and 51 (44.7%) received supportive care medications. Eighty-one (71.05%) patients received prior cancer therapies, and twenty-seven recalled prior supportive care medications. All patients reported visiting non-oncology Health Care Professionals during the study. Nineteen of 72 (26.39%) patients who worked prior to cancer diagnosis changed work status; 49 (42.98) patients had children under 24 years; and 16 (14%) patients lived alone. Nine (7.9%) patients were members of patient associations. Registration was "much/very much" easy for 98 (86.0%) patients, while 67 (58.8%) had difficulties uploading their files. Patients commented on the well-organized data access, improved communication, feeling safe, medication adherence, interventions from a distance, and saving time and money. Over 80% of patients "preferred the digital way".

DISCUSSION

A total of 114 patients succeeded in registering on the digital platform and reporting their demographics, disease and therapy characteristics, and socioeconomic issues. Age and educational disparities were disclosed and highlighted the need for educational programs to help older people and people of lower education use digital innovation. Health care policy measures would support patients' financial burden associated with work changes, living alone, and children under 24 years old at school or college. Policy actions would motivate patients to increase their participation in patient associations. According to the evidence DEFINED framework, the number of patients, and the focus on enrollment, engagement, and user experience, the study fulfills actionability level criterion 1.

Telemedicine Use for Oncology Clinic Visits at a Large Medical Center During the Onset of COVID-19

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic created an unprecedented surge toward telemedicine. This project investigated oncology clinic telemedicine utilization across the Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) from January to October 2020. Poorer prognosis and care of oncology patients is expected to be associated with increased emergency department (ED) visits. Methods: January to October 2020 clinic visits were identified from the VUMC's Electronic Data Warehouse (EDW). Oncology patients were identified by ICD-10 code and their EDW ED visit data were extracted. Joinpoint piecewise linear regression evaluated trends in tele-oncology visits. VUMC ED visits were compared for patients who did versus did not use telemedicine for oncology clinic visits. A Welch's two-tailed t-test investigated differences in ED visits/patient between these cohorts (α < 0.05). Results: A sharp increase in tele-oncology clinic visits from January to April 2020 (Monthly Percent Change = 396.26%) was followed by a steady decrease from April to October 2020 (Monthly Percent Change = -20.93%). The difference between these two trends was significant (p < 0.002). Of 18 cancer sites, breast cancers had the highest proportion (29.04%) of tele-oncology visits. There was no significant difference in January to October 2020 ED usage for oncology patients who did (0.40 ED visits/patient) versus did not (0.38 ED visits/patient) utilize telemedicine (p = 0.69). A total of 9.64% of oncology clinic visits from January to October 2020 were telemedicine visits, just below the 13.0% institutional average. Discussion: At the VUMC, tele-oncology spiked in March and April 2020 before decreasing from April to October 2020. Breast cancer clinics were most likely to use tele-oncology. Telemedicine use was not associated with increased ED visits for oncology patients, suggesting telemedicine as an alternative for routine oncology clinics. Oncology clinic telemedicine usage was 18th-highest among 33 specialties at our institutions, and among the lowest of nonsurgical specialties.

Ambulatory Care Pharmacists' Perception of Telehealth Services in the Wake of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Identifying Barriers and Best Practices for the Older Patient and Beyond

Background Telehealth practice in the ambulatory care pharmacy setting has seen extensive expansion because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Historically, evaluations of pharmacy-driven telehealth services have shown positive patient outcomes and high patient satisfaction, but little was known about pharmacist provider satisfaction. Additionally, barriers to telehealth practice have been highlighted with the widespread expansion of telehealth. With the push to continue high rates of telehealth use postpandemic, evaluation of current ambulatory care pharmacist telehealth practices is needed. Objective This study aimed to evaluate ambulatory care pharmacists' perception of the telehealth services they provide, including barriers patients experience, solutions to address these barriers, and perceptions of the quality of care provided through telehealth. Methods Ambulatory care pharmacists in Washington State were recruited to participate in a 16-item key informant interview. The Technology Acceptance Model was the theoretical framework applied to the interview questions and used to evaluate common themes emerging from the interviews. Results Common themes from the interviews included positive and negative attributes to telehealth care, pharmacist preferences for a video telehealth platform, technology access and use barriers for patients accessing telehealth, technology support from the provider's organization as an avenue to address these barriers, and patient-specific characteristics allowing high-quality health care through telehealth. Conclusion Using these described common ideals, ambulatory care pharmacist telehealth best practices can be developed, including a personalized approach to this care. As we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic, actively addressing common barriers as well as successfully identifying appropriate telehealth candidates will be essential in providing high-quality virtual care.

Telemedicine use among patients with metastatic breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: Differences by race, age, and region

PURPOSE

Our objective was to describe differences in telemedicine use among women with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) by race, age, and geographic region.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of women with recurrent or de novo mBC treated in US community cancer practices that initiated a new line of therapy between March 2020 and February 2021. Multivariable modified Poisson regression models were used to calculate adjusted rate ratios (RR) and robust 95% confidence intervals (CI) associated with telemedicine visits within 90 days of therapy initiation.

RESULTS

Overall, among 3412 women with mBC, 751 (22%) patients had telemedicine visits following therapy initiation, with lower risks observed among older women (<50 years: 24%; 50-64 years: 22%; 65-74 years: 21%; ≥75 years: 20%). Greater telemedicine use was observed among Asian women (35%) compared to White (21%), Black (18%), and Hispanic (21%) women. Fewer telemedicine visits occurred in Southern (12%) and Midwestern (17%) states versus Northeastern (37%) or Western (36%) states. In multivariable models, women ages ≥75 years had significantly lower risks of telemedicine visits (RR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.62-0.95) compared to ages <50 years. Compared to patients in Northeastern states, women in Midwestern (RR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.37-0.57) and Southern (RR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.26-0.37) states had significantly lower risks of telemedicine visits; but not women in Western states (RR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.83-1.12). No statistically significant differences in telemedicine use were found between racial groups in overall multivariable models.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of community cancer practices, older mBC patients and those living in Southern and Midwestern states were less likely to have telemedicine visits. Preferences for communication and delivery of care may have implications for measurement of exposures and endpoints in pharmacoepidemiologic studies of cancer patients.

"Double whammy": a rapid review of rural vs urban psychosocial cancer experiences and telehealth service in five countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Cancer is a long-term condition with biopsychosocial components. People with cancer living in rural areas can have poorer treatment outcomes and higher rates of unmet psychosocial needs than those in urban areas. Cancer, as opposed to other chronic conditions, poses a unique challenge in this current COVID-19 pandemic context, given immunocompromised states of patients and long-term survivor treatment effects. The disaggregated impact of psychosocial issues potentiated by the pandemic on rural vs. urban cancer populations is yet to be quantified. This rapid review investigates whether (i) people with cancer are experiencing pandemic-related psychosocial impacts, (ii) these impacts are equivalent in urban and rural locations, and (iii) whether the rapid uptake of telehealth mitigates or reinforces any identified impacts.

Method

A rapid review was conducted for literature published between December 2019 and 13 August 2021.

Results

Fifteen papers were included, incorporating evidence from five countries. The available literature suggests people affected by cancer living in rural areas are evidencing disproportionate psychosocial impacts of COVID-19, compounding cancer experiences. Despite its widespread and necessary use during the pandemic, telehealth was identified as an additional challenge for rural people with cancer.

Conclusions

Clinicians working with rural people affected by cancer should ensure recognition of the greater risks of psychosocial concerns in their rural patients, and reduced access to health services. Whilst telehealth and other remote technologies are useful and necessary in this pandemic era, clinicians should consider whether its use benefits their rural clients or reinforces existing disparities.

Access to telehealth services for colorectal cancer patients in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic yielded rapid telehealth deployment to improve healthcare access, including for surgical patients.

METHODS

We conducted a secret shopper study to assess telehealth availability for new patient and follow-up colorectal cancer care visits in a random national sample of Commission on Cancer accredited hospitals and investigated predictive facility-level factors.

RESULTS

Of 397 hospitals, 302 (76%) offered telehealth for colorectal cancer patients (75% for follow-up, 42% for new patients). For new patients, NCI-designated Cancer Programs offered telehealth more frequently than Integrated Network (OR: 0.20, p = 0.01), Academic Comprehensive (OR: 0.18, p = 0.001), Comprehensive Community (OR: 0.10, p < 0.001), and Community (OR: 0.11, p < 0.001) Cancer Programs. For follow-up, above average timeliness of care hospitals offered telehealth more frequently than average hospitals (OR: 2.87, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified access disparities and predictive factors for telehealth availability for colorectal cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. These factors should be considered when constructing telehealth policies.

Breast Medical Oncologists' Perspectives of Telemedicine for Breast Cancer Care: A Survey Study

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic forced rapid adoption of telemedicine (TM) for breast oncology visits in the United States, but the appropriate role of postpandemic TM is uncertain. We sought to understand physician and advance practice practitioner perspectives on the use of TM for outpatient breast cancer care through an electronically administered survey.

METHODS

Breast medical oncology clinicians at two academic cancer centers and five satellite locations affiliated with the Dana Farber Cancer Institute and the Massachusetts General Cancer Center were invited to respond to a 21-question survey administered in September 2021 about clinicians' perceptions and attitudes toward TM during the previous 12 months.

RESULTS

Of the 71 survey invitations, 51 clinicians (36 physicians and 15 advance practice practitioners) provided survey responses (response rate = 72%). Ninety-two percent of respondents (n = 47) agreed that TM visits enhance patient care. Ninety-two percent of respondents (n = 46) also agreed that TM is valuable for early-stage breast cancer follow-up visits. Most respondents felt that there was no difference between TM and face-to-face (F2F) visits when it came to patient adherence, ease of ordering tests, ease of accessing patient records, and workflow outside of the visit (82%, 82%, 78%, and 53%, respectively). Fifty-one percent of respondents (n = 26) said that TM was better for timely access to follow-up appointments. Most respondents said that F2F visits were better for seeing physical problems, personal connection with patients, overall quality of visits, and patient-physician communication (100%, 75%, 65%, and 63%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Breast clinicians believe that TM is a valuable tool to enhance outpatient breast cancer care. TM was felt to be appropriate for routine follow-up visits and second opinion consultations and is as good as or better than F2F visits for several routine aspects of breast cancer care.

Geriatric patient outcomes in a multidisciplinary central nervous system community hospital clinic for radiation oncology and neurosurgery (RADIANS)

INTRODUCTION

Management of older adult patients with central nervous system (CNS) cancers requires a patient-centric, multidisciplinary approach. Assessment of neurosurgical and radiation treatment outcomes can assist in establishing guidelines for this patient population. We previously reported on the RADIANS clinic, a novel community hospital-based multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) for CNS cancer care, providing simultaneous radiation oncology and neurosurgery evaluation in a same-day, single-setting clinic. We now provide a focused analysis of our older adult patient population and recommendations for triage and standardization of care.

METHODS

Consecutive older adult patients (age ≥ 65) evaluated at the RADIANS clinic for CNS disease were identified and retrospectively reviewed. Observed 30-day neurosurgical outcomes were compared to predicted outcomes determined by the American College of Physicians NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator. One-sample binomial exact tests were used to evaluate binary outcome measures. A two-sample t-test was used to evaluate the length of hospital stay. Brier Scores were calculated to assess the deviation between predicted probabilities and observed outcomes for binary outcome measures. Overall survival at 90 days was reported.

RESULTS

Fifty-six older adult patients with malignant (42/56) and benign (14/56) CNS disease were evaluated. Mean distance traveled for multidisciplinary evaluation at the RADIANS clinic was 43.4 miles. There was no incidence of radiation-induced toxicity. Mean length of hospital stay for RADIANS patients was significantly shorter by about 1.5 to 3.5 days (95% CI). There was no statistically significant difference for other outcome measures, however, Brier Scores demonstrated that NSQIP was not a good predictive tool for any or serious complications, UTI, venous thromboembolism, return to OR, readmission, or death in our cohort. Local tumor control rate and progression-free survival at 90 days were 97.4% and 76.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first report of CNS disease outcomes in older adult patients evaluated by radiation oncology and neurosurgery at a community hospital-based MDC. We observed minimal adverse radiation outcomes and high tumor control in our cohort. Findings show significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay for patients evaluated and managed at the RADIANS clinic.

Mitigating the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Adult Cancer Patients through Telehealth Adoption: A Systematic Review

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the delivery of life-saving and life-prolonging health services for oncology care and supporting services was delayed and, in some cases, completely halted, as national health services globally shifted their attention and resources towards the pandemic response. Prior to March 2020, telehealth was starting to change access to health services. However, the onset of the global pandemic may mark a tipping point for telehealth adoption in healthcare delivery. We conducted a systematic review of literature published between January 2020 and March 2021 examining the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adult cancer patients. The review's inclusion criteria focused on the economic, social, health, and psychological implications of COVID-19 on cancer patients and the availability of telehealth services emerged as a key theme. The studies reviewed revealed that the introduction of new telehealth services or the expansion of existing telehealth occurred to support and enable the continuity of oncology and related services during this extraordinary period. Our analysis points to several strengths and weaknesses associated with telehealth adoption and use amongst this cohort. Evidence indicates that while telehealth is not a panacea, it can offer a "bolstering" solution during a time of disruption to patients' access to essential cancer diagnostic, treatment, and aftercare services. The innovative use of telehealth has created opportunities to reimagine the delivery of healthcare services beyond COVID-19.

Patients’ Experiences with Cancer Care: Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic heightened the psychosocial impact of a cancer diagnosis as patients face concerns about the risk of infection and serious disease and uncertainties about the impact on their treatment. We conducted an online survey (n = 317) and focus groups (n = 19) with patients to examine their experiences with cancer care during the pandemic. Most survey respondents (68%) reported one or more disruptions or delays in care, including appointments switched to telehealth (49%). Patients perceived both benefits (e.g., convenience) and drawbacks (e.g., more impersonal) to telehealth. For many patients, COVID-19-related restrictions on bringing family members to support them during appointments was a major concern and left them feeling alone and vulnerable during treatment. Patients’ self-reported coping during the pandemic was positively associated with age, education, and income (P < .05 for each) and better communication with their doctors during telehealth sessions (P < .001). Study findings highlight the importance of patient-centered care and communication to help patients cope with the challenges of the pandemic. Further research is needed to develop guidelines for use of telehealth as part of patient-centered cancer care.

Use of Telemedicine in Care of Hematologic Malignancy Patients: Challenges and Opportunities

Purpose of Review

For nearly 20 years, oncology specialty practices have been working to integrate telemedicine technologies into standard patient care models. However, hematology practices have been slower to adopt telemedicine due to traditional care models that rely on interdisciplinary regional care centers and their ability to provide comprehensive and centralized services. Patients have traditionally been able to access high-quality medical care, diagnostics, supportive care, and clinical trials from these regional care centers, but they are required to attend frequent in-person visits to access these services. Rural and underserved patients experience more barriers than their urban counterparts to access the same level of care.

Recent Findings

The COVID-19 pandemic has elevated telemedicine into the forefront of care, highlighting both promise and limitations to incorporating telemedicine into specialty hematology care.

Summary

Hematologists should consider the benefits of incorporating telemedicine technologies into standard-of-care practices to promote patient-centered care and provide equal access to all patient populations.

Telemedicine in Cancer Care Beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic: Oncology 2.0?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This paper summarizes early experiences of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic, the patient and physician experience, limitations in accessibility introduced by telemedicine, and the opportunities and anticipated sustained role of telemedicine for cancer care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research from a wide range of oncology facilities consistently demonstrates the feasibility of delivering telemedicine services over audio (telephone) and/or video platforms. Emerging work highlights that telemedicine is well suited for a subset of patients and clinical settings and that there are methods by which current disparities could potentially be ameliorated. Several current uncertainties limit the broad applicability of telemedicine longitudinally. Early responses to the pandemic that included rapid introduction of telemedicine demonstrated the feasibility of audio- and video-based platforms that achieved promising utility, while simultaneously demonstrating disparities based on patient characteristics and infrastructural support. Its long-term role will likely depend greatly on reimbursement and regulatory reform.

Oncology patients' communication experiences during COVID-19: comparing telehealth consultations to in-person visits

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic created significant disruptions in cancer care, much of which was transitioned to telehealth. Because telehealth alters the way clinicians and patients interact with one another, this investigation examined patients' perceptions of their communication with clinicians during the pandemic.

METHOD

Patients were recruited from the Cancer Support Community, Fight Colorectal Cancer, and a market research firm to participate in an online survey. In addition to demographic and health-related information, respondents completed measures of patient-centered communication and evaluated how their communication in telehealth sessions compared with in-person visits.

RESULTS

From October to December 2020, 227 respondents (65.6% female, 64.6% Non-Hispanic White, 33.5% had 6 or more telehealth sessions, 55% were 50 or older) reported having some of their cancer care provided via telehealth. Respondents who were of racial/ethnic minorities, male, had more telehealth sessions, or had poorer mental health reported less patient-centered communication with clinicians. Most patients thought communication in telehealth sessions was "about the same" as in-person visits with respect to good communication (59%). However, patients thinking communication in telehealth sessions was "better" than in-person visits were more likely to be Hispanic (49%), Non-Hispanic Black (41%), under 50 years of age (32%), male (40%), and had more telehealth sessions (34%).

CONCLUSION

Respondents reporting less patient-centered communication during the pandemic-e.g., persons of racial/ethnic minorities and males-were also more likely to evaluate communication in telehealth sessions as better than in-person visits. Further research is needed to understand reasons underlying this finding. Cancer care clinicians should take into account patient preferences regarding telehealth care, which may be particularly important for racial and ethnic minority patients.

The Utilization and Benefits of Telehealth Services by Health Care Professionals Managing Breast Cancer Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Telehealth is the delivery of many health care services and technologies to individuals at different geographical areas and is categorized as asynchronously or synchronously. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused major disruptions in health care delivery to breast cancer (BCa) patients and there is increasing demand for telehealth services. Globally, telehealth has become an essential means of communication between patient and health care provider. The application of telehealth to the treatment of BCa patients is evolving and increasingly research has demonstrated its feasibility and effectiveness in improving clinical, psychological and social outcomes. Two areas of telehealth that have significantly grown in the past decade and particularly since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic are telerehabilitation and teleoncology. These two technological systems provide opportunities at every stage of the cancer care continuum for BCa patients. We conducted a literature review that examined the use of telehealth services via its various modes of delivery among BCa patients particularly in areas of screening, diagnosis, treatment modalities, as well as satisfaction among patients and health care professionals. The advantages of telehealth models of service and delivery challenges to patients in remote areas are discussed.

Impact of telemedicine adoption on accessibility and time to treatment in patients with thoracic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

To ensure safe delivery of oncologic care during the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has been rapidly adopted. However, little data exist on the impact of telemedicine on quality and accessibility of oncologic care. This study assessed whether conducting an office visit for thoracic oncology patients via telemedicine affected time to treatment initiation and accessibility.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with thoracic malignancies seen by a multidisciplinary team during the first surge of COVID-19 cases in Philadelphia (March 1 to June 30, 2020). Patients with an index visit for a new phase of care, defined as a new diagnosis, local recurrence, or newly discovered metastatic disease, were included.

Results

240 distinct patients with thoracic malignancies were seen: 132 patients (55.0%) were seen initially in-person vs 108 (45.0%) via telemedicine. The majority of visits were for a diagnosis of a new thoracic cancer (87.5%). Among newly diagnosed patients referred to the thoracic oncology team, the median time from referral to initial visit was significantly shorter amongst the patients seen via telemedicine vs. in-person (median 5.0 vs. 6.5 days, p < 0.001). Patients received surgery (32.5%), radiation (24.2%), or systemic therapy (30.4%). Time from initial visit to treatment initiation by modality did not differ by telemedicine vs in-person: surgery (22 vs 16 days, p = 0.47), radiation (27.5 vs 27.5 days, p = 0.86, systemic therapy (15 vs 13 days, p = 0.45).

Conclusions

Rapid adoption of telemedicine allowed timely delivery of oncologic care during the initial surge of the COVID19 pandemic by a thoracic oncology multi-disciplinary clinic.

Oncologist Perspectives on Telemedicine for Patients With Cancer: A National Comprehensive Cancer Network Survey

PURPOSE

The use of telemedicine expanded dramatically in March 2020 following the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to assess oncologist perspectives on telemedicine's present and future roles (both phone and video) for patients with cancer.

METHODS

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Electronic Health Record (EHR) Oncology Advisory Group formed a Workgroup to assess the state of oncology telemedicine and created a 20-question survey. NCCN EHR Oncology Advisory Group members e-mailed the survey to providers (surgical, hematology, gynecologic, medical, and radiation oncology physicians and clinicians) at their home institution.

RESULTS

Providers (N = 1,038) from 26 institutions responded in Summer 2020. Telemedicine (phone and video) was compared with in-person visits across clinical scenarios (n = 766). For reviewing benign follow-up data, 88% reported video and 80% reported telephone were the same as or better than office visits. For establishing a personal connection with patients, 24% and 7% indicated video and telephone, respectively, were the same as or better than office visits. Ninety-three percent reported adverse outcomes attributable to telemedicine visits never or rarely occurred, whereas 6% indicated they occasionally occurred (n = 801). Respondents (n = 796) estimated 46% of postpandemic visits could be virtual, but challenges included (1) lack of patient access to technology, (2) inadequate clinical workflows to support telemedicine, and (3) insurance coverage uncertainty postpandemic.

CONCLUSION

Telemedicine appears effective across a variety of clinical scenarios. Based on provider assessment, a substantial fraction of visits for patients with cancer could be effectively and safely conducted using telemedicine. These findings should influence regulatory and infrastructural decisions regarding telemedicine postpandemic for patients with cancer.

Colorectal Cancer Care and Patients' Perceptions Before and During COVID-19: Implications for Subsequent SARS-CoV-2 Infection Waves

Background

Changes in colorectal cancer (CRC) care planning because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and associated health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and well-being of patients with CRC are unknown. We report changes in CRC care and patient-reported outcomes including HRQoL, distress, and loneliness during the first wave of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

Methods

In April 2020, 4984 patients included in the nationwide Prospective Dutch Colorectal Cancer cohort were invited to complete a COVID-19–specific questionnaire, together with the validated European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), De Jong Gierveld, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Clinical data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Scores were compared with the year prior to COVID-19 and with an age- and sex-matched control population during COVID-19.

Results

In total, 3247 (65.1%) patients responded between April and June 2020. Of the patients, 17% had canceled, postponed, or changed hospital visits to a telephone or video consult, and 5.3% had adjusted, postponed, or canceled treatment. Compared with controls, patients reported worse HRQoL but comparable distress and less social loneliness (patients = 21.2%; controls = 32.9%). Compared with pre–COVID-19, clinically meaningful deterioration of HRQoL was more prevalent in patients with changes in cancer care planning than in patients without changes. Prior to undergoing or currently undergoing treatment and infection worries were associated with lower HRQoL.

Conclusions

CRC patients reported equal anxiety and depression but worse HRQoL than the control population. Changes in care planning were associated with deterioration of HRQoL and increased anxiety. In case of 1 or more risk factors, health-care specialists should discuss (mental) health status and possible support during future SARS-CoV-2 infection waves or comparable pandemics.

Delivering Equitable Care to Underserved Neuro-oncology Populations

It is widely recognized that subspecialized multidisciplinary care improves neuro-oncology outcomes. Optimizing patient outcomes relies on the expertise of the treating physicians, neuroradiology and neuropathology, and supportive services familiar with common neurologic syndromes that occur after brain tumor diagnosis and treatment. Despite an increasing number of providers, patient access to specialized multidisciplinary care and clinical trials remains limited. Barriers to equitable health care exist across the United States, with marginalized communities being impacted disproportionately. Such disparity causes increased morbidity and mortality for patients from backgrounds with various elements of diversity. Limited attention to this inequity has resulted in an incomplete understanding of the spectrum of experiences that patients with neuro-oncologic diseases encounter. Clinical trials represent the highest standard and quality of care in medicine, but inclusion of under-represented and underserved groups consistently lags behind counterpart participants from majority racial and ethnic groups. Through provider education as it pertains to issues from bias and health literacy to increasing clinical trial enrollment and offering opportunities through telemedicine, opportunities for improving access to high-quality neuro-oncologic care are explored.

Meeting the Challenges in Cancer Care Management During the SARS-Cov-2 Pandemic: A Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has overwhelmed the capacity of healthcare systems worldwide. Cancer patients, in particular, are vulnerable and oncology departments drastically needed to modify their care systems and established new priorities. We evaluated the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on the activity of a single cancer center.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of (i) volumes of oncological activities (2020 vs 2019), (ii) patients' perception rate of the preventive measures, (iii) patients' SARS-CoV-2 infections, clinical signs thereof, and (iv) new diagnoses made during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

RESULTS

As compared with a similar time frame in 2019, the overall activity in total numbers of outpatient chemotherapy administrations and specialist visits was not statistically different (P = .961 and P = .252), while inpatient admissions decreased for both medical oncology and thoracic oncology (18% (P = .0018) and 44% (P < .0001), respectively). Cancer diagnosis plummeted (-34%), but no stage shift could be demonstrated.Acceptance and adoption of hygienic measures was high, as measured by a targeted questionnaire (>85%). However, only 46.2% of responding patients regarded telemedicine, although widely deployed, as an efficient surrogate to a consultation.Thirty-three patients developed SARS-CoV-2, 27 were hospitalized, and 11 died within this time frame. These infected patients were younger, current smokers, and suffered more comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective cohort analysis adds to the evidence that continuation of active cancer therapy and specialist visits is feasible and safe with the implementation of telemedicine. These data further confirm the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on cancer care management, cancer diagnosis, and impact of infection on cancer patients.

Telemedicine visits in an established multidisciplinary central nervous system clinic for radiation oncology and neurosurgery (RADIANS) in a community hospital setting

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of telemedicine visits, compared to in-person visits, on patient satisfaction in an established community hospital-based multidisciplinary central nervous system (CNS) clinic.

METHODS

Telemedicine options - virtual visits and teleconferencing - were introduced in July 2020. Both radiation oncologist and neurosurgeon were simultaneously present for the telemedicine visit. Descriptive patient demographics, survey responses, and travel time and distance calculations were analyzed. Satisfaction score was compared to previously published data.

RESULTS

A total of twenty-five telemedicine visits (n=22 video; n=3 phone) were completed since July 2020. Patient demographics are as follows: mean age was 59 years (range=22-81), women (9) and men (16), repeat telemedicine visits n=10, malignant CNS disease (17) and benign disease (5). Mean one-way distance traveled was 165.07 miles (median=114; range=0.8-358). Mean roundtrip travel time was estimated at 5h 5min. Mean telemedicine visit duration was 15.3 mins (range=4-46). Mean patient satisfaction score for telemedicine visits was 4.84.

CONCLUSION

Patients who opted for the telemedicine visits found them just as effective as in-person visits, saving time and travel costs as well as ensuring patient safety during the current COVID-19 pandemic. The telemedicine visit platform facilitates the multidisciplinary clinic model and should be considered for more widespread utilization (Tab. 3, Fig. 1, Ref. 18).