1
|
Toni E, Ayatollahi H. An insight into the use of telemedicine technology for cancer patients during the Covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2024; 24:104. [PMID: 38641567 PMCID: PMC11027268 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-024-02507-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2024] [Indexed: 04/21/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esmaeel Toni
- Student Research Committee, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Haleh Ayatollahi
- Health Management and Economics Research Center, Health Management Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Levine R, Kahn RM, Perez L, Brewer J, Ratner S, Li X, Yeoshoua E, Frey MK. Cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: a review of barriers and breakthroughs. Fam Cancer 2024:10.1007/s10689-024-00373-4. [PMID: 38530571 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-024-00373-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2023] [Accepted: 03/09/2024] [Indexed: 03/28/2024]
Abstract
Germline genetic sequencing is now at the forefront of cancer treatment and preventative medicine. Cascade genetic testing, or the testing of at-risk relatives, is extremely promising as it offers genetic testing and potentially life-saving risk-reduction strategies to a population exponentially enriched for the risk of carrying a cancer-associated pathogenic variant. However, many relatives do not complete cascade testing due to barriers that span individual, relationship, healthcare community, and societal/policy domains. We have reviewed the published research on cascade testing. Our aim is to evaluate barriers to cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes and explore strategies to mitigate these barriers, with the goal of promoting increased uptake of cascade genetic testing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel Levine
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, HCA Florida Brandon, Brandon, FL, USA.
| | - Ryan M Kahn
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Luiza Perez
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jesse Brewer
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samantha Ratner
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Xuan Li
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Effi Yeoshoua
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Melissa K Frey
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
- Genetics and Personalized Cancer Prevention Program, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lichten L, Murden R, Ali N, Bellcross C. Genetic counselors' perceptions of student supervision across service delivery models. J Genet Couns 2023; 32:1314-1324. [PMID: 37095650 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1711] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2022] [Revised: 02/26/2023] [Accepted: 03/13/2023] [Indexed: 04/26/2023]
Abstract
Genetic counseling (GC) services are increasingly delivered by phone or video, resulting in more telehealth student rotations. The purpose of this study was to describe genetic counselors' utilization of telehealth for student supervision and to compare how their comfort, preferences, and perception of the difficulty of selected student supervision competencies vary between phone, video, and in-person student supervision. In 2021, patient-facing genetic counselors in North America with ≥1-year GC experience who supervised ≥3 GC students in the last 3 years received an invitation via the American Board of Genetic Counseling or the Association of GC Program Directors listservs to complete a 26-item online questionnaire. There were 132 responses eligible for analysis. Demographics were fairly consistent with the National Society of Genetic Counselors Professional Status Survey. The majority of participants used more than one service delivery model to provide GC services (93%) and supervise students (89%). Six supervisory competencies related to the student-supervisor communication (Eubanks HIggins et al., 2013) were perceived to be most difficult to accomplish by phone and easiest in-person (p < 0.0001). Participants were most comfortable in-person and least comfortable by telephone for both patient care and student supervision (p < 0.001). The majority of participants predicted continued use of telehealth for patient care but preferred in-person service delivery for both patient care (66%) and student supervision (81%). Overall, these findings indicate service delivery model changes in the field have an impact on GC education and suggest that the student-supervisor relationship may be different via telehealth. Furthermore, the stronger preference for in-person patient care and student supervision, despite predicted continued telehealth utilization, points to a need for multifaceted telehealth education initiatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren Lichten
- Department of Human Genetics, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, 30322, USA
| | - Raphiel Murden
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, 30322, USA
| | - Nadia Ali
- Department of Human Genetics, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, 30322, USA
| | - Cecelia Bellcross
- Department of Human Genetics, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, 30322, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sia TY, Maio A, Kemel YM, Arora KS, Gordhandas SB, Kahn RM, Salo-Mullen EE, Sheehan MA, Tejada PR, Bandlamudi C, Zhou Q, Iasonos A, Grisham RN, O'Cearbhaill RE, Tew WP, Roche KL, Zivanovic O, Sonoda Y, Gardner GJ, Chi DS, Latham AJ, Carlo MI, Murciano-Goroff YR, Will M, Walsh MF, Robson ME, Mandelker DL, Berger MF, Abu-Rustum NR, Brown CL, Offit K, Hamilton JG, Aghajanian C, Weigelt B, Stadler ZK, Liu YL. Germline Pathogenic Variants and Genetic Counseling by Ancestry in Patients With Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. JCO Precis Oncol 2023; 7:e2300137. [PMID: 37738546 PMCID: PMC10861001 DOI: 10.1200/po.23.00137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2023] [Revised: 05/11/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2023] [Indexed: 09/24/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate rates of germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PVs) and genetic counseling by ancestry in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS Patients with pathologically confirmed EOC who underwent clinical tumor-normal sequencing from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, inclusive of germline analysis of ≥76 genes were included. Patients with newly identified PVs were referred for Clinical Genetics Service (CGS) counseling. Ancestry groups were defined using self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) heritage. Genetic ancestry was inferred computationally using validated algorithms. Logistic regression models were built. RESULTS Of 1,266 patients, self-reported ancestry (AJ, 17%; Asian, 10%; Black/African American, 5.4%; Hispanic, 6.2%; non-Hispanic White, 57%; other, 0.16%; unknown, 4.0%) correlated with genetic ancestry (AJ ancestry, 18%; admixed, 10%; African, 4%; East Asian [EAS], 6%; European, 56%; Native American, 0.2%; South Asian [SAS], 4%; unknown, 2%). Germline PVs were observed in 313 (25%) patients, including 195 (15%) with PVs in EOC-associated genes. Those with PVs were younger at diagnosis (59 v 62 years; P < .001) and more likely to have high-grade serous ovarian cancer (83% v 72%; P = .009). PV prevalence varied between ancestry groups (P < .001), with highest rates in the AJ (39.9%) and Asian (26.5%) groups and similar rates (>10%) across other ancestry groups. Use of genetic ancestry demonstrated similar findings and further characterized high rates of PV in EAS/SAS groups. Younger age, high-grade serous histology, and self-reported AJ or Asian ancestry were associated with PV in an EOC-associated gene. Rates of CGS counseling for newly identified PVs were high (80%) across ancestry groups. CONCLUSION Rates of PV, particularly in EOC-associated genes, were high regardless of ancestry, with similar rates of counseling between groups, emphasizing the importance of universal genetic testing in all patients with EOC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tiffany Y. Sia
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Anna Maio
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Yelena M. Kemel
- Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Kanika S. Arora
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Sushmita B. Gordhandas
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Ryan M. Kahn
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Erin E. Salo-Mullen
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Margaret A. Sheehan
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Prince Rainier Tejada
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Chaitanya Bandlamudi
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Qin Zhou
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Alexia Iasonos
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Rachel N. Grisham
- Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Roisin E. O'Cearbhaill
- Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - William P. Tew
- Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Kara Long Roche
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Oliver Zivanovic
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Yukio Sonoda
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Ginger J. Gardner
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Dennis S. Chi
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Alicia J. Latham
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Maria I. Carlo
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Yonina R. Murciano-Goroff
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Marie Will
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Michael F. Walsh
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Mark E. Robson
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Diana L. Mandelker
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Michael F. Berger
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Nadeem R. Abu-Rustum
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Carol L. Brown
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Kenneth Offit
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Jada G. Hamilton
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Carol Aghajanian
- Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Britta Weigelt
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Zsofia K. Stadler
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Ying L. Liu
- Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Zhou W, Cho Y, Shang S, Jiang Y. Use of Digital Health Technology Among Older Adults With Cancer in the United States: Findings From a National Longitudinal Cohort Study (2015-2021). J Med Internet Res 2023; 25:e46721. [PMID: 37256672 DOI: 10.2196/46721] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2023] [Revised: 04/09/2023] [Accepted: 04/26/2023] [Indexed: 06/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the benefits of digital health technology use, older adults with cancer (ie, aged 65 years) have reported challenges to technology adoption. However, there has been a lack of a good understanding of their digital health technology use patterns and the associated influential factors in the past few years. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to examine the trends in and factors associated with digital health technology use among older adults with cancer. METHODS The National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) data set is a national longitudinal cohort study with annual survey waves of Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older. Participants were community-dwelling older adults who self-reported previous or current cancer diagnoses in each round. The study sample size of each round ranged from 1996 (2015) to 1131 (2021). Digital health technology use was defined as using the internet or online in the last month to order or refill prescriptions, contact medical providers, handle Medicare or other insurance matters, or get information about their health conditions. The association of sociodemographics, clinical factors (self-rated health, chronic conditions, difficulties in activities of daily living, dementia, anxiety, and depression), and physical function (Short Physical Performance Battery and grip strength) with digital health technology use was examined using design-based logistic regression. All statistical analyses accounted for the complex sample design. RESULTS The prevalence of any digital health technology use increased from 36% in 2015 to 45% in 2019. In 2020-2021, which was amid the COVID-19 pandemic, it ranged from 51% to 52%. In terms of each digital health technology use behavior, in 2015, overall, 28% of older cancer survivors used digital health technology to obtain health information, followed by contacting clinicians (19%), filling prescriptions (14%), and handling insurance (11%). Greater use of digital health technology was associated with younger age, being White, having a college or higher education, having a higher income, having more comorbidities, nondementia, and having a higher gait speed. CONCLUSIONS Digital health technology use in older adults with cancer has gradually increased, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, socioeconomic and racial disparities have remained in older cancer survivors. Additionally, older adults with cancer may have some unique features associated with digital health technology use; for example, their use of digital health may be increased by their comorbidities (ie, health care needs) and reduced by their frailty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Weijiao Zhou
- School of Nursing, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Youmin Cho
- School of Biomedical Informatics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Shaomei Shang
- School of Nursing, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Yun Jiang
- School of Nursing, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Liu YL, Maio A, Kemel Y, Salo-Mullen EE, Sheehan M, Tejada PR, Trottier M, Arnold AG, Fleischut MH, Latham A, Carlo MI, Murciano-Goroff YR, Walsh MF, Mandelker D, Mehta N, Bandlamudi C, Arora K, Zehir A, Berger MF, Solit DB, Aghajanian C, Diaz LA, Robson ME, Brown CL, Offit K, Hamilton JG, Stadler ZK. Disparities in cancer genetics care by race/ethnicity among pan-cancer patients with pathogenic germline variants. Cancer 2022; 128:3870-3879. [PMID: 36041233 PMCID: PMC10335605 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2022] [Revised: 06/27/2022] [Accepted: 06/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Germline risk assessment is increasing as part of cancer care; however, disparities in subsequent genetic counseling are unknown. METHODS Pan-cancer patients were prospectively consented to tumor-normal sequencing via custom next generation sequencing panel (Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets) inclusive of germline analysis of ≥76 genes from January 2015 through December 2019 (97.5% research nonbillable) with protocol for genetics referral. Rates of pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants (PVs) and downstream counseling were compared across ancestry groups (mutually exclusive groups based on self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish [AJ] heritage) using nonparametric tests and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS Among 15,775 patients (59.6%, non-Hispanic [NH]-White; 15.7%, AJ; 20.5%, non-White [6.9%, Asian; 6.8%, Black/African American (AA); 6.7%, Hispanic; 0.1%, Other], and 4.2%, unknown), 2663 (17%) had a PV. Non-White patients had a lower PV rate (n = 433, 13.4%) compared to NH-Whites (n = 1451, 15.4%) and AJ patients (n = 683, 27.6%), p < .01, with differences in mostly moderate and low/recessive/uncertain penetrance variants. Among 2239 patients with new PV, 1652 (73.8%) completed recommended genetic counseling. Non-White patients had lower rates of genetic counseling (67.7%) than NH-White (73.7%) and AJ patients (78.8%), p < .01, with lower rates occurring in Black/AA (63%) compared to NH-White patients, even after adjustment for confounders (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.97; p = .036). Non-White, particularly Black/AA and Asian, probands had a trend toward lower rates and numbers of at-risk family members being seen for counseling/genetic testing. CONCLUSIONS Despite minimizing barriers to genetic testing, non-White patients were less likely to receive recommended cancer genetics follow-up, with potential implications for oncologic care, cancer risk reduction, and at-risk family members. LAY SUMMARY Genetic testing is becoming an important part of cancer care, and we wanted to see if genetics care was different between individuals of different backgrounds. We studied 15,775 diverse patients with cancer who had genetic testing using a test called MSK-IMPACT that was covered by research funding. Clinically important genetic findings were high in all groups. However, Black patients were less likely to get recommended counseling compared to White patients. Even after removing many roadblocks, non-White and especially Black patients were less likely to get recommended genetics care, which may affect their cancer treatments and families.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ying L Liu
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Anna Maio
- Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Yelena Kemel
- Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Erin E Salo-Mullen
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Margaret Sheehan
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Prince Ray Tejada
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Magan Trottier
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Angela G Arnold
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | | | - Alicia Latham
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Maria I Carlo
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Yonina R Murciano-Goroff
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Michael F Walsh
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Diana Mandelker
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Nikita Mehta
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Chaitanya Bandlamudi
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Kanika Arora
- Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Ahmet Zehir
- Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- AstraZeneca, New York, New York, USA
| | - Michael F Berger
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - David B Solit
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Carol Aghajanian
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Luis A Diaz
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Mark E Robson
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Carol L Brown
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Kenneth Offit
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Jada G Hamilton
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| | - Zsofia K Stadler
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
- Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Gonzalez T, Tucker K, Wakefield CE, Geelan-Small P, Macmillan S, Taylor N, Williams R. Comparing cancer genetic counselling using telegenetics with in-person and telephone appointments: Results of a partially randomised patient-preference pilot study. J Telemed Telecare 2022:1357633X221112556. [PMID: 35833346 DOI: 10.1177/1357633x221112556] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Direct-to-patient telegenetics, which uses video conferencing to connect health professionals directly to patients' devices, has been widely adopted during the pandemic. However, limited evidence currently supports its use in cancer genetic counselling. METHODS Before the pandemic, we conducted a two-arm partially randomised patient-preference pilot trial to evaluate direct-to-patient telegenetics for patients and genetic counsellors. Patients were randomised to a standard care (telephone/in-person) or direct-to-patient telegenetics appointment. Patients completed questionnaires before, during and after appointments measuring: psychological distress, perceived genetic counsellor empathy, telegenetics satisfaction and technical challenges. Genetic counsellor-reported outcomes -measured using purpose-designed questionnaires- included telegenetics satisfaction, therapeutic alliance and time for assessment. Open-ended patient and genetic counsellor questionnaire responses were synthesised using content analysis. RESULTS Fifty-six patients and seven genetic counsellors participated. Thirteen patients switched appointment type. No significant differences in distress (P = 0.84) were identified between direct-to-patient telegenetics and standard care. Perceived genetic counsellor empathy was high for all appointment types. There was no evidence of differences in reported maximum empathy scores between direct-to-patient telegenetics and standard care [telephone (P = 0.57); in-person (P = 0.44)]. Patients reported high direct-to-patient telegenetics satisfaction despite technical challenges in most appointments (65%). Genetic counsellors were satisfied with direct-to-patient telegenetics and perceived high therapeutic alliance irrespective of appointment type. No significant differences in genetic counsellor time were identified between direct-to-patient telegenetics and standard care [telephone (P > 0.90); in-person (P = 0.35)]. DISCUSSION Our results suggest that direct-to-patient telegenetics is a satisfactory service delivery model that does not appear to compromise patient-genetic counsellor relationships or increase patient distress. These findings support direct-to-patient telegenetics use in cancer genetic counselling, although larger trials are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tina Gonzalez
- Prince of Wales Hereditary Cancer Centre, 376195Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia
- Department of Clinical Genetics, 60086Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia
| | - Kathy Tucker
- Prince of Wales Hereditary Cancer Centre, 376195Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, 7800UNSW Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia
| | - Claire E Wakefield
- School of Women's and Children's Health, 7800UNSW Medicine and Health, 7800UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia
- Kids Cancer Centre, 63623Sydney Children's Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia
| | - Peter Geelan-Small
- Stats Central, Mark Wainwright Analytical Centre, 7800UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia
| | - Stephanie Macmillan
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, 7800UNSW Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia
| | - Natalie Taylor
- School of Population Health, UNSW Medicine and Health, 7800UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia
| | - Rachel Williams
- Prince of Wales Hereditary Cancer Centre, 376195Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, 7800UNSW Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bayard S, Fasano G, Tamimi RM, Oh PS. Leveraging Electronic Health Records to Address Breast Cancer Disparities. CURRENT BREAST CANCER REPORTS 2022; 14:199-204. [PMID: 36091940 PMCID: PMC9440449 DOI: 10.1007/s12609-022-00457-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/22/2022] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
Purpose of Review Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women, and the leading cause of cancer death. However, racial and ethnic minority groups, as well as rural and underserved populations, face disparities that limit their access to specialty care for breast cancer. To address these disparities, health care providers can leverage an electronic health record (EHR). Recent Findings Few studies have evaluated the potential benefits of using EHRs to address breast cancer disparities, and none of them outlines a standard approach for this effort. However, these studies outline that EHRs can be used to identify and notify patients at risk for breast cancer. These systems can also automate referrals and scheduling for screening and genetic testing, as well as recruit eligible patients for clinical trials. EHRs can also provide educational materials to reduce risks associated with modifiable risk factors, such as physical activity, obesity, and smoking. These systems can also support telemedicine visits and centralize inter-institutional communication to improve treatment adherence and the quality of care. Summary EHRs have tremendous potential to increase accessibility and communication for patients with breast cancer by augmenting patient engagement, improving communication between patients and providers, and strengthening communication among providers. These efforts can reduce breast cancer disparities by increasing breast cancer screening, improving treatment adherence, expanding access to specialty care, and promoting risk-reducing habits among racial and ethnic minority groups and other underserved populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Solange Bayard
- Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, New York-Presbyterian, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68th Street, New York, NY 10065 USA
| | - Genevieve Fasano
- Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, New York-Presbyterian, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68th Street, New York, NY 10065 USA
| | - Rulla M. Tamimi
- Department of Population Health Sciences, New York-Presbyterian, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68th Street, New York, NY 10065 USA
| | - Pilyung Stephen Oh
- Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, New York-Presbyterian, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68th Street, New York, NY 10065 USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Bayard S, Fasano G, Gillot T, Bratton B, Ibala R, Taylor Fortson K, Newman L. Breast Cancer Disparities and the Digital Divide. CURRENT BREAST CANCER REPORTS 2022; 14:205-212. [PMID: 36467667 PMCID: PMC9703401 DOI: 10.1007/s12609-022-00468-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Purpose of Review Socioeconomically disadvantaged populations and minority groups suffer from high breast cancer mortality, a disparity caused by decreased access to specialty care, lower treatment adherence, co-morbidities, and genetic predisposition for biologically aggressive breast tumor subtypes. Telehealth has the potential to mitigate breast cancer disparities by increasing access to specialty care and health information. However, unequal access to high-speed/broadband internet service and telehealth itself magnifies breast cancer disparities in vulnerable populations. This review evaluates the impact of the digital divide on breast cancer outcomes, as well as strategies for leveraging telehealth to reduce breast cancer disparities. Recent Findings There is a paucity of research specific to employing telehealth to address breast cancer disparities. Previous studies provide examples of telehealth utilization for increasing screening mammography, in addition to improving access to breast cancer care, including breast cancer specialist, nurse navigators, and clinical trials. Telehealth can also be used as an approach to risk reduction, with strategies to support weight management and genetic testing. Summary Eliminating the digital divide holds enormous potential for mitigating breast cancer disparities through an intentional focus on improving access to telehealth. With increased accessibility, resource allocation, and improved digital infrastructure, telehealth can be used to address disparities in early detection, quality of breast cancer care, treatment adherence, and risk assessment. Further research is essential to elucidate best practices in breast cancer telehealth approaches in underserved communities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Solange Bayard
- Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68Th Street, New York-PresbyterianNew York, NY 10065 USA
| | - Genevieve Fasano
- Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68Th Street, New York-PresbyterianNew York, NY 10065 USA
| | - Tamika Gillot
- Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68Th Street, New York-PresbyterianNew York, NY 10065 USA
| | - Brenden Bratton
- Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68Th Street, New York-PresbyterianNew York, NY 10065 USA
| | - Reine Ibala
- Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68Th Street, New York-PresbyterianNew York, NY 10065 USA
| | - Katherine Taylor Fortson
- Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68Th Street, New York-PresbyterianNew York, NY 10065 USA
| | - Lisa Newman
- Department of Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68Th Street, New York-PresbyterianNew York, NY 10065 USA
| |
Collapse
|