RESUMEN
Patients with cancer are a high-priority population for COVID-19 vaccination, as per guideline recommendations. The present cross-sectional study was performed to assess the perception of patients with cancer from Romania regarding COVID-19 vaccines. The study included 932 patients with solid and hematologic malignancies. This was a multicenter study including 12 oncology centers located in Western and Northwestern Romania. Between December 2021 and January 2022, patients with cancer completed an individual paper questionnaire regarding acceptance of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, type of vaccine, side effects and source of information. During the first year of the vaccination campaign in Romania, 58.05% (541/932) of the investigated patients received COVID-19 vaccines. The vaccination rate was highest in the 61-70 year age group (61.22%). The most frequently used vaccine was Pfizer-BioNTech (72%). There was a statistically significant association between the rate of vaccination and the area of residence and level of education (P<0.001), with rural residence and a lower level of education being predictive factors for COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy. Patients living in rural areas used non-medical sources (e.g. mass media, social platforms) as their main source of information (53.40%, 204/382), whereas patients living in urban areas (64.90%, 357/550) used predominantly medical sources (e.g. recommendations from oncologists and general practitioners). The main source of information among non-vaccinated patients was mass media (e.g. television, radio); 72.38% vs. 29.67% among vaccinated patients. For the latter, the primary source of information was the recommendations made by oncologists (59.70%) and general practitioners (56.76%). The most commonly reported side effect was injection site pain (20-33% for the first dose and 5-27% for the second dose). In conclusion, the present study confirmed that patients with cancer may be reluctant to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, mainly due to the fear of its potential side effects. Although there is scientific evidence to support the efficacy and safety of vaccines, the primary source of information for patients may affect vaccine uptake, thus affecting the efforts to stop the pandemic. Furthermore, the present study revealed that non-vaccinated patients preferred mass media as their main source of information, whereas vaccinated patients relied on the recommendations made by oncologists or general practitioners.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Burnout is defined as a three-dimensional syndrome-emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalization (DP), and reduced personal accomplishment (PA)-caused by chronic occupational stress. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prevalence of burnout among oncologists in Eastern Europe and to identify the contributing factors. METHODS: The study was conducted as an online survey between October 2017 and March 2018. Oncologists (including medical, radiation, clinical, and surgical oncologists) from 19 countries were invited to participate. The survey consisted of 30 questions, including the standardized burnout instrument, Maslach Burnout Inventory, and eight demographic questions. Burnout risk was scored according to the scoring manual for health care workers. RESULTS: The study included 637 oncologists. Overall, 28% were at low or intermediate risk and 72% were at high risk for burnout. Forty-four percent of participants were at high risk for EE, 28.7% for DP, and 47.3% for PA. EE risk was associated with female sex. DP risk was highest among clinical and radiation oncologists, whereas PA risk was positively correlated with years of service, percentage of cancer deaths, and availability of the number of oncologists. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, burnout was significantly associated with standardized cancer mortality and fewer years of practice. CONCLUSION: Burnout among oncologists in Eastern Europe is high, and younger oncologists are the most vulnerable group. Preventive measures should be taken to address this issue, which negatively affects optimal care delivery and poses a threat to oncologists' health and well-being.
