Managing Cancer Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Agility and Collaboration Toward a Common Goal.

The first confirmed case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States was reported on January 20, 2020, in Snohomish County, Washington. At the epicenter of COVID-19 in the United States, the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and University of Washington are at the forefront of delivering care to patients with cancer during this public health crisis. This Special Feature highlights the unique circumstances and challenges of cancer treatment amidst this global pandemic, and the importance of organizational structure, preparation, agility, and a shared vision for continuing to provide cancer treatment to patients in the face of uncertainty and rapid change.

Pregnancy and Cancer Treatment: Developing a Standardized Testing Policy and Procedure

Systematic gaps for pregnancy screening and testing of patients with cancer persist. Absent or inconsistent guidelines and policies are barriers to standardized practice. Awareness among oncology nurses is needed to promote safe cancer care, prevent patient harm, and uphold patient-centered care.

Employee influenza vaccination in a large cancer center with high baseline compliance rates: comparison of carrot versus stick approaches.

BACKGROUND: Influenza is a major complication in patients with cancer and hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. We set out to maximize influenza vaccination rates in health care personnel at our large ambulatory cancer center with high baseline compliance and to assess alternatives to mandatory policies. METHODS: Baseline influenza vaccine compliance rates at our center were >85%. During 2011 an incentive-based "carrot" campaign was implemented, and in 2012 a penalty-based "stick" approach to declining staff was required. Yearly approaches were compared using Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. RESULTS: Both the incentive and penalty approaches significantly improved the baseline rates of vaccination (2010 vs 2011 P = .0001 and 2010 vs 2012 P < .0001), and 2012 significantly improved over 2011 (P < .0001). Staff with direct patient contact had significantly higher rates of vaccination compared with those with indirect and minimal contact in every campaign year, except in the penalty-driven campaign from 2012 (P < .001, P < .001, and P = .24 and P < .001, P < .001, and P = .17, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A multifaceted staff vaccination program that included education, training, and active declination was more effective than a program offering incentives. Improvements in vaccination rates in the penalty-driven campaign were driven by staff without direct care responsibilities. High compliance with systemwide influenza vaccination was achieved without requiring mandatory vaccination.