The Anatomy of a Hybrid In-Person and Virtual Sexual Health Clinic in Oncology.

Sexual health is compromised by the diagnosis and treatment of virtually all cancer types. Despite the prevalence and negative impact of sexual dysfunction, sexual health clinics are the exception in cancer centers. Consequently, there is a need for effective, efficient, and inclusive sexual health programming in oncology. This paper describes the development of the innovative Sexual Health Clinic (SHC) utilizing a hybrid model of integrated in-person and virtual care. The SHC evolved from a fusion of the in-person and virtual prostate cancer clinics at Princess Margaret. This hybrid care model was adapted to include six additional cancer sites (cervical, ovarian, testicular, bladder, kidney, and head and neck). The SHC is theoretically founded in a biopsychosocial framework and emphasizes interdisciplinary intervention teams, participation by the partner, and a medical, psychological, and interpersonal approach. Virtual visits are tailored to patients based on biological sex, cancer type, and treatment type. Highly trained sexual health counselors facilitate the virtual clinic and provide an additional layer of personalization and a "human touch". The in-person visits complement virtual care by providing comprehensive sexual health assessment and sexual medicine prescription. The SHC is an innovative care model which has the potential to close the gap in sexual healthcare. The SHC is designed as a transferable, stand-alone clinic which can be shared with cancer centers.

Improving safety and communication for healthcare providers caring for SARS-COV-2 patients.

BACKGROUND: Decreasing healthcare provider (HCP) exposure to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) virus in emergency departments (EDs) is crucial. Approaches include limiting the HCP presence and ensuring sealed isolation rooms, which can result in communication difficulties. This quality improvement (QI) initiative aimed to decrease by 50% duration of isolation room door opening and increasing HCP-perceived communication clarity by one point on a five-point Likert scale. METHODS: This was a prospective, multi-stage project with three Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles between May and July 2020: (1) an educational intervention, (2) the introduction of a novel transceiver communication device, and (3) utilizing a clinical champion. Statistical Process Control XbarR charts were used to assess for special cause variation, and two-tailed Mann-Whitney U tests were used for statistical significance between Likert survey means. Qualitative responses underwent thematic analysis. RESULTS: Observation of 174 patient encounters was completed over 33 days, with 95 meeting the inclusion criteria. Door opening decreased from baseline (n=40; mean 72.97%) to PDSA 3 (n=21; mean 1.58%; p<0.0001). HCP-perceived communication clarity improved from baseline (n=36; mean 3.36) to PDSA-3 (n=49; mean 4.21; p<0.001). Survey themes included positive effects on communication and workflow, with some challenges on the integration of the new device into the clinical workflow. HCP-perceived errors, workarounds, and workflow pauses showed significant improvements. CONCLUSION: This QI initiative with a novel transceiver showed significant decreases in isolation room door opening and increases in communication clarity. Future work will expand to operating rooms and intensive care units.

Biopsychosocial Factors Associated with Supportive Care Needs in Canadian Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors.

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) represent an overlooked population in cancer survivorship care. Identifying the needs of AYAs can guide the development of tailored programs for this population. We conducted a cross-sectional descriptive analysis to identify biopsychosocial factors associated with AYA post-treatment supportive care needs and unmet needs using data obtained from the Experiences of Cancer Patients in Transitions Study of the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, in collaboration with cancer agencies in the 10 Canadian provinces. The analysis focused on data from n = 530 AYAs between the ages of 18 and 34 who had undergone treatment within the past 5 years. Respondents reported a median of two moderate to big (MTB) physical needs (out of 9) and one unmet physical need, two MTB emotional needs (out of 6) with two unmet MTB emotional needs, and one (out of 5) practical need reported and one unmet MTB practical need. We found some common associations across supportive care domains. Income (lower) and more complex treatment were associated with high needs and unmet needs across the three domains. Respondents with a family doctor who was "very involved" in their cancer care had a lower number of unmet physical and emotional needs. Identifying those at risk of supportive care needs and developing tailored pathways in which they are proactively connected with tailored and appropriate resources and programs may help to reduce the number of unmet needs and improve cancer survivors' quality of life.

Factors related to dropout in integrative oncology clinical trials: interim analysis of an ongoing comparative effectiveness trial of mindfulness-based cancer recovery and Tai chi/Qigong for cancer health (The MATCH study).

OBJECTIVE: To examine the factors associated with loss to follow-up (LTFU) in an ongoing preference-based randomized waitlist controlled trial of mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR) and Taichi/Qigong (TCQ) for cancer survivors (the MATCH Study). Hierarchical logistic regression was used to determine the factors associated with LTFU. Predictors included adherence to treatment, preference vs. randomized, type of intervention (MBCR vs. TCQ) and program timing (immediate {IM} vs. waitlist control {WLC} group). RESULTS: Data indicated that randomization to the WLC group and, once in the intervention, low adherence were the main predictors of LTFU. Participants in the WLC group were 4 times more likely to be LTFU post-randomization [OR 3.96, 95% CI 2.08-7.56, p < 0.005] than those in the IM group. Participants showing low adherence to treatment were 6 times more likely for LTFU post-intervention [5.87 (2.57-13.400; p < 0.005] and 4 times more likely for LTFU 6 months post-intervention [OR 3.93, 95% CI 1.53-10.02, p = 0.01].