RESUMEN
An early detection tool for latent COVID-19 infections in oncology staff and patients is essential to prevent outbreaks in a cancer center. (1) Background: In this study, we developed and implemented two early detection tools for the radiotherapy area to identify COVID-19 cases opportunely. (2) Methods: Staff and patients answered a questionnaire (electronic and paper surveys, respectively) with clinical and epidemiological information. The data were collected through two online survey tools: Real-Time Tracking (R-Track) and Summary of Factors (S-Facts). Cut-off values were established according to the algorithm models. SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR tests confirmed the positive algorithms individuals. (3) Results: Oncology staff members (n = 142) were tested, and 14% (n = 20) were positives for the R-Track algorithm; 75% (n = 15) were qRT-PCR positive. The S-Facts Algorithm identified 7.75% (n = 11) positive oncology staff members, and 81.82% (n = 9) were qRT-PCR positive. Oncology patients (n = 369) were evaluated, and 1.36% (n = 5) were positive for the Algorithm used. The five patients (100%) were confirmed by qRT-PCR. (4) Conclusions: The proposed early detection tools have proved to be a low-cost and efficient tool in a country where qRT-PCR tests and vaccines are insufficient for the population.
RESUMEN
Purpose Limited data describe the delivery of pediatric cancer care in Mexico. We report a nationwide survey of pediatric cancer units. Methods An electronic survey was distributed to 74 pediatric cancer units in Mexico to describe case volumes; organization of care; and availability of medical/surgical specialists, supportive care, complex therapies, and diagnostic services. Centers were classified as low (< 30 new patients/year), medium (30 to 59/year) and high (≥ 60/year). Results Sixty-two centers completed the survey (response rate, 84%). The median annual new case volume per center was 50 (interquartile range [IQR], 23 to 81). Thirty-four percent (n = 21), 26% (n = 16), and 40% (n = 25) of units were low-, medium-, and high-volume centers, respectively. Treatment units reported a median of two pediatric oncologists (IQR, 2) and one pediatric hematologist (IQR, 1 to 2). Availability of medical and surgical subspecialists varied by center size, with substantially more specialist support at higher-volume centers ( P < .01). Multidisciplinary tumor boards are available at 29% (six of 21), 56% (nine of 16), and 76% (19 of 25) of low- to high-volume centers, respectively ( P = .005). Radiation and palliative care services are available at 42% (n = 26) and 63% (n = 36) of all centers, which did not vary by center volume. Educational support for hospitalized children and school reintegration programs are available at 56% (n = 36) and 58% (n = 36) of centers, respectively. One third (38% [n = 23]) of centers reported that at least one half of patients were lost to follow-up during the transition from pediatric to adult programs. Conclusion A large variation exists in annual case volumes across Mexican pediatric cancer centers. Additional efforts to increase access to multidisciplinary, supportive, and palliative care across all pediatric cancer units in Mexico are required.