Evolution of the clinical simulation approach to assess digital health technologies.

Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has catalysed digital transformation in the health space. However, it remains a challenge to generate timely and cost-effective evidence for digital health technologies (DHTs) to ensure their safety and efficacy. Traditional methods, such as randomised controlled trials (RCTs), are ill-suited for assessing DHTs for reasons of speed, agility, cost and context. Clinical simulation using high-fidelity synthetic patient cases is emerging as a promising yet underexplored method to evaluate DHTs. It offers several advantages, including conducting remote multi-site testing at low cost, inclusion of high-risk patient profiles that are usually excluded from RCTs and adaptability to different local clinical settings. This article shares some of the insights from studies using clinical simulation conducted at the Institute of Global Health Innovation (IGHI) at Imperial College London and describes the evolution of this approach as well as future opportunities.

Implementation of Partnered Pharmacist Medication Charting in haematology and oncology inpatients.

AIM: Partnered Pharmacist Medication Charting (PPMC) in patients admitted under general medical units has been shown to reduce medication errors. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the PPMC model on medication errors in patients admitted under cancer units in Victorian hospitals. METHODS: A prospective cohort study comparing cohorts before and after the introduction of PPMC was conducted. This included a 2-month pre-intervention phase and 3-month intervention phase. PPMC was implemented during the intervention phase as new model of care that enabled credentialed pharmacists to chart all admission medications, including pre-admission or new medications and cancer therapies, in collaboration with the admitting medical officer. The proportion of medication charts with at least one error was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Seven health services across Victoria were included in the study. The majority of health services were using paper-based prescribing systems for oncology. Of the 547 patients who received standard medical medication charting, 331 (60.5%) had at least one medication error identified compared to 18 out of 416 patients (4.3%) using the PPMC model (p < 0.001). The median (interquartile range) inpatient length of stay was 5 (2.9-10.6) days in pre-intervention and 4.9 (2.9-11) days in intervention (p = 0.88). In the intervention arm, 42 patients had cancer therapy charted by a pharmacist with no errors. CONCLUSIONS: PPMC was successfully scaled into cancer units as a collaborative medication safety strategy. The model was associated with significantly lower rates of medication errors, including cancer therapies. PPMC should be adopted more widely in cancer units in Australia.

Building capacity for cancer care infrastructure in Karnataka - the present and the future.

BACKGROUND: Cancer mortality has doubled in India, a lower and middle-income country, from 1990 to 2016, depicting the ever-increasing burden of non-communicable disease. Karnataka, situated in the south of India, is one of the states with a rich medical college and hospital milieu. We present the status of cancer care across the state from the data collected by the investigators through public registries and personal communication to the concerned units to know the distribution of various services across the districts and give probable directives to improve on the present situation with emphasis on radiation therapy. This study may be taken as a bird's eye view of the situation across the country and form a basis based on which future planning of services and areas to emphasize on, may be considered. PURPOSE: The establishment of a radiation therapy center holds the key to the establishment of comprehensive cancer care centers. The existing situation of such centers and the need and scope for inclusion and expansion of cancer units is presented in this article.

Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Position Statement: 2022 update to the safe handling of monoclonal antibodies in healthcare settings.

AIM: The aims were to (a) review the scientific literature on occupational risk, including exposure mechanisms and risk assessment, with regards to handling monoclonal antibodies (mABs) in healthcare settings; and (b) update the recommendations in the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia (COSA) safe handling of monoclonal antibodies in healthcare settings position statement, published in 2013. METHODS: A literature search was conducted between April 24, 2022, and July 3, 2022, to identify evidence relating to occupational exposure and handling of mABs in healthcare settings. Evidence in the literature was compared to the Position Statement published in 2013, and any potential additions, deletions, or revisions were discussed by the authors, and then agreed changes were made. RESULTS: Thirty-nine references were included in this update, comprising of the 2013 Position Statement itself and 10 of its references, as well as 28 new references. The risks to healthcare workers in the preparation and administration of mABs arise from four distinct exposure mechanisms: dermal, mucosal, inhalation, and oral. Updates included recommendations on using protective eyewear during the preparation and administration of mABs, developing a local institutional risk assessment tool and handling recommendations, considerations for using closed system transfer devices, and to have awareness of the nomenclature change from 2021 for new mABs. CONCLUSION: Practitioners should follow the 14 recommendations to lower occupational risk when handling mABs. Another Position Statement update should occur in 5-10 years to ensure the currency of recommendations.

Evaluating the quality and safety of the BreastScreen remote radiology assessment model of service delivery in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in Australian women. Given the diverse geography and populations within Australia, the ability to offer a telemedicine-supported breast screening and assessment service may increase access. The aim of this study was to assess clinical outcomes of a telemedicine-based remote radiology assessment service delivery model for detecting breast cancer in regional Australian women compared to the traditional radiologist onsite model. METHODS: This study was a pre-post intervention study using de-identified administrative data. Data were collected from seven sites across three health jurisdictions within Australia. There were a total of 21,117 assessment visits, with 10,508 (49.8%) pre- and 10,609 (50.2%) post-remote model implementation. Of the 10,609 post-remote model visits, 3,904 (36.8%) were under the remote model. The main outcome was cancer detection, split into any cancer, any invasive cancer or any small invasive cancer. Timeliness of assessment was also examined. RESULTS: After adjusting for multiple factors, there were no statistically significant differences in cancer detection rates between the remote and onsite models (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 1.02, 95% CI 0.86-1.19, n.s.). Implementing the remote assessment model had statistically significant positive effects on the timeliness of assessment (AOR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.59-0.77, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: This study found the remote model delivers safe and high-quality assessment services, with equivalent rates of cancer detection and improved timeliness of assessment when compared to the traditional onsite model. Careful monitoring and ongoing evaluation of any health-service model is important for ongoing safety, efficiency and acceptability.

A comparative cohort study of gastrointestinal oncology patients: Impact of a shift to telehealth on delivery of interprofessional cancer care.

Early studies of oncology visits performed via telehealth demonstrate patient and provider satisfaction; however, understanding of the impact of telehealth on clinic workflows is limited. The incorporation of telehealth visits into an interprofessional model of oncology care was evaluated to assess for changes in care delivery and patient engagement. New patients with a gastrointestinal cancer diagnosis who were actively undergoing treatment and followed for at least three months were divided into two cohorts based on telehealth utilization. Individual patient charts were reviewed by touchpoint, consisting of in-person visits, telehealth visits, phone calls, and patient portal messages. A total of 28 patient charts were analyzed, 11 pre-telehealth conventional care patients, and 17 telehealth patients. Telehealth cohort patients demonstrated an increased average number of total touchpoints when compared to the pre-telehealth cohort (p-value = 0.008) and had an increased number of patient portal and phone call touchpoints (p-value = 0.00 and 0.002). Telehealth provided more interactions between patients and providers demonstrating increased connectivity between a patient and their care team throughout their complex cancer journey. Clinic workflows may need to adjust to account for the increased demand of unscheduled patient interactions.

Practicalities, challenges and solutions to delivering a national organisational survey of cancer service and processes: Lessons from the National Prostate Cancer Audit.

Organisational surveys are a critical process to assess the configuration and availability of services within health care systems. Cancer service organizational surveys enable understanding of variation in structure, processes and outcomes of cancer care according to the availability of facilities and their geographical organisation. This is critical for evaluating the delivery of cancer care services across a specified region. Furthermore, the organisational survey provides essential information about patient support services which can be used to inform patients where particular allied health services are available. The National Prostate Cancer Audit (NPCA) is an audit of all prostate cancer services in England and Wales. The NPCA encompasses all prostate cancer diagnostics, treatments (including surgery, radiotherapy and systemic therapy) and allied services. The NPCA conducted an organisational survey in 2021 via an online questionnaire sent to the prostate cancer clinical leads within each of the 138 NHS providers and we had a response rate of 93 %. There are many challenges to conducting an organisational survey and gaining a high completion rate is still difficult. The challenges that the NPCA faced included accuracy, completion, duplicates and discrepancies in responses. From this experience, we have developed some suggestions for the practical delivery and development of future organisational surveys. It was thanks to the use of many of these strategies, and the engagement of clinicians with the NPCA, that we were able to achieve such a high response rate. Despite these challenges, the importance of organisational surveys of cancer services is demonstrated by the better understanding of structure, processes and outcomes of cancer care according to the accessibility of facilities and their geographical organisation. This is essential for evaluating and improving the delivery of cancer care services across a region.

Gender diversity in therapeutic radiography: A mixed methods exploration of the gender influences impacting on male students' career choices.

INTRODUCTION: A significant gender imbalance exists in therapeutic radiography, with male radiographers contributing to less than one fifth of the UK registered workforce. This research aimed to explore male student recruitment experiences to identify gender-sensitive strategies to employ within future recruitment drives. METHODS: An exploratory mixed methods design commenced with therapeutic radiography student focus groups, analysed via descriptive thematic analysis. The focus group themes informed an online questionnaire survey targeting enrolled male therapeutic radiography students in the UK. Both phases explored students' experiences of their career choice and the impact, if any, their gender had on this selection. RESULTS: Three focus groups (n = 9) yielded four major themes: the invisible profession; career choices; gender influences; gender-sensitive approaches. Survey responses (n = 38) represented 9 UK institutions, a 25% estimated response rate. Over half (55%) had little or no awareness of the career at entry, with many discovering the profession 'by accident'. Many had never seen recruitment materials; 40% (n = 15) stated they were not designed to appeal to male applicants, with 18% (n = 7) suggesting they reflected more stereotypical female traits. CONCLUSION: Targeting gender imbalances is always controversial but doing nothing will maintain the status quo and perpetuate an unrepresentative workforce. Earlier awareness-raising of therapeutic radiography is essential, with promotional imagery suitable for different audiences and focusing equally on care and technology. Recruitment language should embrace 'leadership' attributes as well as 'caring' attributes. Supported by male role models, outreach events should emphasise the profession in terms of a sustainable, fulfilling and rewarding career. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The findings have provided detailed recommendations on which to focus a specific recruitment and marketing strategy to encourage male applicants to consider a career in therapeutic radiography.

Putting Policy into Practice: How Three Cancer Services Perform against Indigenous Health and Cancer Frameworks.

Improving cancer outcomes for Indigenous people by providing culturally safe, patient-centred care is a critical challenge for health services worldwide. This article explores how three Australian cancer services perform when compared to two national best practice guidelines: the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cancer Framework (Cancer Framework) and the National Safety and Quality Health Service (NSQHS) User Guide for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health (User Guide). The services were identified through a nationwide project undertaken to identify cancer services providing treatment to Indigenous cancer patients. A small number of services which were identified as particularly focused on providing culturally safe cancer care participated in case studies. Interviews were conducted with 35 hospital staff (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) and 8 Indigenous people affected by cancer from the three services. The interviews were analysed and scored using a traffic light system according to the seven priorities of the Cancer Framework and the six actions of the NSQHS User Guide. While two services performed well against the User Guide, all three struggled with the upstream elements of the Cancer Framework, suggesting that the treatment-focused Optimal Care Pathway for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People with Cancer (Cancer Pathway) may be a more appropriate framework for tertiary services. This article highlights the importance of a whole-of-organisation approach when addressing and embedding the six actions of the User Guide. Health services which have successfully implemented the User Guide are in a stronger position to implement the Cancer Framework and Cancer Pathway.

Cancer service delivery and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.

Background: The impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on health systems is widely reported worldwide. However, what remains unclear is the relative extent of the pandemic's effects on cancer management in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This review provides an up-to-date synthesis of the literature to inform post-pandemic policy and practice efforts in the region. Methods: Sources searched for published research include MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, African Index Medicus, African Wide Information and Web of Science. Using predefined criteria, the retrieved citations were screened for primary research describing the direct and indirect impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the cancer care and service delivery landscape in SSA since March 2020. Evidence was summarised using narrative synthesis. Results: Fourteen studies reporting findings from 19 SSA countries were included in this review. Studies were conducted mostly in the first wave of the pandemic (between March and July 2020) (10/14). The most commonly reported impact on cancer treatment (including surgery) were cancellations, delays and modifications (11/14). Half (7/14) of the studies reported on the impact of the pandemic on cancer care resource availability and service restructuring. Other notable impacts included temporary suspension, total cancellations or alterations in cancer screening (3/14) and diagnostic (3/14) services or programmes. Disruptions in cancer research and outreach activities were also reported (3/14). The availability and maintenance of cancer healthcare depended on multiple factors like availability of clinical supplies, existing oncology workforce, adequate supply of personal protective equipment and local pandemic mitigation measures. Notably, no studies reported on the impact of the pandemic on psychosocial support programmes, physiotherapy and other rehabilitation care for cancer patients. Conclusion: Changes in cancer care and service delivery due to the COVID-19 pandemic varied considerably across countries in SSA. This review underscores the need for urgent actions to mitigate current setbacks while recommending evidence-based and contextualised approaches to revitalising cancer care in the post-pandemic era.

Optimization of transmural care by implementation of an online expert panel to assess treatment strategy in patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases: A prospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Centralization of oncological care results in a growing demand for specialized consultations and referrals. Improved telemedicine solutions are needed to facilitate access to specialist care and select patients eligible for referral. The purpose of this quality improvement initiative was to optimize transmural care for patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases through implementation of an online expert panel. METHODS: A digital communication platform was developed to share medical data, including high-quality diagnostic imaging of patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases. Feasibility of local treatment strategies was assessed by a panel of liver specialists to select patients for referral. After implementation, an observational cohort study was conducted to evaluate quality improvement in transmural care using revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence guidelines. RESULTS: From September 2016-September 2018, eight hospitals were connected to the platform, covering a population of 3 m. In total, 123 cases were assessed, of which 54 (43.9%) were prevented from needless physical referral. Assessment of treatment strategy by an online expert panel significantly reduced the average lead time during multidisciplinary team meetings from 3.73 min to 2.12 min per patient (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an online expert panel is an innovative, accessible and user-friendly way to provide cancer-specific expertise to regional hospitals. E-consultation of such panels may result in more efficient multidisciplinary team meetings and prevent fragile patients from needless referral. Sustainability of these panels however is subject to structural financial compensation, so a cost-effectiveness analysis is warranted.

Providing an acute oncology service during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to adaptations being made to all aspects of the NHS, including general practice, acute medical specialties and oncology. This has presented unique challenges to acute oncology services (AOSs) in how to provide continuity of care while maintaining the safety of patients and staff. We describe the experience of the AOS team at Barts Health NHS Trust, working across three acute hospitals in east London. Changes to the service due to COVID-19 included increased remote reviews and referrals to the specialist oncology cancer acute assessment unit. The patient population reviewed in April 2020 (at the initial peak of the pandemic in the UK) was markedly different to one reviewed in April 2019, with 55% more patients presenting with a new diagnosis of cancer via an emergency route. Finally, we suggest changes to AOSs for future waves of the pandemic.

Maintaining cancer services during the COVID-19 pandemic: the Aotearoa New Zealand experience.

COVID-19 caused significant disruption to cancer services around the world. The health system in Aotearoa New Zealand has fared better than many other regions, with the country being successful, so far, in avoiding sustained community transmission. However, there was a significant initial disruption to services across the cancer continuum, resulting in a decrease in the number of new diagnoses of cancer in March and April 2020. Te Aho o Te Kahu, Aotearoa New Zealand's national Cancer Control Agency, coordinated a nationwide response to minimise the impact of COVID-19 on people with cancer. The response, outlined in this paper, included rapid clinical governance, a strong equity focus, development of national clinical guidance, utilising new ways of delivering care, identifying and addressing systems issues and close monitoring and reporting of the impact on cancer services. Diagnostic procedures and new cancer registrations increased in the months following the national lockdown, and the cumulative number of cancer registrations in 2020 surpassed the number of registrations in 2019 by the end of September. Cancer treatment services - surgery, medical oncology, radiation oncology and haematology - continued during the national COVID-19 lockdown in March and April 2020 and continued to be delivered at pre-COVID-19 volumes in the months since. We are cautiously optimistic that, in general, the COVID-19 pandemic does not appear to have increased inequities in cancer diagnosis and treatment for Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand.

"The support has been brilliant": experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients attending two high performing cancer services.

BACKGROUND: Improving health outcomes for Indigenous people by providing person-centred, culturally safe care is a crucial challenge for the health sector, both in Australia and internationally. Many cancer providers and support services are committed to providing high quality care, yet struggle with providing accessible, culturally safe cancer care to Indigenous Australians. Two Australian cancer services, one urban and one regional, were identified as particularly focused on providing culturally safe cancer care for Indigenous cancer patients and their families. The article explores the experiences of Indigenous cancer patients and their families within the cancer services and ascertains how their experiences of care matches with the cancer services' strategies to improve care. METHODS: Services were identified as part of a national study designed to identify and assess innovative services for Indigenous cancer patients and their families. Case studies were conducted with a small number of identified services. In-depth interviews were conducted with Indigenous people affected by cancer and hospital staff. The interviews from two services, which stood out as particularly high performing, were analysed through the lens of the patient experience. RESULTS: Eight Indigenous people affected by cancer and 23 hospital staff (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) were interviewed. Three experiences were shared by the majority of Indigenous cancer patients and family members interviewed in this study: a positive experience while receiving treatment at the cancer service; a challenging time between receiving diagnosis and reaching the cancer centre; and the importance of family support, while acknowledging the burden on family and carers. CONCLUSIONS: This article is significant because it demonstrates that with a culturally appropriate and person-centred approach, involving patients, family members, Indigenous and non-Indigenous staff, it is possible for Indigenous people to have positive experiences of cancer care in mainstream, tertiary health services. If we are to improve health outcomes for Indigenous people it is vital more cancer services and hospitals follow the lead of these two services and make a sustained and ongoing commitment to strengthening the cultural safety of their service.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer diagnosis and service access in New Zealand-a country pursuing COVID-19 elimination.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted cancer services globally. New Zealand has pursued an elimination strategy to COVID-19, reducing (but not eliminating) this disruption. Early in the pandemic, our national Cancer Control Agency (Te Aho o Te Kahu) began monitoring and reporting on service access to inform national and regional decision-making. In this manuscript we use high-quality, national-level data to describe changes in cancer registrations, diagnosis and treatment over the course of New Zealand's response to COVID-19. METHODS: Data were sourced (2018-2020) from national collections, including cancer registrations, inpatient hospitalisations and outpatient events. Cancer registrations, diagnostic testing (gastrointestinal endoscopy), surgery (colorectal, lung and prostate surgeries), medical oncology access (first specialist appointments [FSAs] and intravenous chemotherapy attendances) and radiation oncology access (FSAs and megavoltage attendances) were extracted. Descriptive analyses of count data were performed, stratified by ethnicity (Indigenous Maori, Pacific Island, non-Maori/non-Pacific). FINDINGS: Compared to 2018-2019, there was a 40% decline in cancer registrations during New Zealand's national shutdown in March-April 2020, increasing back to pre-shutdown levels over subsequent months. While there was a sharp decline in endoscopies, pre-shutdown volumes were achieved again by August. The impact on cancer surgery and medical oncology has been minimal, but there has been an 8% year-to-date decrease in radiation therapy attendances. With the exception of lung cancer, there is no evidence that existing inequities in service access between ethnic groups have been exacerbated by COVID-19. INTERPRETATION: The impact of COVID-19 on cancer care in New Zealand has been largely mitigated. The New Zealand experience may provide other agencies or organisations with a sense of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer services within a country that has actively pursued elimination of COVID-19. FUNDING: Data were provided by New Zealand's Ministry of Health, and analyses completed by Te Aho o Te Kahu staff.

Barriers and Facilitators to Integrative Oncology Services in Australia: A Changed Mind Set Required.

Objectives: This study aimed to explore barriers and facilitators to integrative oncology (IO) service provision and access in Australia. Design: The study design was mixed method with two substudies: a cross-sectional national cancer service survey of public and private sectors; and focus group interviews and an online survey of cancer survivors. Triangulation analysis of qualitative and quantitative data was used to identify and interrogate meta-themes. Subjects: The cancer service response rate was 93.2% (n = 275/295); 71/275 (25.8%) provided IO. Thirty-three cancer survivors from Anglo-European, Arabic, Vietnamese, and Chinese backgrounds were interviewed, and 121 survivors answered the online survey. Results: IO gaps were substantial, with no services in many regions and cities; a lack of diversity and availability of therapeutic options, including culturally appropriate services; and a mismatch between the high use of natural health products by survivors and types of IO services provided. Two overlapping meta-themes were identified: "barriers and facilitators" and "peoples and institutions"; each with four subthemes, respectively, "access/provision, affordability/funding, information/evidence, and culture/values" and "cancer survivors, healthcare professionals, organizations, and policies." While affordability/funding was the greatest barrier to survivors and providers, solutions varied (e.g., building a stronger evidence-base, business model advice) and often conflicted (e.g., public verses private sector funding). The most insidious barrier was professional/corporate cultures and values that influenced hospital policies (or lack thereof), conceptions of evidence and the therapeutic alliance. Survivors called for a change of mindset in the culture of medicine and value-based health care. Conclusions: The barriers and facilitators to IO services were more complex than building the evidence-base and demonstrating value to justify funding. To achieve a better alignment of patients' preferences with service provision, providers require more guidance on clinical governance, business models, local service gaps, and interprofessional collaboration. National strategies and funding models are needed to ensure appropriate, equitable IO service provision.

Beyond Teenage and Young Adult Cancer Care: Care Experiences of Patients Aged 25-39 Years Old in the UK National Health Service.

AIMS: Adolescents and young adults aged 15-39 years with cancer face unique medical, practical and psychosocial issues. In the UK, principal treatment centres and programmes have been designed to care for teenage and young adult patients aged 13-24 years in an age-appropriate manner. However, for young adults (YAs) aged 25-39 years with cancer, little access to age-specific support is available. The aim of this study was to examine this possible gap by qualitatively exploring YA care experiences, involving patients as research partners in the analysis to ensure robust results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a phenomenological qualitative study with YAs diagnosed with any cancer type between ages 25 and 39 years old in the last 5 years. Participants took part in interviews or focus groups and data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Results were shaped in an iterative process with the initial coders and four YA patients who did not participate in the study to improve the rigor of the results. RESULTS: Sixty-five YAs with a range of tumour types participated. We identified seven themes and 13 subthemes. YAs found navigating the healthcare system difficult and commonly experienced prolonged diagnostic pathways. Participants felt under-informed about clinical details and the long-term implications of side-effects on daily life. YAs found online resources overwhelming but also a source of information and treatment support. Some patients regretted not discussing fertility before cancer treatment or felt uninformed or rushed when making fertility preservation decisions. A lack of age-tailored content or age-specific groups deterred YAs from accessing psychological support and rehabilitation services. CONCLUSIONS: YAs with cancer may miss some benefits provided to teenagers and young adults in age-tailored cancer services. Improving services for YAs in adult settings should focus on provision of age-specific information and access to existing relevant support.