Clinical Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Mexican Patients with Thoracic Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Accumulated evidence indicates that patients with lung cancer are a vulnerable population throughout the pandemic. Limited information is available in Latin America regarding the impact of the pandemic on medical care. The goal of this study was to describe the clinical and social effect of COVID-19 on patients with thoracic cancer and to ascertain outcomes in those with a confirmed diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cohort study included patients with thoracic neoplasms within a single institution between March 1, 2020, and February 28, 2021. All variables of interest were extracted from electronic medical records. During this period, the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale 21 (DASS-2) was applied to evaluate and identify more common psychological disorders. RESULTS: The mean age for the total cohort (n = 548) was 61.5 ± 12.9 years; non-small cell lung cancer was the most frequent neoplasm (86.9%), advanced stages predominated (80%), and most patients were under active therapy (82.8%). Any change in treatment was reported in 23.9% of patients, of which 78.6% were due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Treatment delays (≥7 days) were the most frequent modifications in 41.9% of cases, followed by treatment suspension at 37.4%. Patients without treatment changes had a more prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.21, p < .001 and HR 0.28, p < .001, respectively). The mean DASS-21 score was 10.45 in 144 evaluated patients, with women being more affected than men (11.41 vs. 9.08, p < .001). Anxiety was reported in 30.5% of cases, followed by depression and distress in equal proportions (18%). Depressed and stressed patients had higher odds of experiencing delays in treatment than patients without depression (odds ratio [OR] 4.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53-13.23, p = .006 and OR 3.18, 95% CI 1.2-10.06, p = .006, respectively). CONCLUSION: Treatment adjustments in patients with thoracic malignancies often occurred to avoid COVID-19 contagion with detrimental effects on survival. Psychological disorders could have a role in adherence to the original treatment regimen. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The pandemic has placed an enormous strain on health care systems globally. Patients with thoracic cancers represent a vulnerable population, with increased morbidity and mortality rates. In Mexico, treatment modifications were common during the pandemic, and those who experienced delays had worse survival outcomes. Most treatment modifications were related to a patient decision rather than a lockdown of health care facilities in which mental health impairment plays an essential role. Moreover, the high case fatality rate highlights the importance of improving medical care access. Likewise, to develop strategies facing future threats that may compromise health care systems in non-developed countries.

Global changes to the chemotherapy service during the covid-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, changes to chemotherapy services were implemented as a means of managing imposed workload strains within health services and protecting patients from contracting COVID-19. Given the rapidly evolving nature of the pandemic many changes were rapidly adopted and were not substantiated by robust evidence. This study aimed to describe the changes adopted internationally to chemotherapy services, which may be used to guide future changes to treatment delivery. METHODS: A survey was developed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on the delivery of systemic anti-cancer therapies (SACT). It comprised 22 questions and examined the strategies implemented during the pandemic to prioritise and protect patients receiving SACT and the participants' professional opinion of the strategies employed. The survey was available in English, Spanish and French and was distributed via professional bodies. RESULTS: 129 responses were obtained from healthcare professionals working across 17 different countries. 45% of institutions had to implement treatment prioritisation strategies and all hospitals implemented changes in the delivery of treatment, including: reduction in treatments (69%), using less immunosuppressive agents (50%), allowing treatment breaks (14%) and switching to oral therapies (45%). Virtual clinic visits were perceived by participants as the most effective strategy to protect patients. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has forced chemotherapy healthcare professionals to adopt new ways of working by reducing health interactions. Many areas of research are needed following this period, including understanding patients' perceptions of risks to treatment, utilisation of oral treatments and the impact of treatment breaks on cancer outcomes.

Health-care policies during the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico: A continuous case of heterogeneous, reactive, and unequal response.

Background: The pandemic in Mexico underlined pre-existing health-care system inequalities. Within the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic, 154 health policies across health institutions were found to be uncoordinated and heterogeneous, leading to health inequalities in access and potential health outcomes. Data & methods: Using a rapid qualitative research methodology, data was collected using purposive sampling of institutional policies published for public access on the official websites of the four public health institutions in Mexico from June 16th, 2020 to October 30th, 2021. This policy review used archival analysis to understand the differences in health-care policies during the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico. These policies were classified under the RREAL framework and as a continuation of our first publication. Results: During this study, categories of public health response and vaccination dominated the policies enacted. The SSA was the main author of publications. There seems to be a more unified policy response. However, health inequalities persist. Conclusions: The Mexican government continued to be reactive to the increase in cases or the arrival of new variants, rather than preventative. Research and development of policies need to work together in soaring cases like COVID-19 to work more effectively against the economic and epidemiological burden of a pandemic. It is suggested that this "vaccination" should be included in the RREAL classification. Other sectors (i.e. the ministry of foreign affairs) should be considered relevant players in the future management of a pandemic.

UK Healthcare Workers' Experiences of Major System Change in Elective Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Reflections on Rapid Service Adaptation.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted the delivery of elective surgery in the United Kingdom. The majority of planned surgery was cancelled or postponed in March 2020 for the duration of the first wave of the pandemic. We investigated the experiences of staff responsible for delivering rapid changes to surgical services during the first wave of the pandemic in the United Kingdom, with the aim of developing lessons for future major systems change (MSC). METHODS: Using a rapid qualitative study design, we conducted 25 interviews with frontline surgical staff during the first wave of the pandemic. Framework analysis was used to organise and interpret findings. RESULTS: Staff discussed positive and negative experiences of rapid service organisation. Clinician-led decision-making, the flexibility of individual staff and teams, and the opportunity to innovate service design were all seen as positive contributors to success in service adaptation. The negative aspects of rapid change were inconsistent guidance from national government and medical bodies, top-down decisions about when to cancel and restart surgery, the challenges of delivering emergency surgical care safely and the complexity of prioritising surgical cases when services re-started. CONCLUSION: Success in the rapid reorganisation of elective surgical services can be attributed to the flexibility and adaptability of staff. However, there was an absence of involvement of staff in wider system-level pandemic decision-making and competing guidance from national bodies. Involving staff in decisions about the organisation and delivery of MSC is essential for the sustainability of change processes.

Health-care guidelines and policies during the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico: A case of health-inequalities.

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneous government responses have been reported in reaction to COVID-19. The aim of this study is to generate an exploratory review of healthcare policies published during COVID-19 by health-care institutions in Mexico. Analyzing policies within different health sub-systems becomes imperative in the Mexican case due to the longstanding fragmentation of the health-care system and health inequalities. DATA AND METHODS: Policies purposely included in the analysis were published by four public health institutions (IMSS, ISSSTE, SSA and PEMEX) during the COVID-19 epidemic in Mexico (from February 29th to June 15th, 2020) on official institutional websites. Researchers reviewed each document and classified them into seven policy categories set by the Rapid Research Evaluation and Appraisal Lab (RREAL): public health response, health-care delivery, human resources, health-system infrastructure and supplies, clinical response, health-care management, and epidemiological surveillance. RESULTS: Policy types varied by health institution. The largest number of policies were aimed at public health responses followed by health-care delivery and human resources. Policies were mainly published during the community transmission phase. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic exposed underlying health-care system inequalities and a reactive rather than prepared response to the outbreak. Additionally, this study outlines potential policy gaps and delays in the response that could be avoided in the future.

Perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has set unprecedented demand on the healthcare workforce around the world. The UK has been one of the most affected countries in Europe. The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs) in relation to COVID-19 and care delivery models implemented to deal with the pandemic in the UK. METHODS: The study was designed as a rapid appraisal combining: (1) a review of UK healthcare policies (n=35 policies), (2) mass media and social media analysis of front-line staff experiences and perceptions (n=101 newspaper articles, n=1 46 000 posts) and (3) in-depth (telephone) interviews with front-line staff (n=30 interviews). The findings from all streams were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Limited personal protective equipment (PPE) and lack of routine testing created anxiety and distress and had a tangible impact on the workforce. When PPE was available, incorrect size and overheating complicated routine work. Lack of training for redeployed staff and the failure to consider the skills of redeployed staff for new areas were identified as problems. Positive aspects of daily work reported by HCWs included solidarity between colleagues, the establishment of well-being support structures and feeling valued by society. CONCLUSION: Our study highlighted the importance of taking into consideration the experiences and concerns of front-line staff during a pandemic. Staff working in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic advocated clear and consistent guidelines, streamlined testing of HCWs, administration of PPE and acknowledgement of the effects of PPE on routine practice.