Design as a quality improvement strategy: The case for design expertise.

Bad design in safety-critical environments like healthcare can lead to users being frustrated, excluded or injured. In contrast, good design can make it easier to use a service correctly, with impacts on both the safety and efficiency of healthcare delivery, as well as the experience of patients and staff. The participative dimension of design as an improvement strategy has recently gained traction in the healthcare quality improvement literature. However, the role of design expertise and professional design has been much less explored. Good design does not happen by accident: it takes expertise and the specific reasoning that expert designers develop through practical experience and training. Here, we define design, show why poor design can be disastrous and illustrate the benefits of good design. We argue for the recognition of distinctive design expertise and describe some of its characteristics. Finally, we discuss how design could be better promoted in healthcare improvement.

Impact of the Sars-Cov-2 outbreak on the initial clinical presentation of new solid cancer diagnoses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic might have delayed cancer diagnosis and management. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the initial tumor stage of new cancer diagnoses before and after the pandemic. METHODS: We systematically reviewed articles that compared the tumor stage of new solid cancer diagnoses before and after the initial pandemic waves. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to compare the rate of metastatic tumors and the distribution of stages at diagnosis. Subgroup analyses were performed by primary tumor site and by country. RESULTS: From 2,013 studies published between January 2020 and April 2022, we included 58 studies with 109,996 patients. The rate of metastatic tumors was higher after the COVID-19 outbreak than before (pooled OR: 1.29 (95% CI, 1.06-1.57), I2: 89% (95% CI, 86-91)). For specific cancers, common ORs reached statistical significance for breast (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.07-2.12)) and gynecologic (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.04-2.18)) cancers, but not for other cancer types. According to countries, common OR (95% CI) reached statistical significance only for Italy: 1.55 (1.01-2.39) and Spain:1.14 (1.02-1.29). Rates were comparable for stage I-II versus III-IV in studies for which that information was available, and for stages I-II versus stage III in studies that did not include metastatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite inter-study heterogeneity, our meta-analysis showed a higher rate of metastatic tumors at diagnosis after the pandemic. The burden of social distancing policies might explain those results, as patients may have delayed seeking care.

What can Safety Cases offer for patient safety? A multisite case study.

BACKGROUND: The Safety Case is a regulatory technique that requires organisations to demonstrate to regulators that they have systematically identified hazards in their systems and reduced risks to being as low as reasonably practicable. It is used in several high-risk sectors, but only in a very limited way in healthcare. We examined the first documented attempt to apply the Safety Case methodology to clinical pathways. METHODS: Data are drawn from a mixed-methods evaluation of the Safer Clinical Systems programme. The development of a Safety Case for a defined clinical pathway was a centrepiece of the programme. We base our analysis on 143 interviews covering all aspects of the programme and on analysis of 13 Safety Cases produced by clinical teams. RESULTS: The principles behind a proactive, systematic approach to identifying and controlling risk that could be curated in a single document were broadly welcomed by participants, but was not straightforward to deliver. Compiling Safety Cases helped teams to identify safety hazards in clinical pathways, some of which had been previously occluded. However, the work of compiling Safety Cases was demanding of scarce skill and resource. Not all problems identified through proactive methods were tractable to the efforts of front-line staff. Some persistent hazards, originating from institutional and organisational vulnerabilities, appeared also to be out of the scope of control of even the board level of organisations. A particular dilemma for organisational senior leadership was whether to prioritise fixing the risks proactively identified in Safety Cases over other pressing issues, including those that had already resulted in harm. CONCLUSIONS: The Safety Case approach was recognised by those involved in the Safer Clinical Systems programme as having potential value. However, it is also fraught with challenge, highlighting the limitations of efforts to transfer safety management practices to healthcare from other sectors.

Why is safety in intrapartum electronic fetal monitoring so hard? A qualitative study combining human factors/ergonomics and social science analysis.

BACKGROUND: Problems in intrapartum electronic fetal monitoring with cardiotocography (CTG) remain a major area of preventable harm. Poor understanding of the range of influences on safety may have hindered improvement. Taking an interdisciplinary perspective, we sought to characterise the everyday practice of CTG monitoring and the work systems within which it takes place, with the goal of identifying potential sources of risk. METHODS: Human factors/ergonomics (HF/E) experts and social scientists conducted 325 hours of observations and 23 interviews in three maternity units in the UK, focusing on how CTG tasks were undertaken, the influences on this work and the cultural and organisational features of work settings. HF/E analysis was based on the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety 2.0 model. Social science analysis was based on the constant comparative method. RESULTS: CTG monitoring can be understood as a complex sociotechnical activity, with tasks, people, tools and technology, and organisational and external factors all combining to affect safety. Fetal heart rate patterns need to be recorded and interpreted correctly. Systems are also required for seeking the opinions of others, determining whether the situation warrants concern, escalating concerns and mobilising response. These processes may be inadequately designed or function suboptimally, and may be further complicated by staffing issues, equipment and ergonomics issues, and competing and frequently changing clinical guidelines. Practice may also be affected by variable standards and workflows, variations in clinical competence, teamwork and situation awareness, and the ability to communicate concerns freely. CONCLUSIONS: CTG monitoring is an inherently collective and sociotechnical practice. Improving it will require accounting for complex system interdependencies, rather than focusing solely on discrete factors such as individual technical proficiency in interpreting traces.

Development of a natural language processing model for deriving breast cancer quality indicators : A cross-sectional, multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: Medico-administrative data are promising to automate the calculation of Healthcare Quality and Safety Indicators. Nevertheless, not all relevant indicators can be calculated with this data alone. Our feasibility study objective is to analyze 1) the availability of data sources; 2) the availability of each indicator elementary variables, and 3) to apply natural language processing to automatically retrieve such information. METHOD: We performed a multicenter cross-sectional observational feasibility study on the clinical data warehouse of Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP). We studied the management of breast cancer patients treated at AP-HP between January 2019 and June 2021, and the quality indicators published by the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialist, using claims data from the Programme de Médicalisation du Système d'Information (PMSI) and pathology reports. For each indicator, we calculated the number (%) of patients for whom all necessary data sources were available, and the number (%) of patients for whom all elementary variables were available in the sources, and for whom the related HQSI was computable. To extract useful data from the free text reports, we developed and validated dedicated rule-based algorithms, whose performance metrics were assessed with recall, precision, and f1-score. RESULTS: Out of 5785 female patients diagnosed with a breast cancer (60.9 years, IQR [50.0-71.9]), 5,147 (89.0%) had procedures related to breast cancer recorded in the PMSI, and 3732 (72.5%) had at least one surgery. Out of the 34 key indicators, 9 could be calculated with the PMSI alone, and 6 others became so using the data from pathology reports. Ten elementary variables were needed to calculate the 6 indicators combining the PMSI and pathology reports. The necessary sources were available for 58.8% to 94.6% of patients, depending on the indicators. The extraction algorithms developed had an average accuracy of 76.5% (min-max [32.7%-93.3%]), an average precision of 77.7% [10.0%-97.4%] and an average sensitivity of 71.6% [2.8% to 100.0%]. Once these algorithms applied, the variables needed to calculate the indicators were extracted for 2% to 88% of patients, depending on the indicators. DISCUSSION: The availability of medical reports in the electronic health records, of the elementary variables within the reports, and the performance of the extraction algorithms limit the population for which the indicators can be calculated. CONCLUSIONS: The automated calculation of quality indicators from electronic health records is a prospect that comes up against many practical obstacles.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical presentation, treatments, and outcomes of new breast cancer patients: A retrospective multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The SARS CoV-2 pandemic disrupted healthcare systems. We compared the cancer stage for new breast cancers (BCs) before and during the pandemic. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter cohort study on the data warehouse of Greater Paris University Hospitals (AP-HP). We identified all female patients newly referred with a BC in 2019 and 2020. We assessed the timeline of their care trajectories, initial tumor stage, and treatment received: BC resection, exclusive systemic therapy, exclusive radiation therapy, or exclusive best supportive care (BSC). We calculated patients' 1-year overall survival (OS) and compared indicators in 2019 and 2020. RESULTS: In 2019 and 2020, 2055 and 1988, new BC patients underwent cancer treatment, and during the two lockdowns, the BC diagnoses varied by -18% and by +23% compared to 2019. De novo metastatic tumors (15% and 15%, p = 0.95), pTNM and ypTNM distributions of 1332 cases with upfront resection and of 296 cases with neoadjuvant therapy did not differ (p = 0.37, p = 0.3). The median times from first multidisciplinary meeting and from diagnosis to treatment of 19 days (interquartile 11-39 days) and 35 days (interquartile 22-65 days) did not differ. Access to plastic surgery (15% and 17%, p = 0.08) and to treatment categories did not vary: tumor resection (73% and 72%), exclusive systemic therapy (13% and 14%), exclusive radiation therapy (9% and 9%), exclusive BSC (5% and 5%) (p = 0.8). Among resected patients, the neoadjuvant therapy rate was lower in 2019 (16%) versus 2020 (20%) (p = 0.02). One-year OS rates were 99.3% versus 98.9% (HR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.77-1.2), 72.6% versus 76.6% (HR = 1.28; 95% CI, 0.95-1.72), 96.6% versus 97.8% (HR = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.61-1.94), and 15.5% versus 15.1% (HR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.72-1.37), in the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a decrease in the number of new BCs, there was no tumor stage shift, and OS did not vary.

No changes in clinical presentation, treatment strategies and survival of pancreatic cancer cases during the SARS-COV-2 outbreak: A retrospective multicenter cohort study on real-world data.

The SARS-COV-2 pandemic disrupted healthcare systems. We assessed its impact on the presentation, care trajectories and outcomes of new pancreatic cancers (PCs) in the Paris area. We performed a retrospective multicenter cohort study on the data warehouse of Greater Paris University Hospitals (AP-HP). We identified all patients newly referred with a PC between January 1, 2019, and June 30, 2021, and excluded endocrine tumors. Using claims data and health records, we analyzed the timeline of care trajectories, the initial tumor stage, the treatment categories: pancreatectomy, exclusive systemic therapy or exclusive best supportive care (BSC). We calculated patients' 1-year overall survival (OS) and compared indicators in 2019 and 2020 to 2021. We included 2335 patients. Referral fell by 29% during the first lockdown. The median time from biopsy and from first MDM to treatment were 25 days (16-50) and 21 days (11-40), respectively. Between 2019 and 2020 to 2021, the rate of metastatic tumors (36% vs 33%, P = .39), the pTNM distribution of the 464 cases with upfront tumor resection (P = .80), and the proportion of treatment categories did not vary: tumor resection (32% vs 33%), exclusive systemic therapy (49% vs 49%), exclusive BSC (19% vs 19%). The 1-year OS rates in 2019 vs 2020 to 2021 were 92% vs 89% (aHR = 1.42; 95% CI, 0.82-2.48), 52% vs 56% (aHR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73-1.08), 13% vs 10% (aHR = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78-1.25), in the treatment categories, respectively. Despite an initial decrease in the number of new PCs, we did not observe any stage shift. OS did not vary significantly.

Why Are Data Missing in Clinical Data Warehouses? A Simulation Study of How Data Are Processed (and Can Be Lost).

In recent years, the development of clinical data warehouses (CDW) has put Electronic Health Records (EHR) data in the spotlight. More and more innovative technologies for healthcare are based on these EHR data. However, quality assessments on EHR data are fundamental to gain confidence in the performances of new technologies. The infrastructure developed to access EHR data - CDW - can affect EHR data quality but its impact is difficult to measure. We conducted a simulation on the Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) infrastructure to assess how a study on breast cancer care pathways could be affected by the complexity of the data flows between the AP-HP Hospital Information System, the CDW, and the analysis platform. A model of the data flows was developed. We retraced the flows of specific data elements for a simulated cohort of 1,000 patients. We estimated that 756 [743;770] and 423 [367;483] patients had all the data elements necessary to reconstruct the care pathway in the analysis platform in the "best case" scenarios (losses affect the same patients) and in a random distribution scenario (losses affect patients at random), respectively.

"In conferences, everyone goes 'health data is the future' ": an interview study on challenges in re-using EHR data for research in Clinical Data Warehouses.

More and more hospital Clinical Data Warehouses (CDWs) are developed to gain access to EHR data. The rapid growth of investments in CDWs suggest a real potential for innovation in healthcare. However, it is still not confirmed that CDWs will deliver on their promises as researchers working with CDWs face many challenges. To gain a better understanding of these challenges and how to overcome them, we conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with EHR data experts. In this article, we share some initial results from the ongoing interview study. Two main themes emerged from the analysis of the transcripts of the interviews: the importance of infrastructures in terms of data and how it is generated, and the difficulty to make care, clinical research, and data science work together. Finally, based on the experts' experience, several recommendations were identified when using a CDW.

Influence of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak on management and prognosis of new lung cancer cases, a retrospective multicentre real-life cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has impacted the care of cancer patients. This study sought to assess the pandemic's impact on the clinical presentations and outcomes of newly referred patients with lung cancer from the Greater Paris area. METHODS: We retrospectively retrieved the electronic health records and administrative data of 11.4 million patients pertaining to Greater Paris University Hospital (AP-HP). We compared indicators for the 2018-2019 period to those of 2020 in regard to newly referred lung cancer cases. We assessed the initial tumour stage, the delay between the first multidisciplinary tumour board (MTB) and anticancer treatment initiation, and 6-month overall survival (OS) rates depending on the anticancer treatment, including surgery, palliative systemic treatment, and best supportive care (BSC). RESULT: Among 6240 patients with lung cancer, 2179 (35%) underwent tumour resection, 2069 (33%) systemic anticancer therapy, 775 (12%) BSC, whereas 1217 (20%) did not receive any treatment. During the first lockdown, the rate of new diagnoses decreased by 32% compared with that recorded in 2018-2019. Initial tumour stage, repartition of patients among treatment categories, and MTB-related delays remained unchanged. The 6-month OS rates of patients diagnosed in 2018-2019 who underwent tumour resection were 98% versus 97% (HR = 1.2; 95% CI: 0.7-2.0) for those diagnosed in 2020; the respective rates for patients who underwent systemic anticancer therapy were 78% versus 79% (HR = 1.0; 95% CI: 0.8-1.2); these rates were 20% versus 13% (HR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1-1.6) for those who received BSC. COVID-19 was associated with poorer OS rates (HR = 2.1; 95% CI: 1.6-3.0) for patients who received systemic anticancer therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has not exerted any deleterious impact on 6-month OS of new lung cancer patients that underwent active anticancer therapy in Greater Paris University hospitals.

"What's the evidence?"-Towards more empirical evaluations of the impact of OR interventions in healthcare.

Despite an increasing number of papers reporting applications of operational research (OR) to problems in healthcare, there remains little empirical evidence of OR improving healthcare delivery in practice. Without such evidence it is harder both to justify the usefulness of OR to a healthcare audience and to learn and continuously improve our approaches. To progress, we need to build the evidence-base on whether and how OR improves healthcare delivery through careful empirical evaluation. This position paper reviews evaluation standards in healthcare improvement research and dispels some common myths about evaluation. It highlights the current lack of robust evaluation of healthcare OR and makes the case for addressing this. It then proposes possible ways for building better empirical evaluations of OR interventions in healthcare.

Impact of two waves of Sars-Cov2 outbreak on the number, clinical presentation, care trajectories and survival of patients newly referred for a colorectal cancer: A French multicentric cohort study from a large group of university hospitals.

The SARS-Cov2 may have impaired care trajectories, patient overall survival (OS), tumor stage at initial presentation for new colorectal cancer (CRC) cases. This study aimed at assessing those indicators before and after the beginning of the pandemic in France. In this retrospective cohort study, we collected prospectively the clinical data of the 11.4 million of patients referred to the Greater Paris University Hospitals (AP-HP). We identified new CRC cases between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2020, and compared indicators for 2018-2019 to 2020. pTNM tumor stage was extracted from postoperative pathology reports for localized colon cancer, and metastatic status was extracted from CT-scan baseline text reports. Between 2018 and 2020, 3602 and 1083 new colon and rectal cancers were referred to the AP-HP, respectively. The 1-year OS rates reached 94%, 93% and 76% for new CRC patients undergoing a resection of the primary tumor, in 2018-2019, in 2020 without any Sars-Cov2 infection and in 2020 with a Sars-Cov2 infection, respectively (HR 3.78, 95% CI 2.1-7.1). For patients undergoing other kind of anticancer treatment, the percentages are 64%, 66% and 27% (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4-3.3). Tumor stage at initial presentation, emergency level of primary tumor resection, delays between the first multidisciplinary meeting and the first anticancer treatment did not differ over time. The SARS-Cov2 pandemic has been associated with less newly diagnosed CRC patients and worse 1-year OS rates attributable to the infection itself rather than to its impact on hospital care delivery or tumor stage at initial presentation.

Identifying how GPs spend their time and the obstacles they face: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Although problems that impair task completion - known as operational failures - are an important focus of concern in primary care, they have remained little studied. AIM: To quantify the time GPs spend on different activities during clinical sessions; to identify the number of operational failures they encounter; and to characterise the nature of operational failures and their impact for GPs. DESIGN AND SETTING: Mixed-method triangulation study with 61 GPs in 28 NHS general practices in England from December 2018 to December 2019. METHOD: Time-motion methods, ethnographic observations, and interviews were used. RESULTS: Time-motion data on 7679 GP tasks during 238 hours of practice in 61 clinical sessions suggested that operational failures were responsible for around 5.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.5% to 5.4%) of all tasks undertaken by GPs and accounted for 3.9% (95% CI = 3.2% to 4.5%) of clinical time. However, qualitative data showed that time-motion methods, which depend on pre-programmed categories, substantially underestimated operational failures. Qualitative data also enabled further characterisation of operational failures, extending beyond those measured directly in the time-motion data (for example, interruptions, deficits in equipment/supplies, and technology) to include problems linked to GPs' coordination role and weaknesses in work systems and processes. The impacts of operational failures were highly consequential for GPs' experiences of work. CONCLUSION: GPs experience frequent operational failures, disrupting patient care, impairing experiences of work, and imposing burden in an already pressurised system. This better understanding of the nature and impact of operational failures allows for identification of targets for improvement and indicates the need for coordinated action to support GPs.

New cancer cases at the time of SARS-Cov2 pandemic and related public health policies: A persistent and concerning decrease long after the end of the national lockdown.

INTRODUCTION: The dissemination of SARS-Cov2 may have delayed the diagnosis of new cancers. This study aimed at assessing the number of new cancers during and after the lockdown. METHODS: We prospectively collected the clinical data of the 11.4 million patients referred to the Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris Teaching Hospital. We identified new cancer cases between 1st January 2018 and 31st September 2020 and compared indicators for 2018 and 2019 to 2020 with a focus on the French lockdown (17th March to 11th May 2020) across cancer types and patient age classes. RESULTS: Between January and September, 28,348, 27,272 and 23,734 new cancer cases were identified in 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively. The monthly median number of new cases reached 3168 (interquartile range, IQR, 3027; 3282), 3054 (IQR 2945; 3127) and 2723 (IQR 2085; 2,863) in 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively. From March 1st to May 31st, new cancer decreased by 30% in 2020 compared to the 2018-19 average; then by 9% from 1st June to 31st September. This evolution was consistent across all tumour types: -30% and -9% for colon, -27% and -6% for lung, -29% and -14% for breast, -33% and -12% for prostate cancers, respectively. For patients aged <70 years, the decrease of colorectal and breast new cancers in April between 2018 and 2019 average and 2020 reached 41% and 39%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The SARS-Cov2 pandemic led to a substantial decrease in new cancer cases. Delays in cancer diagnoses may affect clinical outcomes in the coming years.

Crowdsourcing citation-screening in a mixed-studies systematic review: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Crowdsourcing engages the help of large numbers of people in tasks, activities or projects, usually via the internet. One application of crowdsourcing is the screening of citations for inclusion in a systematic review. There is evidence that a 'Crowd' of non-specialists can reliably identify quantitative studies, such as randomized controlled trials, through the assessment of study titles and abstracts. In this feasibility study, we investigated crowd performance of an online, topic-based citation-screening task, assessing titles and abstracts for inclusion in a single mixed-studies systematic review. METHODS: This study was embedded within a mixed studies systematic review of maternity care, exploring the effects of training healthcare professionals in intrapartum cardiotocography. Citation-screening was undertaken via Cochrane Crowd, an online citizen science platform enabling volunteers to contribute to a range of tasks identifying evidence in health and healthcare. Contributors were recruited from users registered with Cochrane Crowd. Following completion of task-specific online training, the crowd and the review team independently screened 9546 titles and abstracts. The screening task was subsequently repeated with a new crowd following minor changes to the crowd agreement algorithm based on findings from the first screening task. We assessed the crowd decisions against the review team categorizations (the 'gold standard'), measuring sensitivity, specificity, time and task engagement. RESULTS: Seventy-eight crowd contributors completed the first screening task. Sensitivity (the crowd's ability to correctly identify studies included within the review) was 84% (N = 42/50), and specificity (the crowd's ability to correctly identify excluded studies) was 99% (N = 9373/9493). Task completion was 33 h for the crowd and 410 h for the review team; mean time to classify each record was 6.06 s for each crowd participant and 3.96 s for review team members. Replicating this task with 85 new contributors and an altered agreement algorithm found 94% sensitivity (N = 48/50) and 98% specificity (N = 9348/9493). Contributors reported positive experiences of the task. CONCLUSION: It might be feasible to recruit and train a crowd to accurately perform topic-based citation-screening for mixed studies systematic reviews, though resource expended on the necessary customised training required should be factored in. In the face of long review production times, crowd screening may enable a more time-efficient conduct of reviews, with minimal reduction of citation-screening accuracy, but further research is needed.

The Influence of Media Coverage and Governmental Policies on Google Queries Related to COVID-19 Cutaneous Symptoms: Infodemiology Study.

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19, studies have reported the appearance of internet searches for disease symptoms before their validation by the World Health Organization. This suggested that monitoring of these searches with tools including Google Trends may help monitor the pandemic itself. In Europe and North America, dermatologists reported an unexpected outbreak of cutaneous acral lesions (eg, chilblain-like lesions) in April 2020. However, external factors such as public communications may also hinder the use of Google Trends as an infodemiology tool. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess the impact of media announcements and lockdown enforcement on internet searches related to cutaneous acral lesions during the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020. METHODS: Two searches on Google Trends, including daily relative search volumes for (1) "toe" or "chilblains" and (2) "coronavirus," were performed from January 1 to May 16, 2020, with the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain, and Germany as the countries of choice. The ratio of interest over time in "chilblains" and "coronavirus" was plotted. To assess the impact of lockdown enforcement and media coverage on these internet searches, we performed an interrupted time-series analysis for each country. RESULTS: The ratio of interest over time in "chilblains" to "coronavirus" showed a constant upward trend. In France, Italy, and the United Kingdom, lockdown enforcement was associated with a significant slope change for "chilblain" searches with a variation coefficient of 1.06 (SE 0.42) (P=0.01), 1.04 (SE 0.28) (P<.01), and 1.21 (SE 0.44) (P=0.01), respectively. After media announcements, these ratios significantly increased in France, Spain, Italy, and the United States with variation coefficients of 18.95 (SE 5.77) (P=.001), 31.31 (SE 6.31) (P<.001), 14.57 (SE 6.33) (P=.02), and 11.24 (SE 4.93) (P=.02), respectively, followed by a significant downward trend in France (-1.82 [SE 0.45]), Spain (-1.10 [SE 0.38]), and Italy (-0.93 [SE 0.33]) (P<.001, P=0.004, and P<.001, respectively). The adjusted R2 values were 0.311, 0.351, 0.325, and 0.305 for France, Spain, Italy, and the United States, respectively, suggesting an average correlation between time and the search volume; however, this correlation was weak for Germany and the United Kingdom. CONCLUSIONS: To date, the association between chilblain-like lesions and COVID-19 remains controversial; however, our results indicate that Google queries of "chilblain" were highly influenced by media coverage and government policies, indicating that caution should be exercised when using Google Trends as a monitoring tool for emerging diseases.

A process modelling approach to assess the impact of teledermatology deployment onto the skin tumor care pathway.

BACKGROUND: Teledermatology was raised as a potential answer to increase access and decrease delay for skin cancer management. However, its influence on non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) care pathway has never been studied. OBJECTIVES: To compare conventional care pathway to teledermatology (TD) in NMSC care pathways using a process modelling approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A period study including three groups was conducted in a department of dermatology. During the first period from January till February 2013 a NMSC care pathway was mapped for a group a prior TD integration. During the second period from September 2016 till October 2018, the NMSC care pathway was determined for patients managed by a conventional care process and after TD diagnosis. Patients characteristics, type of tumors and processes were compared using time as a key performance indicator. Mean were reported with their ± SD. Linear regression was performed using time between multidisciplinary consultation and surgery as outcome adjusted on sex, age and cancer type. RESULTS: During the first period (prior to TD) 89 NMSC patients were managed (mean age = 76 yr old ± 13) during the second period, 36 patients NMSC were managed after TD, mean age of 89 years old ± 6 and 954 patients in a conventional process, mean age of 78 years old ±12. In comparison between the two periods patient's age, sex and cancer distribution significantly differed while the rate of surgery was not significantly different (p = 0.967). Linear multivariate regression using time between multidisciplinary consultation and surgery as outcome adjusted on sex age and cancer type displayed that during the second period patients in the TD group spent 17.6 days more [0.98,34.25] while patient in the conventional care process group had 9.8 days [1.85,17.74] more than patient in the study period 1, (p = 0.04, p = 0.02) without significant difference for age and sex (p = 0.29, p = 0.51). Patients with a SCC had a decreased time between multidisciplinary consultation and surgery of -12.97 days [-17.43, -8.5], p < 10-3. CONCLUSION: Interestingly, patients managed by TD were significantly older than those managed using a conventional care pathway. Unexpectedly their total time spent in the process was not shorter. The results of this analysis illustrated the interest of using process modelling approach to assess the impact of a healthcare innovation integration and to further rethink coordination and care pathways for NSMC post TD.