Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on training conditions and education in oncologic disciplines: a survey-based analysis.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to changes in global health care. Medical societies had to update guidelines and enhance new services such as video consultations. Cancer treatment had to be modified. The aim of this study is to ensure optimal care for cancer patients with the help of high-quality training even in times of crisis. We therefore conducted a nationwide survey of physicians in training in oncological disciplines during the pandemic to assess the impact on their education. METHODS: The survey was sent to tumour centres, hospitals, specialist societies, and working and junior research groups and distributed via newsletters and homepages. Interim results and a call for participation were published as a poster (DEGRO) [26] and in the German Cancer Society (DKG) journal FORUM [42]. The survey contained 53 questions on conditions of education and training and on clinical and scientific work. Statistics were carried out with LimeSurvey and SPSS (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). RESULTS: Between February and November 2022, 450 participants answered the survey, with radio-oncologists being the largest group (28%). Most colleagues (63%) had access to digital training methods. Virtual sessions were rated as a good alternative, especially as multidisciplinary meetings (54%) as well as in-house and external training programs (48%, 47%). The time spent by training supervisors on education was rated as less than before the pandemic by 57%. Half of all participants perceived communication (54%), motivation (44%) and atmosphere (50%) in the team as bad. The participants felt strongly burdened by extra work (55%) and by a changed team atmosphere (49%). One third felt a change in the quality of training during the pandemic and rated it as negative (35%). According to 37% of the participants, this had little influence on their own quality of work. Additional subgroup analyses revealed significant differences in gender, specialty and education level. CONCLUSION: In order to improve oncology training in times of crisis, access to digital training options and meetings should be ensured. Participants wish for regular team meetings in person to enable good team spirit, compensation for overtime work and sufficient time for training supervisors for discussion and feedback.

Variable participation of knowledge users in cancer health services research: results of a multiple case study.

BACKGROUND: Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is a research approach in which knowledge users (KUs) co-produce research. The rationale for IKT is that it leads to research that is more relevant and useful to KUs, thereby accelerating uptake of findings. The aim of the current study was to evaluate IKT activities within a cancer health services research network in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: An embedded multiple case study design was used. The cases were 5 individual studies within an overarching cancer health services research network. These studies focused on one of the following topics: case costing of cancer treatment, lung cancer surgery policy analysis, patient and provider-reported outcomes, colorectal cancer screening, and a team approach to women's survivorship. We conducted document reviews and held semi-structured interviews with researchers, KUs, and other stakeholders within a cancer system organization. The analysis examined patterns across and within cases. RESULTS: Researchers and their respective knowledge users from 4 of the 5 cases agreed to participate. Eighteen individuals from 4 cases were interviewed. In 3 of 4 cases, there were mismatched expectations between researchers and KUs regarding KU role; participants recommended that expectations be made explicit from the beginning of the collaboration. KUs perceived that frequent KU turnover may have affected both KU engagement and the uptake of study results within the organization. Researchers and KUs found that sharing research results was challenging because the organization lacked a framework for knowledge translation. Uptake of research findings appeared to be related to the researcher having an embedded role in the cancer system organization and/or close alignment of the study with organizational priorities. Document reviews found evidence of planned IKT strategies in 3 of 4 cases; however, actual KU role/engagement on research teams was variable. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to KU co-production of cancer health services research include mismatched expectations of KU role and frequent KU turnover. When a research study directly aligns with organizational priorities, it appears more likely that results will be considered in programming. Research teams that take an IKT approach should consider specific strategies to address barriers to KU engagement.

Lung Cancer Mortality Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Patient Experiences with Care: a SEER-CAHPS Study.

BACKGROUND: To determine whether there are racial/ethnic disparities in patient experiences with care among lung cancer survivors, whether they are associated with mortality. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of lung cancer survivors > 65 years old who completed a CAHPS survey > 6 months after the date of diagnosis. We used data from the SEER-Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers Systems (SEER-CAHPS®) database from 2000 to 2013 to assess racial/ethnic differences in patient experiences with care multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to assess the association between patient experience with care scores mortality in each racial/ethnic group. RESULTS: Within our cohort of 2603 lung cancer patients, Hispanic patients reported lower adjusted mean score with their ability to get needed care compared to white patients (B: - 5.21, 95% CI: - 9.03, - 1.39). Asian patients reported lower adjusted mean scores with their ability to get care quickly (- 4.25 (- 8.19, - 0.31)), get needed care (- 7.06 (- 10.51, - 3.61)), get needed drugs (- 9.06 (- 13.04, - 5.08)). For Hispanic patients, a 1-unit score increase in their ability to get all needed care (HR: 1.02, 1.00-1.03) care coordination (1.06, 1.02-1.09) was associated with higher risk of mortality. Among black patients, a 1-unit score increase in their ability to get needed care (HR: 0.99, 95% CI 0.98-0.99) care coordination (0.97, 0.94-0.99) was associated with lower risk mortality. CONCLUSIONS: There are racial/ethnic disparities in lung cancer patient experiences with care that may impact mortality. Patient experiences with care are important risk factors of mortality for certain racial/ethnic groups.

Estimating the Cancer Treatment Cost for 5 Common Types of Cancer with Separating Out-of-Pocket and Governmental Costs in Afghanistan, 2020.

The objective this study was to estimate the cost of cancer treatment services for 5 common types of cancer (Breast, Esophageal, Colorectal, Stomach and lung) by the public sector and patients. This study was a cross-sectional study that conducted using the medical records of patients who were registered in the Jamhuriyat Hospital from 1, 2020 to 12, 2020. The prevalence-based approach was used to estimate the costs of five major cancer types. The data of 769 patients were eligible to include for the analysis. The considered cost of services was obtained from the average cost in 3 private hospitals in Kabul. Also all costs converted in to US dollar using the exchange rate of each USD equaling to AFN 77 in 2020. The data was analyzed using Ms. Excel Program. The total number of patients with 5 types of cancer were 769. Of these, female, in the age group of 40-60 years and were illiterate. The most common cancers based on the cancer treatment services' costs of health services was breast cancer, followed by esophagus, colorectal, stomach and lung. Moreover, the most common cancers based on the cancer treatment services' costs of health services which cancer patients needed was breast cancer, followed by esophagus, colorectal, stomach and lung.  Moreover, total cost of cancer treatment is US$590,662.98, in which Patients paid USD 82,537 of it out-of-pocket. The costs of cancer treatment services for 5 common types of cancer are high which a considerable portion are paid by patients. There is a need for the government to pay more attention to the provision of these services and to increase the centers providing these services and the existing facilities. Also, support of the international community in this process can enable more people to access these services and reduce the economic burden on patients.

Cancer as a Chronic Illness in Colombia: A Normative Consensus Approach to Improving Healthcare Services for those Living with and beyond Cancer and Its Treatment.

Cancer survivorship care in Colombia is of increasing importance. International survivorship initiatives and studies show that continuing symptoms, psychological distress, and late effects impact the quality of life for survivors. Priorities for quality survivorship according to Colombian patients and clinicians are unknown. We undertook a nominal consensus approach with 24 participants using virtual meeting technology to identify the priorities for cancer survivorship. We applied an iterative approach conducted over eight weeks with five workshops and one patient focus group followed by a priority setting survey. The consensus group established six main themes, which were subsequently evaluated by experts: (i) symptoms and secondary effects of cancer; (ii) care coordination to increase patient access and integration of cancer care; (iii) psychosocial support after cancer treatment; (iv) mapping information resources and available support services for long-term cancer care; (v) identifying socioeconomic and regional inequalities in cancer survival to improve care and outcomes; and (vi) health promotion and encouraging lifestyle change. The order of priorities differed between clinicians and patients: patients mentioned psychosocial support as the number one priority, and clinicians prioritized symptoms and surveillance for cancer recurrence. Developing survivorship care needs consideration of both views, including barriers such as access to services and socioeconomic disparities.

Rural and Urban Differences in the Adoption of New Health Information and Medical Technologies.

BACKGROUND: This statewide survey sought to understand the adoption level of new health information and medical technologies, and whether these patterns differed between urban and rural populations. METHODS: A random sample of 7,979 people aged 18-75 years, stratified by rural status and race, who lived in 1 of 34 Indiana counties with high cancer mortality rates and were seen at least once in the past year in a statewide health system were surveyed. RESULTS: Completed surveys were returned by 970 participants. Rural patients were less likely than urban to use electronic health record messaging systems (28.3% vs 34.5%, P = .045) or any communication technology (43.0% vs 50.8%, P = .017). Rural patients were less likely to look for personal health information for someone else's medical record (11.0% vs 16.3%, P = .022), look-up test results (29.5% vs 38.3%, P = .005), or use any form of electronic medical record (EMR) access (57.5% vs 67.1%, P = .003). Rural differences in any use of communication technology or EMRs were no longer significant in adjusted models, while education and income were significantly associated. There was a trend in the higher use of low-dose computed tomography (CT) scan among rural patients (19.1% vs 14.4%, P = .057). No significant difference was present between rural and urban patients in the use of the human papilloma virus test (27.1% vs 26.6%, P = .880). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in health information technology use between rural and urban populations may be moderated by social determinants. Lower adoption of new health information technologies (HITs) than medical technologies among rural, compared to urban, individuals may be due to lower levels of evidence supporting HITs.