Search

Introduction: Although virtual care (VC) has become an integral part of oncology care and healthcare delivery, clinicians’ perspectives on and satisfaction with this modality are not well understood. Methods: Using a National Network Forum framework and expert panel review, we developed a questionnaire to measure oncologists’ satisfaction with VC. The questionnaire was distributed to Canadian oncologists through medical society email lists (n = 1541). We used a 5-point Likert scale to capture their responses, which included strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), undecided (3), agree (4), and strongly agree (5). Results: A total of 61 oncologists and/or oncology trainees, of 768 (7.9%) who opened their email, completed questionnaires between October 2022 and January 2023. Every questionnaire item had a response rate greater than 98%. Seventy-two percent of the respondents were satisfied with VC. Oncologists who were less comfortable with technology were more likely to report lower levels of satisfaction (p < 0.001, Wilcoxon rank-sum). The questionnaire items that received the highest levels of agreement were related to VC reducing costs and improving access for patients and concerns about missing a diagnosis and assessing patients’ functional status. The questionnaire items that received the greatest disagreement were related to VC improving access for patients with language barriers, VC being associated with time-savings for clinicians, improvements in clinical efficacy, and more readily available lab tests. Conclusions: Most of the oncologists surveyed are satisfied with VC; however, there are some concerns with VC that need to be addressed. Future research on optimizing VC should address clinicians’ concerns, in addition to addressing the patient experience.

Introduction: Although virtual care (VC) has become an integral part of oncology care and healthcare delivery, clinicians' perspectives on and satisfaction with this modality are not well understood. Methods: Using a National Network Forum framework and expert panel review, we developed a questionnaire to measure oncologists' satisfaction with VC. The questionnaire was distributed to Canadian oncologists through medical society email lists (n = 1541). We used a 5-point Likert scale to capture their responses, which included strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), undecided (3), agree (4), and strongly agree (5). Results: A total of 61 oncologists and/or oncology trainees, of 768 (7.9%) who opened their email, completed questionnaires between October 2022 and January 2023. Every questionnaire item had a response rate greater than 98%. Seventy-two percent of the respondents were satisfied with VC. Oncologists who were less comfortable with technology were more likely to report lower levels of satisfaction (p < 0.001, Wilcoxon rank-sum). The questionnaire items that received the highest levels of agreement were related to VC reducing costs and improving access for patients and concerns about missing a diagnosis and assessing patients' functional status. The questionnaire items that received the greatest disagreement were related to VC improving access for patients with language barriers, VC being associated with time-savings for clinicians, improvements in clinical efficacy, and more readily available lab tests. Conclusions: Most of the oncologists surveyed are satisfied with VC; however, there are some concerns with VC that need to be addressed. Future research on optimizing VC should address clinicians' concerns, in addition to addressing the patient experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an unprecedent shift towards virtual cancer care, including the care of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of virtual care for GEP-NETs during the COVID-19 pandemic at a high-volume academic cancer center. Methods: This retrospective, observational study performed at the Ottawa Hospital Cancer Center in Canada evaluated adult patients with GEP-NETs seen in consultation by medical oncology between 1 June 2019 and 31 December 2022. Demographic, clinicopathologic, cancer treatment and visit data were collected. Univariable and multivariable analyses assessed the relationship between patient characteristics and virtual care use. Results: A total of 103 patients with well-differentiated GEP-NETS were included. Overall, 18/103 (17.5%) consults and 594/781 (76.1%) follow-ups were performed virtually. All consultation visits returned to in-person assessment by 2022, while 67.0% and 41.4% follow-ups remained virtual in 2022 and 2023, respectively. The year of follow-up, sex, employment and Charlston comorbidity index were associated with virtual follow-up use in the multivariable analysis. Discussion: Virtual care remained a predominant method of GEP-NET patient assessment in the peri-pandemic period. These results highlight an opportunity to improve access to subspecialty neuroendocrine cancer care through the continued use of virtual care.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an unprecedent shift towards virtual cancer care, including the care of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of virtual care for GEP-NETs during the COVID-19 pandemic at a high-volume academic cancer center. Methods: This retrospective, observational study performed at the Ottawa Hospital Cancer Center in Canada evaluated adult patients with GEP-NETs seen in consultation by medical oncology between 1 June 2019 and 31 December 2022. Demographic, clinicopathologic, cancer treatment and visit data were collected. Univariable and multivariable analyses assessed the relationship between patient characteristics and virtual care use. Results: A total of 103 patients with well-differentiated GEP-NETS were included. Overall, 18/103 (17.5%) consults and 594/781 (76.1%) follow-ups were performed virtually. All consultation visits returned to in-person assessment by 2022, while 67.0% and 41.4% follow-ups remained virtual in 2022 and 2023, respectively. The year of follow-up, sex, employment and Charlston comorbidity index were associated with virtual follow-up use in the multivariable analysis. Discussion: Virtual care remained a predominant method of GEP-NET patient assessment in the peri-pandemic period. These results highlight an opportunity to improve access to subspecialty neuroendocrine cancer care through the continued use of virtual care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

CancerCare Manitoba (CCMB) introduced virtual visits at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to replace many in-person visits. This study examines the impact of virtual visits for cancer care on travel distance, travel time, and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. We included all visits to CCMB for invasive and in situ cancers from 1 April 2020 to 31 December 2022. Data were extracted from CCMB’s electronic health record. The percentage of visits done virtually by month was reported by age, gender, cancer diagnosis, and regional health authority of residence. Postal codes for patients’ residences and clinic locations were converted into latitude and longitude values. Travel distance, travel time, and CO2 emissions associated with travel were estimated. The percentage of virtual visits was highest during the months when COVID-19 restrictions were present in Manitoba and represent more than 50% of such monthly visits. Virtual visits increased with age, were highest among men with urogenital cancer, and were lowest among northern Manitoba residents. The median travel time per visit ranged from 30 min in Winnipeg to 15 h in the Northern Region. The estimated travel distance saved varied from 420,000 to 750,000 km per month. Estimated travel time saved varied from 5500 to 9600 h per month. Estimated CO2 emissions prevented varied from 87 to 155 metric tons per month. Virtual care is an important tool for better supporting those living with cancer by substantially decreasing travel distance and time. Virtual care also contributes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

(1) Background: Cancer is the leading cause of death in Canada, with significant resource limitation impacting the delivery of cancer care nationwide. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic forced additional resource restriction and diversion, further impacting care delivery. Our intention is to analyze the impact COVID-19 on a provincial medical oncology workload and bring attention to the limitations of the current workload metric for oncologists. (2) Methods: All medical oncology patient encounters were extracted and compared, collected by year and encounter type, from April 2014 through March 2022. (3) Results: There was an increase in all patient encounters by an average of 9.5% per year, including during the strictest COVID-19 restrictions. There was an increase in virtual care encounters from 37.9% to 52.1%. (4) Conclusions: Medical Oncology workloads have increased over time and estimates suggest growing demand. Little data exist to inform workforce requirements and actual workload is not captured by the current metric. Though volume of new consults continues to increase, COVID-19 has highlighted additional changes in the delivery of care, likely with lasting impact, little of which are included in the current workload metric.

CancerCare Manitoba (CCMB) introduced virtual visits at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to replace many in-person visits. This study examines the impact of virtual visits for cancer care on travel distance, travel time, and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. We included all visits to CCMB for invasive and in situ cancers from 1 April 2020 to 31 December 2022. Data were extracted from CCMB's electronic health record. The percentage of visits done virtually by month was reported by age, gender, cancer diagnosis, and regional health authority of residence. Postal codes for patients' residences and clinic locations were converted into latitude and longitude values. Travel distance, travel time, and CO2 emissions associated with travel were estimated. The percentage of virtual visits was highest during the months when COVID-19 restrictions were present in Manitoba and represent more than 50% of such monthly visits. Virtual visits increased with age, were highest among men with urogenital cancer, and were lowest among northern Manitoba residents. The median travel time per visit ranged from 30 min in Winnipeg to 15 h in the Northern Region. The estimated travel distance saved varied from 420,000 to 750,000 km per month. Estimated travel time saved varied from 5500 to 9600 h per month. Estimated CO2 emissions prevented varied from 87 to 155 metric tons per month. Virtual care is an important tool for better supporting those living with cancer by substantially decreasing travel distance and time. Virtual care also contributes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The majority of Canadians agree they have the right to end-of-life care in their own homes. While a palliative approach to care in the home setting has been demonstrated to be beneficial for patients and the healthcare system, it has rarely been well-integrated through an eHealth approach. Thus, in 2018, we piloted the RELIEF app, a digital symptom self-reporting tool for patients with palliative care needs. This was followed by the initiation of an extension phase of RELIEF in the home care setting. In this commentary, we share the implementation perspectives and experiences of the researchers and healthcare workers involved in this home care phase. It was mainly expressed that there were challenges with nurses feeling involved, supporting the research program, and using the technology, while patients and family caregivers had challenges using the app and cooperating with staff. We describe our lessons learned from these experiences and future changes to be enacted. A detailed report of this trial will be made available in future publications.

(1) Background: The coronavirus 2019 pandemic has resulted in an abrupt transition to virtual oncology care worldwide. This study’s objective is to evaluate chemotherapy delivery and clinical outcomes in patients on systemic treatment for colorectal cancer before and during the pandemic. (2) Methods: Clinical data was collected on patients with colorectal cancer receiving intravenous chemotherapy at The Ottawa Hospital from June 2019 to March 2021. Patients were stratified by whether they were started on chemotherapy pre-pandemic (June 2019–January 2020) or intra-pandemic (February 2020–March 2021). Multiple regression analysis was used to compare outcomes between pandemic periods; (3) Results: There were 220 patients included in this study. The proportion of virtual consultations (1.2% to 64.4%) and follow-up visits (5.2% to 83.3%) increased during the pandemic. There was no difference in the incidence of treatment delays (OR = 1.01, p = 0.78), chemotherapy dose reductions (OR = 0.99, p = 0.69), emergency department visits (OR = 1.23, p = 0.37) or hospitalizations (OR = 0.73, p = 0.43) between pandemic periods. A subgroup analysis revealed no difference in outcomes independent of the presence of metastases; (4) Conclusion: These findings serve as an important quality-care indicator and demonstrate that virtual oncology care appears safe in a cohort of high-risk colorectal cancer patients.

(1) Background: Cancer is the leading cause of death in Canada, with significant resource limitation impacting the delivery of cancer care nationwide. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic forced additional resource restriction and diversion, further impacting care delivery. Our intention is to analyze the impact COVID-19 on a provincial medical oncology workload and bring attention to the limitations of the current workload metric for oncologists. (2) Methods: All medical oncology patient encounters were extracted and compared, collected by year and encounter type, from April 2014 through March 2022. (3) Results: There was an increase in all patient encounters by an average of 9.5% per year, including during the strictest COVID-19 restrictions. There was an increase in virtual care encounters from 37.9% to 52.1%. (4) Conclusions: Medical Oncology workloads have increased over time and estimates suggest growing demand. Little data exist to inform workforce requirements and actual workload is not captured by the current metric. Though volume of new consults continues to increase, COVID-19 has highlighted additional changes in the delivery of care, likely with lasting impact, little of which are included in the current workload metric. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: The COVID-19 pandemic illuminated vulnerabilities in the Canadian health care system and exposed gaps and challenges across the cancer care continuum. Canada is experiencing significant disruptions to cancer-related services, and the impact these disruptions (delays/deferrals/cancellations) have on the health care system and patients are yet to be determined. Given the potential adverse ramifications, how can Canada’s health care systems build resilience for future threats? (2) Methods: To answer this question, CCC facilitated a series of four thought-leadership roundtables, each representing the views of four different stakeholder groups: patients, physicians, health care system leaders, and researchers. (3) Results: Six themes of strength were identified to serve as a springboard for building resilience including, (1) advancing virtual care and digital health technologies to prevent future interruptions in cancer care delivery. (2) developing real-time data metrics, data sharing, and evidence-based decision-making. (3) enhancing public–private-non-profit partnerships to advance research and strengthen connections across the system. (4) advancing patient-centricity in cancer research to drive and encourage precision medicine approaches to care. (5) investing in training and hiring a robust supply of health care human resources. (6) implementing a national strategy and infrastructure to ensure inter-provincial collaborative data sharing (4). Conclusions: A resilient health care system that can respond to shocks and threats is not an emergency system; it is a robust everyday system that can respond to emergencies.

There is increasing interest from cancer patients and their healthcare providers in the use of virtual care in routine clinical practice. In the setting of hematologic malignancy, where patients often undergo complex and immunodepleting treatments, understanding how to use virtual care safely and effectively is critically important. We aimed to describe the use of virtual care in patients with hematologic malignancies and to examine physician- and patient-reported outcomes in the form of a systematic scoping review. An electronic search of PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, Scopus, and EBSCO CINAHL was conducted from January 2000 to April 2021. A comprehensive search strategy was used to identify relevant articles, and data were extracted to assess the study design, population, setting, patient characteristics, virtual care platform, and study results. Studies were included if they described the use of virtual care for patients with hematologic malignancies; commentaries were excluded. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria after abstract and full-text review. Three studies found that app-based tools were effective in monitoring patient symptoms and triggering alerts for more urgent follow-up. Four studies described the use of phone-based interventions. Five studies found that videoconferencing, with both physicians and oncology nurses, was highly rated by patients. Emerging themes included high levels of patient satisfaction across all domains of virtual care. Provider satisfaction scores were rated lower than patient scores, with concerns about technical issues leading to challenges with virtual care. Four studies found that virtual care allowed providers to promptly respond to patient concerns, especially when patients were experiencing side-effects or had questions about their treatment. Overall, the use of virtual care in patients with hematologic malignancies appears feasible, and resulted in high patient satisfaction. Further research is needed in order to evaluate the optimal method of integrating virtual care into clinical practice.

The majority of Canadians agree they have the right to end-of-life care in their own homes. While a palliative approach to care in the home setting has been demonstrated to be beneficial for patients and the healthcare system, it has rarely been well-integrated through an eHealth approach. Thus, in 2018, we piloted the RELIEF app, a digital symptom self-reporting tool for patients with palliative care needs. This was followed by the initiation of an extension phase of RELIEF in the home care setting. In this commentary, we share the implementation perspectives and experiences of the researchers and healthcare workers involved in this home care phase. It was mainly expressed that there were challenges with nurses feeling involved, supporting the research program, and using the technology, while patients and family caregivers had challenges using the app and cooperating with staff. We describe our lessons learned from these experiences and future changes to be enacted. A detailed report of this trial will be made available in future publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Continued smoking after a cancer diagnosis may be attributed to misbeliefs by both patients and healthcare providers on the value and benefit of quitting smoking on treatment outcomes. The perceived myths and misconceptions about the relationship between smoking and cancer may be readily dispelled with the provision of practical and pertinent education. However, busy clinics as well as the rapid move to virtual care due to the COVID-19 pandemic present several challenges with the provision of smoking cessation education. Here, we describe how the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre implemented innovative solutions to improve the delivery of education during the COVID-19 pandemic to better support patients and healthcare providers.

Virtual cancer care (i.e., teleoncology) was rapidly adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic to meet the needs of patients with cancer. However, there is a paucity of guidance for clinicians regarding virtual cancer care. We sought to develop consensus-based statements to guide the optimal provision of virtual care for clinicians caring for patients with cancer, using a modified Delphi consensus process with a 29-member panel consisting of an interprofessional group of clinicians caring for patients with cancer and patient representatives. The consensus process consisted of two rounds and one synchronous final consensus meeting. At the end of the modified Delphi process, 62 of 62 statements achieved consensus. Fifty-seven statements reached consensus in the first round of the process. Concerns regarding the ability to convey difficult news virtually and maintaining similar standards as in-person care without disproportionate strain on clinicians and patients were addressed in the consensus process. We achieved interprofessional consensus on virtual cancer care practices. Further research examining the impact of virtual cancer care on person-centred and clinical outcomes are needed to inform practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

The lack of timely symptom reporting remains a barrier to effective symptom management and comfort for patients with cancer-related palliative care needs. Poor symptom management at home can lead to unwanted outcomes, such as emergency department visits and death in hospital. We developed and evaluated RELIEF, a remote symptom self-reporting app for community patients with palliative care needs. A pilot feasibility study was conducted at a large, community hospital in Ontario, Canada. Patients self-reported their symptoms each morning using validated clinical symptom measures and RELIEF would alert for worsening or severe symptoms. RELIEF alerts were monitored by palliative care nurses who would then contact patients to determine if appropriate clinical intervention could be initiated to avoid unnecessary emergency department visits. A total of 20 patients were recruited to use RELIEF for two months. Patients completed 80% of daily self-report assessments; 133 alerts were trigged, half of which required clinical intervention. No patient visited the emergency department for symptom management during the study. Clinical staff estimated five emergency department visits were avoided because of RELIEF—saving an estimated cost of over CAD 60,000. RELIEF is a feasible and acceptable method for the remote monitoring of patients with palliative care needs through regular symptom self-reporting.

We aimed to describe the negative and positive impacts of changes in cancer care delivery due to COVID-19 pandemic for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) in Canada, as well as the correlates of negative impact and their perspectives on optimization of cancer care. We conducted an online, self-administered survey of AYAs with cancer living in Canada between January and February 2021. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with a negative impact on cancer care. Of the 805 participants, 173 (21.5%) experienced a negative impact on their cancer care including delays in diagnostic tests (11.9%), cancer treatment (11.4%), and appointments (11.1%). A prior diagnosis of mental or chronic physical health condition, an annual income of p-value < 0.05). The majority (n = 767, 95.2%) stated a positive impact of the changes to cancer care delivery, including the implementation of virtual healthcare visits (n = 601, 74.6%). Pandemic-related changes in cancer care delivery have unfavorably and favorably influenced AYAs with cancer. Interventions to support AYAs who are more vulnerable to the adverse effects of the pandemic, and the thoughtful integration of virtual care into cancer care delivery models is essential.

(1) Background: The coronavirus 2019 pandemic has resulted in an abrupt transition to virtual oncology care worldwide. This study's objective is to evaluate chemotherapy delivery and clinical outcomes in patients on systemic treatment for colorectal cancer before and during the pandemic. (2) Methods: Clinical data was collected on patients with colorectal cancer receiving intravenous chemotherapy at The Ottawa Hospital from June 2019 to March 2021. Patients were stratified by whether they were started on chemotherapy pre-pandemic (June 2019–January 2020) or intra-pandemic (February 2020–March 2021). Multiple regression analysis was used to compare outcomes between pandemic periods; (3) Results: There were 220 patients included in this study. The proportion of virtual consultations (1.2% to 64.4%) and follow-up visits (5.2% to 83.3%) increased during the pandemic. There was no difference in the incidence of treatment delays (OR = 1.01, p = 0.78), chemotherapy dose reductions (OR = 0.99, p = 0.69), emergency department visits (OR = 1.23, p = 0.37) or hospitalizations (OR = 0.73, p = 0.43) between pandemic periods. A subgroup analysis revealed no difference in outcomes independent of the presence of metastases; (4) Conclusion: These findings serve as an important quality-care indicator and demonstrate that virtual oncology care appears safe in a cohort of high-risk colorectal cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: The COVID-19 pandemic illuminated vulnerabilities in the Canadian health care system and exposed gaps and challenges across the cancer care continuum. Canada is experiencing significant disruptions to cancer-related services, and the impact these disruptions (delays/deferrals/cancellations) have on the health care system and patients are yet to be determined. Given the potential adverse ramifications, how can Canada's health care systems build resilience for future threats? (2) Methods: To answer this question, CCC facilitated a series of four thought-leadership roundtables, each representing the views of four different stakeholder groups: patients, physicians, health care system leaders, and researchers. (3) Results: Six themes of strength were identified to serve as a springboard for building resilience including, (1) advancing virtual care and digital health technologies to prevent future interruptions in cancer care delivery. (2) developing real-time data metrics, data sharing, and evidence-based decision-making. (3) enhancing public–private-non-profit partnerships to advance research and strengthen connections across the system. (4) advancing patient-centricity in cancer research to drive and encourage precision medicine approaches to care. (5) investing in training and hiring a robust supply of health care human resources. (6) implementing a national strategy and infrastructure to ensure inter-provincial collaborative data sharing (4). Conclusions: A resilient health care system that can respond to shocks and threats is not an emergency system; it is a robust everyday system that can respond to emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is increasing interest from cancer patients and their healthcare providers in the use of virtual care in routine clinical practice. In the setting of hematologic malignancy, where patients often undergo complex and immunodepleting treatments, understanding how to use virtual care safely and effectively is critically important. We aimed to describe the use of virtual care in patients with hematologic malignancies and to examine physician- and patient-reported outcomes in the form of a systematic scoping review. An electronic search of PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, Scopus, and EBSCO CINAHL was conducted from January 2000 to April 2021. A comprehensive search strategy was used to identify relevant articles, and data were extracted to assess the study design, population, setting, patient characteristics, virtual care platform, and study results. Studies were included if they described the use of virtual care for patients with hematologic malignancies; commentaries were excluded. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria after abstract and full-text review. Three studies found that app-based tools were effective in monitoring patient symptoms and triggering alerts for more urgent follow-up. Four studies described the use of phone-based interventions. Five studies found that videoconferencing, with both physicians and oncology nurses, was highly rated by patients. Emerging themes included high levels of patient satisfaction across all domains of virtual care. Provider satisfaction scores were rated lower than patient scores, with concerns about technical issues leading to challenges with virtual care. Four studies found that virtual care allowed providers to promptly respond to patient concerns, especially when patients were experiencing side-effects or had questions about their treatment. Overall, the use of virtual care in patients with hematologic malignancies appears feasible, and resulted in high patient satisfaction. Further research is needed in order to evaluate the optimal method of integrating virtual care into clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Continued smoking after a cancer diagnosis may be attributed to misbeliefs by both patients and healthcare providers on the value and benefit of quitting smoking on treatment outcomes. The perceived myths and misconceptions about the relationship between smoking and cancer may be readily dispelled with the provision of practical and pertinent education. However, busy clinics as well as the rapid move to virtual care due to the COVID-19 pandemic present several challenges with the provision of smoking cessation education. Here, we describe how the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre implemented innovative solutions to improve the delivery of education during the COVID-19 pandemic to better support patients and healthcare providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Virtual cancer care (i.e., teleoncology) was rapidly adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic to meet the needs of patients with cancer. However, there is a paucity of guidance for clinicians regarding virtual cancer care. We sought to develop consensus-based statements to guide the optimal provision of virtual care for clinicians caring for patients with cancer, using a modified Delphi consensus process with a 29-member panel consisting of an interprofessional group of clinicians caring for patients with cancer and patient representatives. The consensus process consisted of two rounds and one synchronous final consensus meeting. At the end of the modified Delphi process, 62 of 62 statements achieved consensus. Fifty-seven statements reached consensus in the first round of the process. Concerns regarding the ability to convey difficult news virtually and maintaining similar standards as in-person care without disproportionate strain on clinicians and patients were addressed in the consensus process. We achieved interprofessional consensus on virtual cancer care practices. Further research examining the impact of virtual cancer care on person-centred and clinical outcomes are needed to inform practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The lack of timely symptom reporting remains a barrier to effective symptom management and comfort for patients with cancer-related palliative care needs. Poor symptom management at home can lead to unwanted outcomes, such as emergency department visits and death in hospital. We developed and evaluated RELIEF, a remote symptom self-reporting app for community patients with palliative care needs. A pilot feasibility study was conducted at a large, community hospital in Ontario, Canada. Patients self-reported their symptoms each morning using validated clinical symptom measures and RELIEF would alert for worsening or severe symptoms. RELIEF alerts were monitored by palliative care nurses who would then contact patients to determine if appropriate clinical intervention could be initiated to avoid unnecessary emergency department visits. A total of 20 patients were recruited to use RELIEF for two months. Patients completed 80% of daily self-report assessments; 133 alerts were trigged, half of which required clinical intervention. No patient visited the emergency department for symptom management during the study. Clinical staff estimated five emergency department visits were avoided because of RELIEF--saving an estimated cost of over CAD 60,000. RELIEF is a feasible and acceptable method for the remote monitoring of patients with palliative care needs through regular symptom self-reporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Virtual care in cancer care existed in a limited fashion globally before the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly driven by geographic constraints. The pandemic has required dramatic shifts in health care delivery, including cancer care. We conducted a systematic review of comparative studies evaluating virtual versus in-person care in patients with cancer. Embase, APA PsycInfo, Ovid MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for literature from January 2015 to 6 August 2020. We adhered to PRISMA guidelines and used the modified GRADE approach to evaluate the data. We included 34 full-text publications of 10 randomized controlled trials, 13 non-randomized comparative studies, and 5 ongoing randomized controlled trials. Evidence was divided into studies that provide psychosocial or genetic counselling and those that provide or assess medical and supportive care. The limited data in this review support that in the general field of psychological counselling, virtual or remote counselling can be equivalent to in-person counselling. In the area of genetic counselling, telephone counselling was more convenient and noninferior to usual care for all outcomes (knowledge, decision conflict, cancer distress, perceived stress, genetic counseling satisfaction). There are few data for clinical outcomes and supportive care. Future research should assess the role of virtual care in these areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We aimed to describe the negative and positive impacts of changes in cancer care delivery due to COVID-19 pandemic for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) in Canada, as well as the correlates of negative impact and their perspectives on optimization of cancer care. We conducted an online, self-administered survey of AYAs with cancer living in Canada between January and February 2021. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with a negative impact on cancer care. Of the 805 participants, 173 (21.5%) experienced a negative impact on their cancer care including delays in diagnostic tests (11.9%), cancer treatment (11.4%), and appointments (11.1%). A prior diagnosis of mental or chronic physical health condition, an annual income of <20,000 CAD, ongoing cancer treatment, and province of residence were independently associated with a negative cancer care impact (p-value < 0.05). The majority (n = 767, 95.2%) stated a positive impact of the changes to cancer care delivery, including the implementation of virtual healthcare visits (n = 601, 74.6%). Pandemic-related changes in cancer care delivery have unfavorably and favorably influenced AYAs with cancer. Interventions to support AYAs who are more vulnerable to the adverse effects of the pandemic, and the thoughtful integration of virtual care into cancer care delivery models is essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Improved treatments resulting in a rising number of survivors of breast cancer (bca) calls for optimization of current specialist-based follow-up care. In the present study, we evaluated well survivors of bca with respect to their supportive care needs and attitudes toward follow-up with various care providers, in varying settings, or mediated by technology (for example, videoconference or e-mail). Methods A cross-sectional paper survey of well survivors of early-stage pT1-2N0 bca undergoing posttreatment follow-up was completed. Descriptive and univariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine associations between survivor characteristics, supportive care needs, and perceived satisfaction with follow-up options. Qualitative responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Results The 190 well survivors of bca who participated (79% response rate) had an average age of 63 ± 10 years. Median time since first follow-up was 21 months. Most had high perceived satisfaction with in-person specialist care (96%, 177 of 185). The second most accepted model was shared care involving specialist and primary care provider follow-up (54%, 102 of 190). Other models received less than 50% perceived satisfaction. Factors associated with higher perceived satisfaction with non-specialist care or virtual follow-up by a specialist included less formal education (p < 0.01) and more met supportive care needs (p < 0.05). Concerns with virtual follow-up included the perceived impersonal nature of virtual care, potential for inadequate care, and confidentiality. Conclusions Well survivors of bca want specialists involved in their follow-up care. Compared with virtual followup, in-person follow-up is perceived as more reassuring. Certain survivor characteristics (for example, met supportive care needs) might signal survivor readiness for virtual or non-specialist follow-up. Future work should examine multi-stakeholder perspectives about barriers to and facilitators of shared multimodal follow-up care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]