Telemedicine for head and neck cancer surveillance in the COVID-19 era: Promise and pitfalls.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to increased telemedicine visits. This study examines current preferences and barriers for telemedicine among patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS: Single institution retrospective analysis of 64 patients scheduling visits with the head and neck surgical oncology clinic at a tertiary academic medical center. Data were collected detailing patient preferences and barriers regarding telemedicine appointments. Patients electing to participate in telemedicine were compared to those preferring in-person appointments. RESULTS: Most patients (68%) were not interested in telemedicine. Preference for in-person examination was the most common reason for rejecting telemedicine, followed by discomfort with or limited access to technology. Patients elected telemedicine visits to avoid infection and for convenience. CONCLUSIONS: When given a choice, patients with head and neck cancer preferred in-person visits over telemedicine. Although telemedicine may improve health care access, patient preferences, technology-related barriers, and limitations regarding cancer surveillance must be addressed moving forward.

Snapshot Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Wellness in Nonphysician Otolaryngology Health Care Workers: A National Study.

OBJECTIVE: Nonphysician health care workers are involved in high-risk patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic, placing them at high risk of mental health burden. The mental health impact of COVID-19 in this crucial population has not been studied thus far. Thus, the objective of this study is to assess the psychosocial well-being of these providers. STUDY DESIGN: National cross-sectional online survey (no control group). SETTING: Academic otolaryngology programs in the United States. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We distributed a survey to nonphysician health care workers in otolaryngology departments across the United States. The survey incorporated a variety of validated mental health assessment tools to measure participant burnout (Mini-Z assessment), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), distress (Impact of Event Scale), and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-2). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictive factors associated with these mental health outcomes. RESULTS: We received 347 survey responses: 248 (71.5%) nurses, 63 (18.2%) administrative staff, and 36 (10.4%) advanced practice providers. A total of 104 (30.0%) respondents reported symptoms of burnout; 241 (69.5%), symptoms of anxiety; 292 (84.1%), symptoms of at least mild distress; and 79 (22.8%), symptoms of depression. Upon further analysis, development of these symptoms was associated with factors such as occupation, practice setting, and case load. CONCLUSION: Frontline otolaryngology health care providers exhibit high rates of mental health complications, particularly anxiety and distress, in the wake of COVID-19. Adequate support systems must be put into place to address these issues.

Mental health among otolaryngology resident and attending physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic: National study.

BACKGROUND: Otolaryngologists are among the highest risk for COVID-19 exposure. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, survey-based, national study evaluating academic otolaryngologists. Burnout, anxiety, distress, and depression were assessed by the single-item Mini-Z Burnout Assessment, 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale, 15-item Impact of Event Scale, and 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 349 physicians completed the survey. Of them, 165 (47.3%) were residents and 212 (60.7%) were males. Anxiety, distress, burnout, and depression were reported in 167 (47.9%), 210 (60.2%), 76 (21.8%), and 37 (10.6%) physicians, respectively. Attendings had decreased burnout relative to residents (odds ratio [OR] 0.28, confidence interval [CI] [0.11-0.68]; P = .005). Females had increased burnout (OR 1.93, CI [1.12.-3.32]; P = .018), anxiety (OR 2.53, CI [1.59-4.02]; P < .005), and distress (OR 2.68, CI [1.64-4.37]; P < .005). Physicians in states with greater than 20 000 positive cases had increased distress (OR 2.01, CI [1.22-3.31]; P = .006). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the prevalence of burnout, anxiety, and distress is high among academic otolaryngologists.

Changes in head and neck oncologic practice during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has raised controversies regarding safe and effective care of patients with head and neck cancer. It is unknown how much the pandemic has changed surgeon practice. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to head and neck surgeons assessing opinions related to treatment and concerns for the safety of patients, self, family, and staff. RESULTS: A total of 88 head and neck surgeons responded during the study period. Surgeons continued to recommend primary surgical treatment for oral cavity cancers. Respondents were more likely to consider nonsurgical therapy for patients with early glottic cancers and HPV-mediated oropharynx cancer. Surgeons were least likely to be concerned for their own health and safety and had the greatest concern for their resident trainees. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights differences in the willingness of head and neck surgeons to delay surgery or alter plans during times when hospital resources are scarce and risk is high.