ABSTRACT
Objective: In response to COVID-19, the fall prevention program (FPP) at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre was modified to be delivered virtually. We compared patient populations assessed for the FPP virtually versus in-person to explore equitable accessibility. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed. All patients assessed virtually from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic until the end of abstraction (April 25, 2022) were compared to a historic sample of patients assessed in-person beginning in January 2019. Demographics, measures of frailty, co-morbidity, and cognition were abstracted. Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests and Fisher's Exact tests were used for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Results: Thirty patients were assessed virtually and compared to 30 in-person historic controls. Median age was 80 years (interquartile range 75-85), 82% were female, 70% were university educated, the median Clinical Frailty Score was 5 out of 9, and 87% used >5 medications. Once normalized, frailty scores showed no difference (p = 0.446). The virtual cohort showed significantly higher outdoor walking aid use (p = 0.015), reduced accuracy with clock drawing (p = 0.020), and nonsignificant trends toward using >10 medications, requiring assistance with >3 instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), and higher treatment attendance. No significant differences were seen for time-to-treat (p = 0.423). Conclusion: Patients assessed virtually were similarly frail as the in-person controls but had increased use of walking aids, medications, IADL assistance, and cognitive impairment. In a Canadian context, frail and high socioeconomic status older adults continued to access treatment through virtual FPP assessments during the COVID-19 pandemic highlighting both the benefits of virtual care and potential inequity.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The incidence of colorectal cancer is rising in adults <50 years of age. As a primarily unscreened population, they may have clinically important delays to diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to review the literature on delay intervals in patients <50 years with colorectal cancer (CRC), and explore associations between longer intervals and outcomes. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS were searched until December 2, 2021. We included studies published after 1990 reporting any delay interval in adults <50 with CRC. Interval measures and associations with stage at presentation or survival were synthesized and described in a narrative fashion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, Institute of Health Economics Case Series Quality Appraisal Checklist, and the Aarhus Checklist for cancer delay studies. RESULTS: 55 studies representing 188,530 younger CRC patients were included. Most studies used primary data collection (64%), and 47% reported a single center. Sixteen unique intervals were measured. The most common interval was symptom onset to diagnosis (21 studies; N = 2,107). By sample size, diagnosis to treatment start was the most reported interval (12 studies; N = 170,463). Four studies examined symptoms onset to treatment start (total interval). The shortest was a mean of 99.5 days and the longest was a median of 217 days. There was substantial heterogeneity in the measurement of intervals, and quality of reporting. Higher-quality studies were more likely to use cancer registries, and be population-based. In four studies reporting the relationship between intervals and cancer stage or survival, there were no clear associations between longer intervals and adverse outcomes. DISCUSSION: Adults <50 with CRC may have intervals between symptom onset to treatment start greater than 6 months. Studies reporting intervals among younger patients are limited by inconsistent results and heterogeneous reporting. There is insufficient evidence to determine if longer intervals are associated with advanced stage or worse survival. OTHER: This study's protocol was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration number CRD42020179707).
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Adult , Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Incidence , Neoplasm Staging , Registries , Systematic Reviews as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has placed demands on General Surgery residents, who are already at high risk of burnout. This study examined the pandemic's impact on burnout and wellness among General Surgery residents at a large training program. METHODS: General Surgery residents at our institution completed a survey focused on self-reported burnout, mental health, perceptions of wellness resources, and changes in activities during the pandemic. Burnout was measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). Unsupervised machine learning (k-means clustering) was used to identify profiles of burnout and comparisons between profiles were made. RESULTS: Of 82 eligible residents, 51 completed the survey (62% response rate). During COVID-19, 63% of residents had self-described burnout, 43% had depression, 18% acknowledged binge drinking/drug use, and 8% had anxiety. There were no significant differences from pre-pandemic levels (p all >.05). Few residents perceived available wellness resources as effective (6%). Based on MBI scores, the clustering analysis identified three clusters, characterized as "overextended", "engaged", and "ineffective". Engaged residents had the least concerning MBI scores and were significantly more likely to exercise, retain social contact during the pandemic, and had less self-reported anxiety or depression. Research residents were overrepresented in the ineffective cluster (46%), which had high rates of self-reported burnout (77%) and was characterized by the lowest personal accomplishment scores. Rates of self-reported burnout for overextended and engaged residents were 73% and 48%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Surgical residents have high rates of self-reported burnout and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clusters of burnout may offer targets for individualized intervention.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Immunothrombosis and coagulopathy in the lung microvasculature may lead to lung injury and disease progression in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aim to identify biomarkers of coagulation, endothelial function, and fibrinolysis that are associated with disease severity and may have prognostic potential. METHODS: We performed a single-center prospective study of 14 adult COVID-19(+) intensive care unit patients who were age- and sex-matched to 14 COVID-19(-) intensive care unit patients, and healthy controls. Daily blood draws, clinical data, and patient characteristics were collected. Baseline values for 10 biomarkers of interest were compared between the three groups, and visualized using Fisher's linear discriminant function. Linear repeated-measures mixed models were used to screen biomarkers for associations with mortality. Selected biomarkers were further explored and entered into an unsupervised longitudinal clustering machine learning algorithm to identify trends and targets that may be used for future predictive modelling efforts. RESULTS: Elevated D-dimer was the strongest contributor in distinguishing COVID-19 status; however, D-dimer was not associated with survival. Variable selection identified clot lysis time, and antigen levels of soluble thrombomodulin (sTM), plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), and plasminogen as biomarkers associated with death. Longitudinal multivariate k-means clustering on these biomarkers alone identified two clusters of COVID-19(+) patients: low (30%) and high (100%) mortality groups. Biomarker trajectories that characterized the high mortality cluster were higher clot lysis times (inhibited fibrinolysis), higher sTM and PAI-1 levels, and lower plasminogen levels. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal trajectories of clot lysis time, sTM, PAI-1, and plasminogen may have predictive ability for mortality in COVID-19.