Quality of teaching radiation oncology in times of COVID-19 - an analysis of challenges and opportunities

Background: The COVID-pandemic has challenged medical education on multiple levels. Radiation Oncology (RO) is a pivotal clinical discipline for the understanding of modern oncology concepts [1]. The following analysis aims at providing an overview of students' evaluation of RO teaching in the pre- and pandemic situation. Method(s): RO curriculum at our faculty is organized longitudinally spanning all clinical semesters which are analyzed here. Students' evaluation is mandatory and done on a 101-item Likert scale (0-100;with 0 being the best grade). Starting from summer semester 2020 onward, lectures were digitalized and digital implementation was rated on a 11-item Likert scale (-5-+5;with -5 being the best grade). Evaluation results and participant numbers between winter semester 2018/2019 and summer semester 2021 were assessed, the first three semesters being classified as "pre-pandemic" and the later three as "pandemic". Result(s): Lectures were rated with a median 18.5-21.5 for the 2nd-6th clinical semester. Comparison between pre-pandemic and pandemic semesters revealed a deterioration of 1-3 points. Median participants numbers were 63.5-89 with an increase of 12-20 in the pandemic semesters except for the 6th clinical semester. The percentage of students attending 75 % of RO lectures in one semester increased considerably (median: 41.4 % vs. 75.3 %). Digital implementation was rated with a median score of -2 to 0. Discussion(s): Differences between pre-pandemic and pandemic evaluations are consistent but small and are unlikely a sign of students' discontent. Digital formats could augment the numbers of participants as well as the percentage of presence. Digital implementation was evaluated to be average to good. Conclusion(s): Digital transfer of RO is feasible and good evaluation results are maintained. Additional concepts with a web-based learning platform and videocasts are currently being developed.

Managing hematological cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: an ESMO-EHA Interdisciplinary Expert Consensus.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has created enormous challenges for the clinical management of patients with hematological malignancies (HMs), raising questions about the optimal care of this patient group. METHODS: This consensus manuscript aims at discussing clinical evidence and providing expert advice on statements related to the management of HMs in the COVID-19 pandemic. For this purpose, an international consortium was established including a steering committee, which prepared six working packages addressing significant clinical questions from the COVID-19 diagnosis, treatment, and mitigation strategies to specific HMs management in the pandemic. During a virtual consensus meeting, including global experts and lead by the European Society for Medical Oncology and the European Hematology Association, statements were discussed and voted upon. When a consensus could not be reached, the panel revised statements to develop consensual clinical guidance. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The expert panel agreed on 33 statements, reflecting a consensus, which will guide clinical decision making for patients with hematological neoplasms during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Radiation treatment of hemato-oncological patients in times of the COVID-19 pandemic : Expert recommendations from the radiation oncology panels of the German Hodgkin Study Group and the German Lymphoma Alliance.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus pandemic is affecting global health systems, endangering daily patient care. Hemato-oncological patients are particularly vulnerable to infection, requiring decisive recommendations on treatment and triage. The aim of this survey amongst experts on radiation therapy (RT) for lymphoma and leukemia is to delineate typical clinical scenarios and to provide counsel for high-quality care. METHODS: A multi-item questionnaire containing multiple-choice and free-text questions was developed in a peer-reviewed process and sent to members of the radiation oncology panels of the German Hodgkin Study Group and the German Lymphoma Alliance. Answers were assessed online and analyzed centrally. RESULTS: Omission of RT was only considered in a minority of cases if alternative treatment options were available. Hypofractionated regimens and reduced dosages may be used for indolent lymphoma and fractures due to multiple myeloma. Overall, there was a tendency to shorten RT rather than to postpone or omit it. Even in case of critical resource shortage, panelists agreed to start emergency RT for typical indications (intracranial pressure, spinal compression, superior vena cava syndrome) within 24 h. Possible criteria to consider for patient triage are the availability of (systemic) options, the underlying disease dynamic, and the treatment rationale (curative/palliative). CONCLUSION: RT for hemato-oncological patients receives high-priority and should be maintained even in later stages of the pandemic. Hypofractionation and shortened treatment schedules are feasible options for well-defined constellations, but have to be discussed in the clinical context.