Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
J Surg Res ; 278: 233-239, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1867431

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Multidisciplinary tumor boards (TBs) are crucial for decision-making and management of patients diagnosed with complex malignancies. The social distancing conditions imposed by coronavirus disease 2019 presented an opportunity to compare virtual versus in-person TBs. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of attendance data from an National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center's gastrointestinal (GI) TB participant data from September 2019 to October 2020. In addition, an online survey assessing the virtual TB experience was sent to participants of all TBs. Interrupted time series analyses were performed to evaluate preintervention and postintervention GI TB attendance only. RESULTS: The overall mean attendance for GI TB was 30 participants; turnout was higher for virtual format compared to in-person (32 versus 23 attendees, P < 0.001). This increase was seen across all participant categories: attending physicians (15 versus 11 attendees, P < 0.001), trainees (11 versus 8, P < 0.001), and support staff (6 versus 3, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the mean number of cases discussed between TB formats. The majority of the 141 survey respondents (across all TB) were attending physicians with >20-year experience. Most supported a permanent virtual or hybrid TB format, 72.5% found this format to be more time efficient and with similar productivity, and 85.8% found it easier to attend. The majority (89.9%) felt confident that the decision-making process was not affected by virtual interactions. CONCLUSIONS: A virtual platform for multispecialty TBs allows for greater attendance without sacrificing the decision-making process. This survey supports continuing with a virtual or hybrid format, which may increase attendance and facilitate access to multidisciplinary discussions leading to improved patient care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Health Personnel , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 29(3): 1629-1635, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526674

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Covid-19 significantly affected healthcare delivery over the past year, with a shift in focus away from nonurgent care. Emerging data are showing that screening for breast and colon cancer has dramatically decreased. It is unknown whether the same trend has affected patients with melanoma. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of melanoma patients at two large-volume cancer centers. Patients were compared for 8 months before and after the lockdown. Outcomes focused on delay in treatment and possible resultant upstaging of melanoma. RESULTS: A total of 375 patients were treated pre-lockdown and 313 patients were treated post-lockdown (17% decrease). Fewer patients presented with in situ disease post-lockdown (15.3% vs. 17.9%), and a higher proportion presented with stage III-IV melanoma (11.2% vs. 9.9%). Comparing patients presenting 2 months before versus 2 months after the lockdown, there was an even more significant increase in Stage III-IV melanoma from 7.1% to 27.5% (p < 0.0001). Finally, in Stage IIIB-IIID patients, there was a decrease in patients receiving adjuvant therapy in the post lockdown period (20.0% vs. 15.2%). CONCLUSIONS: As a result of the recent pandemic, it appears there has been a shift away from melanoma in situ and toward more advanced disease, which may have significant downstream effects on prognosis and could be due to a delay in screening. Significantly patients have presented after the lockdown, and fewer patients are undergoing the recommended adjuvant therapies. Patient outreach efforts are essential to ensure that patients continue to receive preventative medical care and screening as the pandemic continues.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Melanoma , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Melanoma/diagnosis , Melanoma/epidemiology , Melanoma/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Am J Surg ; 222(1): 99-103, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-917204

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID crisis hit during the interview season for the Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) fellowship. With minimal time to adapt, all programs transitioned to virtual interviews. Here we describe the experience of both program directors (PDs) and candidates with virtual interviews, and provide guidelines for implementation based on the results. METHODS: Surveys regarding interview day specifics and perceptions were created for CGSO fellowship PDs and candidates. They were distributed at the conclusion of the season, prior to match. RESULTS: Thirty (94%) PDs and 64 (79%) candidates responded. Eighty-three% of PDs and 79% of candidates agreed or strongly agreed that they felt comfortable creating a rank list. If given the choice, 60% of PDs and 45% of candidates would choose virtual interviews over in-person interviews. The majority of candidates found PD overviews, fellows only sessions and pre-interview materials helpful. CONCLUSION: Overall, the majority of PDs and candidates felt comfortable creating a rank list; however, more PDs preferred virtual interviews for the future. Our results also confirm key components of a virtual interview day.


Subject(s)
Internship and Residency/organization & administration , Personal Satisfaction , Personnel Selection/methods , Surgical Oncology/education , Telecommunications/organization & administration , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Female , Humans , Internship and Residency/methods , Internship and Residency/statistics & numerical data , Male , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personnel Selection/organization & administration , Personnel Selection/standards , Personnel Selection/statistics & numerical data , Surgeons/psychology , Surgeons/statistics & numerical data , Surgical Oncology/organization & administration , Surgical Oncology/standards , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Telecommunications/standards , Telecommunications/statistics & numerical data
5.
J Surg Educ ; 78(1): 321-323, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-688862

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus crisis hit at the beginning of the Complex General Surgical Oncology Fellowship (CGSO) and Breast Oncology Fellowship interview cycles. Within 2 weeks, nearly all programs, including ours, switched to a virtual platform for the remainder of the season. Given that social distancing will remain in place for the foreseeable future, it is possible that all residency and fellowship interviews will need to be conducted virtually. Our methods and shared experience can assist other programs faced with this task for their upcoming interview cycle. We recommend using a virtual meeting platform in which staff have the most comfort; we chose Zoom as our platform. Information on the program traditionally included in the welcome packet, research opportunities, details on the institution, hospital and staff, and detailed interview instructions were distributed prior to the interview day. A virtual "happy hour" was conducted to provide an opportunity for candidates and current trainees to interact. Our virtual interview day schedule mimicked our traditional in person interview day, and we always had a back-up plan for completing the interview if the virtual platform became unstable. While many programs would not choose to perform virtual interviews, we felt that by conducting them in the methods we describe, we were able to closely replicate our traditional interview day and appreciate the candidacy of the applicants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Interviews as Topic , Physical Distancing , Surgical Oncology/education , Videoconferencing , Education, Medical, Graduate , Fellowships and Scholarships , Humans , Internship and Residency , Pandemics , Pennsylvania/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL