Implementation of national blood conservation recommendations at an adult sickle cell center.

BACKGROUND: Due to the national blood supply crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the American Society of Hematology proposed guidance to decrease blood utilization for sickle cell patients on chronic transfusion therapy (CTT). Little evidence exists to support the efficacy and safety of these blood conservation strategies. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Through retrospective analysis, we sought to describe outcomes following implementation of these recommendations in 58 adult sickle cell patients on chronic exchange transfusions. The strategies employed included: relaxing the goal fraction of cells remaining (FCR) to 30%-50%, utilizing depletion exchanges in select patients, and transitioning select patients to monthly simple transfusions. We compared hemoglobin S%, hemoglobin values, and other laboratory parameters, acute care visits, and red blood cell usage during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to the year prior using Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: Of 53 patients who remained on chronic exchanges during the pandemic, use of depletion exchange increased (15%-23%) and FCR increased (34.9 [SD 4.7] vs. 37.6 [SD 4.5], p < .05). These changes resulted in 854 units conserved without clinically significant changes to pre-exchange laboratory parameters, including hemoglobin S%, or number of acute care presentations. In contrast, five patients who transitioned to predominantly simple transfusions, experienced difficulty maintaining hemoglobin S% less than 30 and worsening anemia. DISCUSSION: Our data suggest that in a blood shortage crisis, optimizing the exchange procedure itself may be the safest means of conserving blood in a population of adult patients with sickle cell disease.

Readdressing the Needs of Cancer Survivors During COVID-19: A Path Forward.

The growing number of cancer survivors and the high prevalence of cancer-related physical and psychosocial effects pose important and pressing challenges to health systems. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to further stressors on cancer survivors and health care systems. As the pandemic continues to have substantial impact on the world, it is critical to focus attention on the health care needs of cancer survivors. In this commentary, we propose an adoption of essential steps that should be part of a continuous adaptive approach to promote effective cancer survivorship care during ongoing COVID-19 waves and beyond.

Delivering Virtual Cancer Rehabilitation Programming During the First 90 Days of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multimethod Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the adaptations made to implement virtual cancer rehabilitation at the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, as well as understand the experiences of patients and providers adapting to virtual care. DESIGN: Multimethod study. SETTING: Cancer center. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1968 virtual patient visits were completed during the study period. Adult survivors of cancer (n=12) and oncology health care providers (n=12) participated in semi-structured interviews. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Framework-driven categorization of program modifications, qualitative interviews with patients and providers, and a comparison of process outcomes with the previous 90 days of in-person care via referrals, completed visits and attendance, method of delivery, weekly capacities, and wait times. RESULTS: The majority of program visits could be adapted to virtual delivery, with format, setting, and content modifications. Virtual care demonstrated an increase or maintenance in the number of completed visits by appointment type compared with in-person care, with attendance ranging from 80%-93%. For most appointment types, capacities increased, whereas wait times decreased slightly. Overall, 168 patients (11% of all assessments and follow-ups) assessed virtually were identified by providers as requiring an in-person appointment because of reassessment of musculoskeletal and/or neurologic impairment (n=109, 65%) and lymphedema (n=59, 35%). The interviews (n=24) revealed that virtual care was an acceptable alternative in some circumstances, with the ability to (1) increase access to care; (2) provide a sense of reassurance during a time of isolation; and (3) provide confidence in learning skills to self-manage impairments. CONCLUSIONS: Many appointments can be successfully adapted to virtual formats to deliver cancer rehabilitation programming. Based on our findings, we provide practical recommendations that can be implemented by providers and programs to facilitate the adoption and delivery of virtual care.

Decision-making in Surgery or Active Surveillance for Low Risk Papillary Thyroid Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

We describe our experience conducting a prospective observational cohort study on the management of small, low risk papillary thyroid cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study participants are given the choice of active surveillance (AS) or surgery, and those in the AS arm are followed at the study center, whereas surgical patients undergo usual care. During the pandemic we have transitioned from in-person research patient visits to largely virtual care of patients under AS. As of 30 October 2020, we had enrolled 181 patients enrolled in our study (including 25 during the pandemic), of which 92.3% (167/181) consented to telephone communication and 79.0% (143/181) consented to secure videoconferencing communication. Prior to the pandemic, 74.5% (117/157) of our patients chose AS over surgery, whereas during the pandemic, 96.0% (24/25) chose AS. Of the 133 study patients who were under AS within the timeframe from 12 March 2020, to 30 October 2020, the percentage of patients who missed appointments was 8.3% (11/133, for neck ultrasound and physician visits, respectively) and delayed appointments was 23.3% (31/133). This preliminary data suggests that prospective observational research on AS of thyroid cancer can safely continue during the pandemic.