Cancer patients' satisfaction with telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To examine factors associated with cancer patients' satisfaction using telehealth during COVID-19, including video conferencing platforms and secure messaging systems. METHOD: Patients with cancer participated in a cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted with patients with cancer. The survey included questions about satisfaction with video-conferencing and secure messaging platforms to interact with clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine predictors of satisfaction for each telehealth platform. RESULTS: Participants generally reported positive satisfaction with each telehealth platform. Both platforms were commonly used to review medical results and discuss symptoms or treatment. Participants identifying as a man were most satisfied with their video-conferencing session, especially if they had a comfortable place to sit. Patients were more satisfied with secure messaging because they could ask a question without scheduling an appointment. DISCUSSION: When strategically used together, video-conferencing platforms and secure messaging may increase patient satisfaction in cancer care during the remainder of the pandemic and beyond. Attention must be paid to optimizing factors that promote satisfaction for each telehealth platform.

Impact of COVID-19 on Hematology-Oncology Trainees: A Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment.

PURPOSE: Graduate medical and research training has drastically changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, with widespread implementation of virtual learning, redeployment from core rotations to the care of patients with COVID-19, and significant emotional and physical stressors. The specific experience of hematology-oncology (HO) fellows during the COVID-19 pandemic is not known. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study using a survey of Likert-style and open-ended questions to assess the training experience and well-being of HO fellows, including both clinical and postdoctoral trainee members of the American Society of Hematology and ASCO. RESULTS: A total of 2,306 surveys were distributed by e-mail; 548 (23.8%) fellows completed the survey. Nearly 40% of fellows felt that they had not received adequate mental health support during the pandemic, and 22% reported new symptoms of burnout. Pre-existing burnout before the pandemic, COVID-19-related clinical work, and working in a primary research or nonclinical setting were associated with increased burnout on multivariable logistic regression. Qualitative thematic analysis of open-ended responses revealed significant concerns about employment after training completion, perceived variable quality of virtual education and board preparation, loss of clinical opportunities to prepare for independent clinical practice, inadequate grant funding opportunities in part because of shifting research priorities, variable productivity, and mental health or stress during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: HO fellows have been profoundly affected by the pandemic, and our data illustrate multiple avenues for fellowship programs and national organizations to support both clinical and postdoctoral trainees.

Secure Messaging and COVID-19: A Content Analysis of Patient-Clinician Communication During the Pandemic.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) immediately impacted patient-clinician communication, particularly in the oncology setting. Relatedly, secure messaging (SM) usage greatly increased, yet it is unknown what was discussed and whether the technology was utilized to disseminate information. Aims: This study aimed at identifying the most frequently discussed topics using SM as well as at understanding how the communication process transpired during the early stages of the pandemic. Materials and Methods: A mixed-methods design was utilized, consisting of a content analysis of more than 4,200 secure messages, aggregated into 1,454 patient-clinician discussions. Data were collected from February 2020 to May 2020. Discussions were from various oncology departments and included physicians, physician assistants, and nurses. Based on the identified categories, a thematic analysis was conducted to understand the nuances occurring within discussions. Results: Out of the 1,454 discussions, 26% (n = 373) related to COVID-19. Of the COVID-19 discussion, the most frequently coded category was "changes, adjustments, and re-arranging care" (65%, n = 241), followed by "risk for COVID-19" (24%, n = 90), "precautions inside the hospital" (18%, n = 66), and "precautions outside the hospital" (14%, n = 52). Natural language processing techniques were used to confirm the validity of the results. Thematic analysis revealed that patients were proactive in rescheduling appointments, expressed anxiety about being immunocompromised, and clinicians were uncertain about providing recommendations related to COVID-19. Conclusions: The COVID-19 outbreak revealed the need for responsive and effective public health communication. The SM can disseminate information from trusted sources, clinicians, but can be better utilized to deliver tailored information for specific patient populations.

Forming the Hematology-Oncology Collaborative Videoconferencing (CO-VID) Learning Initiative: Experiential Lessons Learned From a Novel Trainee-Led Multidisciplinary Virtual Learning Platform.

PURPOSE: COVID-19 challenged medical practice and graduate medical education. Building on previous initiatives, we describe and reflect on the formative process and goals of the Hematology-Oncology Collaborative Videoconferencing Learning Initiative, a trainee-led multi-institutional virtual COVID-19 learning model. METHODS: Clinical fellows and faculty from 13 US training institutions developed consensus needs, goals, and objectives, recruited presenters, and generated a multidisciplinary COVID-19 curriculum. Weekly Zoom conferences consisted of two trainee-led instructional segments and a trainee-moderated faculty Q&A panel. Hematology-oncology training program faculty and trainees were the targeted audience. Leadership evaluations consisted of anonymized baseline and concluding mixed methods surveys. Presenter evaluations consisted of session debriefs and two structured focus groups. Conference evaluations consisted of attendance, demographics, and pre- or postmultiple-choice questions on topic learning objectives. RESULTS: In 6 weeks, the initiative produced five conferences: antivirals, anticoagulation, pulmonology, provider resilience, and resource scarcity ethics. The average attendance was 100 (range 57-185). Among attendees providing both pre- and postconference data, group-level knowledge appeared to increase: antiviral (n = 46) pre-/postcorrect 82.6%/97.8% and incorrect 10.9%/2.2%, anticoagulation (n = 60) pre-/postcorrect 75%/93.3% and incorrect 15%/6.7%, and pulmonary (n = 21) pre-/postcorrect 66.7%/95.2% and incorrect 33.3%/4.8%. Although pulmonary management comfort appeared to increase, comfort managing of antivirals and anticoagulation was unchanged. At the conclusion of the pilot, leadership trainees reported improved self-confidence organizing multi-institutional collaborations, median (interquartile range) 58.5 (50-64) compared with baseline 34 (26-39), but did not report improved confidence in other educational or leadership skills. CONCLUSION: During crisis, trainees built a multi-institutional virtual education platform for the purposes of sharing pandemic experiences and knowledge. Accomplishment of initiative goals was mixed. Lessons learned from the process and goals may improve future disaster educational initiatives.