Workforce challenges across Victorian medical oncology services.

BACKGROUND: Cancer incidence is growing, with increasing treatment options and durations. This has led to an increase workload on the current oncology workforce. The global pandemic has increased this pressure further. AIMS: To determine the current medical oncology workforce in Victoria, current shortfalls and future anticipated shortfalls beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A self-reported, cross-sectional observational study of all current adult Victorian cancer services in June 2020 examining workforce, workload and early effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The current average workload of 242 new patients per full-time equivalent consultant in medical oncology across Victoria. This is higher than optimal to deliver a safe and efficient cancer service. The significant variation in workforce between sites highlights the areas in need of most urgent resource allocation. Use of safe prescribing practises such as electronic chemotherapy prescribing are not universal but urgently needed. CONCLUSIONS: The medical oncology workforce in Victoria is inadequate to meet current and future demands. This needs to be addressed urgently to avoid an adverse impact on cancer measures and quality standards. Better, standardised data collection is needed to allow for ongoing measures of workforce activity. Novel workforce solutions will also need to be implemented in the short and medium term in the face of global workforce shortages.

Efficacy of Group Exercise-Based Cancer Rehabilitation Delivered via Telehealth (TeleCaRe): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Access to rehabilitation to support cancer survivors to exercise is poor. Group exercise-based rehabilitation may be delivered remotely, but no trials have currently evaluated their efficacy. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a group exercise-based cancer rehabilitation program delivered via telehealth compared to usual care for improving the quality of life of cancer survivors. METHODS: A parallel, assessor-blinded, pragmatic randomized controlled trial with embedded cost and qualitative analysis will be completed. In total, 116 cancer survivors will be recruited from a metropolitan health network in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. The experimental group will attend an 8-week, twice-weekly, 60-minute exercise group session supervised via videoconferencing supplemented by a web-based home exercise program and information portal. The comparison group will receive usual care including standardized exercise advice and written information. Assessments will be completed at weeks 0 (baseline), 9 (post intervention), and 26 (follow-up). The primary outcome will be health-related quality of life measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire at week 9. Secondary measures include walking capacity (6-minute walk test), physical activity (activPAL accelerometer), self-efficacy (Health Action Process Approach Questionnaire), and adverse events. Health service data including hospital length of stay, hospital readmissions, and emergency department presentations will be recorded. Semistructured interviews will be completed within an interpretive description framework to explore the patient experience. The primary outcome will be analyzed using linear mixed effects models. A cost-effectiveness analysis will also be performed. RESULTS: The trial commenced in April 2022. As of June 2022, we enrolled 14 participants. CONCLUSIONS: This trial will inform the future implementation of cancer rehabilitation by providing important data about efficacy, safety, cost, and patient experience. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12621001417875; https://tinyurl.com/yc5crwtr. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/38553.

Telerehabilitation's Safety, Feasibility, and Exercise Uptake in Cancer Survivors: Process Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Access to exercise for cancer survivors is poor despite global recognition of its benefits. Telerehabilitation may overcome barriers to exercise for cancer survivors but is not routinely offered. OBJECTIVE: Following the rapid implementation of an exercise-based telerehabilitation program in response to COVID-19, a process evaluation was conducted to understand the impact on patients, staff, and the health service with the aim of informing future program development. METHODS: A mixed methods evaluation was completed for a telerehabilitation program for cancer survivors admitted between March and December 2020. Interviews were conducted with patients and staff involved in implementation. Routinely collected hospital data (adverse events, referrals, admissions, wait time, attendance, physical activity, and quality of life) were also assessed. Patients received an 8-week telerehabilitation intervention including one-on-one health coaching via telehealth, online group exercise and education, information portal, and home exercise prescription. Quantitative data were reported descriptively, and qualitative interview data were coded and mapped to the Proctor model for implementation research. RESULTS: The telerehabilitation program received 175 new referrals over 8 months. Of those eligible, 123 of 150 (82%) commenced the study. There were no major adverse events. Adherence to health coaching was high (674/843, 80% of scheduled sessions), but participation in online group exercise classes was low (n=36, 29%). Patients improved their self-reported physical activity levels by a median of 110 minutes per week (IQR 90-401) by program completion. Patients were satisfied with telerehabilitation, but clinicians reported a mixed experience of pride in rapid care delivery contrasting with loss of personal connections. The average health service cost per patient was Aus $1104 (US $790). CONCLUSIONS: Telerehabilitation is safe, feasible, and improved outcomes for cancer survivors. Learnings from this study may inform the ongoing implementation of cancer telerehabilitation.

Towards new models of cancer care in Australia: lessons from Victoria's response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Department of Health and Human Services Victoria (DHHS), the Monash Partners Comprehensive Cancer Consortium (MPCCC) and Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre (VCCC) pooled their combined infrastructure to establish the Victorian COVID-19 Cancer Network (VCCN) backed by a Taskforce of expert members. In a few short months, this state-wide clinical network implemented a number of new models of care including clinics to manage acutely presenting cancer patients away from emergency departments, chemotherapy in the home, telehealth models and addressing sustainability of clinical trials.