Metastatic Melanoma: A Consequence of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Metastatic melanoma, though less common than other skin cancers, remains one of the deadliest, particularly in late-stage disease. Our report aims to highlight the importance of early detection and treatment to reduce the morbidity, mortality, and significant disfigurement associated with advanced melanoma. The subject of this case is an 81-year-old female who presented to our emergency department as a trauma patient after being found lying down by a neighbor for an unknown amount of time. She was discovered to have a large fungating nasal mass which was subsequently diagnosed as highly invasive melanoma. A thorough workup revealed a metastatic cerebellar lesion, a large ulcerated basal cell carcinoma eroding her calvarium, and a hemorrhagic lesion within her internal capsule that left her with right-sided hemiparesis. During hospitalization, she underwent palliative resection of the primary nasal mass with flap reconstruction, radiation therapy for her cerebellar lesion, and daily physical therapy. Additional surgery was required for hematoma evacuation and pedicle dissection. Though lockdowns were an important part of the pandemic, they were not without their drawbacks, many of which are still being elucidated. Particularly, by utilizing telehealth services, our patient may have had earlier recognition of her melanoma and a better outcome. Regardless, enhancing patient education and maintaining access to care even through lockdowns poses a potential target for improving melanoma survivability while decreasing associated morbidity.

Answers to common questions about COVID-19 vaccines in children with cancer.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in 2020 evolved into a global pandemic, and COVID-19 vaccines became rapidly available, including for pediatric patients. However, questions emerged that challenged vaccine acceptance and use. We aimed to answer these questions and give recommendations applicable for use in pediatric patients with cancer by healthcare professionals and the public. METHODS: A 12-member global COVID-19 Vaccine in Pediatric Oncology Working Group made up of physicians and nurses from all world regions met weekly from March to July 2021. We used a modified Delphi method to select the top questions. The Working Group, in four-member subgroups, answered assigned questions by providing brief recommendations, followed by a discussion of the rationale for each answer. All Working Group members voted on each recommendation using a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being complete agreement. A "pass" recommendation corresponded to an agreement ≥7.5. RESULTS: We selected 15 questions from 173 suggested questions. Based on existing published information, we generated answers for each question as recommendations. The overall average agreement for the 24 recommendations was 9.5 (95% CI 9.4-9.6). CONCLUSION: Top COVID-19 vaccine-related questions could be answered using available information. Reports on COVID-19 vaccination and related topics have been published at record speed, aided by available technology and the priority imposed by the pandemic; however, all efforts were made to incorporate emerging information throughout our project. Recommendations will be periodically updated on a dedicated website.

Multinational primary health care experiences from the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To learn from primary health care experts' experiences from the COVID-19 pandemic across countries. METHODS: We applied qualitative thematic analysis to open-text responses from a multinational rapid response survey of primary health care experts assessing response to the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Respondents' comments focused on three main areas of primary health care response directly influenced by the pandemic: 1) impact on the primary care workforce, including task-shifting responsibilities outside clinician specialty and changes in scope of work, financial strains on practices, and the daily uncertainties and stress of a constantly evolving situation; 2) impact on patient care delivery, both essential care for COVID-19 cases and the non-essential care that was neglected or postponed; 3) and the shift to using new technologies. CONCLUSIONS: Primary health care experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic across the globe were similar in their levels of workforce stress, rapid technologic adaptation, and need to pivot delivery strategies, often at the expense of routine care.

International examples of primary care COVID-19 preparedness and response: a comparison of four countries.

We report the learnings gleaned from a four-country panel (Australia, South Africa, Egypt and Nigeria) sharing their countries' COVID-19 primary healthcare approaches and implementation of policy at the World Organization of Family Doctor's World virtual conference in November. The countries differ considerably with respect to size, national economies, average age, unemployment rates and proportion of people living rurally. South Africa has fared the worst with respect to waves of COVID-19 cases and deaths. All countries introduced strategies such as border closure, COVID-19 testing, physical distancing and face masks. Australia and Nigeria mobilised primary care, but the response was mostly public health and hospital-based in South Africa and Egypt. All countries rapidly adopted telehealth. All countries emphasised the critical importance of an integrated response between primary care and public health to conduct surveillance, diagnose cases through testing, provide community-based care unless hospitalisation is required and vaccinate the population to reduce infection spread.

Health System Strategy to Safely Provide Surgical Care During the Covid-19 Pandemic

Houston Methodist’s policies designed to avoid the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 during hospital-based surgeries or procedures led to a postintervention nosocomial Covid-19 infection rate of 0.1% during the first 19 months of the pandemic. Preoperative polymerase chain reaction testing was found to be particularly effective. Summary During the initial onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, there was little information regarding how to deliver surgical care safely. Houston Methodist, an eight-hospital system with a flagship academic medical center (Texas Medical Center), adopted and implemented policies that were driven by science and expert opinion, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction preoperative testing to decrease patient risk of Covid-19 diagnosis postintervention. In examining outcomes of the policies during the first 19 months of the pandemic, the authors discovered from a retrospective cohort study of 141,439 patients that the policies — especially SARS-CoV-2 preoperative testing — were effective in reducing postintervention Covid-19 disease, with an overall rate of 0.6%. Analysis of patients who had Covid-19 after intervention found that most had contracted the disease from community sources, which led to a nosocomial Covid-19 rate of 0.1%. Effective policy implementation was associated with successful delivery of safe surgical care during the pandemic.

Disparities in COVID-19 hospitalizations and mortality among black and Hispanic patients: cross-sectional analysis from the greater Houston metropolitan area.

BACKGROUND: Disparate racial/ethnic burdens of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may be attributable to higher susceptibility to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or to factors such as differences in hospitalization and care provision. METHODS: In our cross-sectional analysis of lab-confirmed COVID-19 cases from a tertiary, eight-hospital healthcare system across greater Houston, multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to evaluate hospitalization and mortality odds for non-Hispanic Blacks (NHBs) vs. non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) and Hispanics vs. non-Hispanics. RESULTS: Between March 3rd and July 18th, 2020, 70,496 individuals were tested for SARS-CoV-2; 12,084 (17.1%) tested positive, of whom 3536 (29.3%) were hospitalized. Among positive cases, NHBs and Hispanics were significantly younger than NHWs and Hispanics, respectively (mean age NHBs vs. NHWs: 46.0 vs. 51.7 years; p < 0.001 and Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic: 44.0 vs. 48.7 years; p < 0.001). Despite younger age, NHBs (vs. NHWs) had a higher prevalence of diabetes (25.2% vs. 17.6%; p < 0.001), hypertension (47.7% vs. 43.1%; p < 0.001), and chronic kidney disease (5.0% vs. 3.3%; p = 0.001). Both minority groups resided in lower median income (median income [USD]; NHBs vs. NHWs: 63,489 vs. 75,793; p < 0.001, Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic: 59,104 vs. 68,318; p < 0.001) and higher population density areas (median population density [per square mile]; NHBs vs. NHWs: 3257 vs. 2742; p < 0.001, Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic: 3381 vs. 2884; p < 0.001). In fully adjusted models, NHBs (vs. NHWs) and Hispanics (vs. non-Hispanic) had higher likelihoods of hospitalization, aOR (95% CI): 1.42 (1.24-1.63) and 1.61 (1.46-1.78), respectively. No differences were observed in intensive care unit (ICU) utilization or treatment parameters. Models adjusted for demographics, vital signs, laboratory parameters, hospital complications, and ICU admission vital signs demonstrated non-significantly lower likelihoods of in-hospital mortality among NHBs and Hispanic patients, aOR (95% CI): 0.65 (0.40-1.03) and 0.89 (0.59-1.31), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our data did not demonstrate racial and ethnic differences in care provision and hospital outcomes. Higher susceptibility of racial and ethnic minorities to SARS-CoV-2 and subsequent hospitalization may be driven primarily by social determinants.

Impact of mRNA vaccines in curtailing SARS-CoV-2 infection and disability leave utilisation among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional analysis from a tertiary healthcare system in the Greater Houston metropolitan area.

OBJECTIVES: We provide an account of real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among healthcare workers (HCWs) at a tertiary healthcare system and report trends in SARS-CoV-2 infections and subsequent utilisation of COVID-19-specific short-term disability leave (STDL). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Summary data on 27 291 employees at a tertiary healthcare system in the Greater Houston metropolitan area between 15 December 2020 and 5 June 2021. The initial 12-week vaccination programme period (15 December 2020 to 6 March 2021) was defined as a rapid roll-out phase. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: At the pandemic onset, HCW testing and surveillance was conducted where SARS-CoV-2-positive HCWs were offered STDL. Deidentified summary data of SARS-CoV-2 infections and STDL utilisation among HCWs were analysed. Prevaccination and postvaccination trends in SARS-CoV-2 positivity and STDL utilisation rates were evaluated. RESULTS: Updated for 5 June 2021, 98.2% (n=26 791) of employees received a full or partial dose of one of the approved mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. The vaccination rate during the rapid roll-out phase was approximately 3700 doses/7 days. The overall mean weekly SARS-CoV-2 positivity rates among HCWs were significantly lower following vaccine roll-out (2.4%), compared with prevaccination period (11.8%, p<0.001). An accompanying 69.8% decline in STDL utilisation was also observed (315 to 95 weekly leaves). During the rapid roll-out phase, SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate among Houston Methodist HCWs declined by 84.3% (8.9% to 1.4% positivity rate), compared with a 54.7% (12.8% to 5.8% positivity rate) decline in the Houston metropolitan area. CONCLUSION: Despite limited generalisability of regional hospital-based studies-where factors such as the emergence of viral variants and population-level vaccine penetrance may differ-accounts of robust HCW vaccination programmes provide important guidance for sustaining a critical resource to provide safe and effective care for patients with and without COVID-19 across healthcare systems.

Assessing Patient Needs During Natural Disasters: Mixed Methods Analysis of Portal Messages Sent During Hurricane Harvey.

BACKGROUND: Patient portals play an important role in connecting patients with their medical care team, which improves patient engagement in treatment plans, decreases unnecessary visits, and reduces costs. During natural disasters, patients' needs increase, whereas available resources, specifically access to care, become limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine patients' health needs during a natural crisis by analyzing the electronic messages sent during Hurricane Harvey to guide future disaster planning efforts. METHODS: We explored patient portal use data from a large Greater Houston area health care system focusing on the initial week of the Hurricane Harvey disaster, beginning with the date of landfall, August 25, 2017, to August 31, 2017. A mixed methods approach was used to assess patients' immediate health needs and concerns during the disruption of access to routine and emergent medical care. Quantitative analysis used logistic regression models to assess the predictive characteristics of patients using the portal during Hurricane Harvey. This study also included encounters by type (emergency, inpatient, observation, outpatient, and outpatient surgery) and time (before, during, and after Hurricane Harvey). For qualitative analysis, the content of these messages was examined using the constant comparative method to identify emerging themes found within the message texts. RESULTS: Out of a total of 557,024 patients, 4079 (0.73%) sent a message during Hurricane Harvey, whereas 31,737 (5.69%) used the portal. Age, sex, race, and ethnicity were predictive factors for using the portal and sending a message during the natural disaster. We found that prior use of the patient portal increased the likelihood of portal use during Hurricane Harvey (odds ratio 13.688, 95% CI 12.929-14.491) and of sending a portal message during the disaster (odds ratio 14.172, 95% CI 11.879-16.907). Having an encounter 4 weeks before or after Hurricane Harvey was positively associated with increased use of the portal and sending a portal message. Patients with encounters during the main Hurricane Harvey week had a higher increased likelihood of portal use across all five encounter types. Qualitative themes included: access, prescription requests, medical advice (chronic conditions, acute care, urgent needs, and Hurricane Harvey-related injuries), mental health, technical difficulties, and provider constraints. CONCLUSIONS: The patient portal can be a useful tool for communication between patients and providers to address the urgent needs and concerns of patients as a natural disaster unfolds. This was the first known study to include encounter data to understand portal use compared with care provisioning. Prior use was predictive of both portal use and message sending during Hurricane Harvey. These findings could inform the types of demands that may arise in future disaster situations and can serve as the first step in intentionally optimizing patient portal usability for emergency health care management during natural disasters.

Uniting Public Health and Primary Care for Healthy Communities in the COVID-19 Era and Beyond.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has laid bare the dis-integrated health care system in the United States. Decades of inattention and dwindling support for public health, coupled with declining access to primary care medical services have left many vulnerable communities without adequate COVID-19 response and recovery capacity. "Health is a Community Affair" is a 1966 effort to build and deploy local communities of solution that align public health, primary care, and community organizations to identify health care problem sheds, and activate local asset sheds. After decades of independent effort, the COVID-19 pandemic offers an opportunity to reunite and align the shared goals of public health and primary care. Imagine how different things might look if we had widely implemented the recommendations from the 1966 report? The ideas and concepts laid out in "Health is a Community Affair" still offer a COVID-19 response and recovery approach. By bringing public health and primary care together in community now, a future that includes a shared vision and combined effort may emerge.

Primary care perspectives on pandemic politics.

While the COVID-19 pandemic now affects the entire world, countries have had diverse responses. Some responded faster than others, with considerable variations in strategy. After securing border control, primary health care approaches (public health and primary care) attempt to mitigate spread through public education to reduce person-to-person contact (hygiene and physical distancing measures, lockdown procedures), triaging of cases by severity, COVID-19 testing, and contact-tracing. An international survey of primary care experts' perspectives about their country's national responseswas conducted April to early May 2020. This mixed method paper reports on whether they perceived that their country's decision-making and pandemic response was primarily driven by medical facts, economic models, or political ideals; initially intended to develop herd immunity or flatten the curve, and the level of decision-making authority (federal, state, regional). Correlations with country-level death rates and implications of political forces and processes in shaping a country's pandemic response are presented and discussed, informed by our data and by the literature. The intersection of political decision-making, public health/primary care policies and economic strategies is analysed to explore implications of COVID-19's impact on countries with different levels of social and economic development.

Severity of COVID-19 in children with cancer: Report from the United Kingdom Paediatric Coronavirus Cancer Monitoring Project.

BACKGROUND: Children with cancer are frequently immunocompromised. While children are generally thought to be at less risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection than adults, comprehensive population-based evidence for the risk in children with cancer is unavailable. We aimed to produce evidence of the incidence and outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 in children with cancer attending all hospitals treating this population across the UK. METHODS: Retrospective and prospective observational study of all children in the UK under 16 diagnosed with cancer through data collection from all hospitals providing cancer care to this population. Eligible patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The primary end-point was death, discharge or end of active care for COVID-19 for those remaining in hospital. RESULTS: Between 12 March 2020 and 31 July 2020, 54 cases were identified: 15 (28%) were asymptomatic, 34 (63%) had mild infections and 5 (10%) moderate, severe or critical infections. No patients died and only three patients required intensive care support due to COVID-19. Estimated incidence of hospital identified SARS-CoV-2 infection in children with cancer under 16 was 3%. CONCLUSIONS: Children with cancer with SARS-CoV-2 infection do not appear at increased risk of severe infection compared to the general paediatric population. This is reassuring and supports the continued delivery of standard treatment.