ABSTRACT
Problem: 35 years after signing the Ottawa Charter, the field of health promotion is undergoing a dynamic development. This also applies to the tertiary education sector. There is still no law in Austria that regulates occupations in health promotion. Another challenge is that students within a specific cohort have different interests, goals and prior knowledge. This requires flexibility and openness. Besides, the COVID-19 pandemic reinforced the need for digital, flexible and personalized teaching and learning opportunities at universities. Concept: In this paper the didactic framework of a full-time bachelors' programme as well as a part-time masters' programme at the University of Applied Sciences Burgenland is described. The CompHP framework and the outlines of a new health education policy in the DACH region formed the basis for defining study goals. Principles: In order to achieve the study goals, two didactic principles are combined: personalized teaching and learning and linking teaching and research. Conclusion: During the COVID-19 pandemic, using a variety of didactic principles and creating a concept for the implementation of distance learning methods can help meet the challenges during the knowledge transformation process. Results may be referred to a wide range of study programmes in various academic fields. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic strained healthcare systems worldwide, delaying breast cancer screening and surgery. In 2019, approximately 80% of breast cancers in the U.S. were diagnosed on screening examinations, with 76.4% of eligible Medicare patients undergoing screening at least every two years. Since the start of the pandemic, many women have been reluctant to seek elective screening mammography, even with the lifting of "lock-down". We describe the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer presentation at an academic medical center in a city hit hard by the pandemic. Materials and Methods: The institutional IRB-approved Breast Cancer Registry Database was queried for patients enrolled during two time periods, those undergoing first surgical procedure before the start of the pandemic (4/1/2019-3/31/2020) to those the year after the pandemic started (4/1/2020-3/31/2021). Elective cancer surgery was paused for 3 weeks, ending 4/20/2020, and access to routine breast care was limited for 3 months. Variables included age, method of detection, palpability, histologic subtype and staging, neoadjuvant systemic therapy, cancer specific treatments, and radiation uptake. Results: 349 patients were in the 2019 cohort;246 in the 2020 cohort. No differences in baseline characteristics, including age at presentation, nodal status, or operation type. Fewer cancers were detected on routine mammography post-COVID vs. pre-COVID. Increase in detection of breast cancer through self-Sexams in 2020 was seen compared to 2019. Palpability on presentation also increased. More patients were treated with neo-adjuvant therapy chemotherapy, and 36 of 45 (80%) eligible early-stage breast cancer patients accepted neoadjuvant hormonal therapy during the period that elective cancer surgery was on hold. Patients received radiation therapy less frequently during the pandemic. The proportion of patients diagnosed with invasive ductal cancers was higher in the 2020 cohort and the proportion of patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and for invasive lobular cancers (ILC) was lower. Conclusions: Patients at an academic New York City medical center presented with more palpable and invasive breast cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the preceding year, and fewer patients with DCIS and ILC, cancers typically detected following screening mammography. While stage migration with an increase in diagnosis of late stage cancers has been described, in our population the stage shift occurred in early stage breast cancer, with decreases in DCIS and increases in Stages I-II, with the higher stages III-IV essentially unchanged. This reflects the effect of delay in our previously highly-screened population, with an average screening delay of 3 + months, and many patients missing their yearly screening altogether. While many medical interactions during COVID-19 were via telemedicine, radiation therapy requires daily office visits, and fear of exposure contributed to the lower rate of radiation. Given the increase in invasiveness and stage of breast cancers diagnosed during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study emphasizes the importance of screening for diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer, even in the face of a concurrent health crisis.
ABSTRACT
Background: In high-risk estrogen-receptor positive, HER2 positive, or triple negative breast cancer (BC), chemotherapy can increase cure rates in early-stage disease and prolong survival in setting of advanced disease. Real world data specific to BC is needed to counsel patients (pts) with BC on their risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Methods: In this retrospective study, we abstracted clinical data including demographics, tumor histology, cancer treatment, and COVID-19 testing results status from the electronic medical record of 3778 BC patients who received cancer care from 02/01/2020 - 05/01/2020 in New York City at our cancer center. The primary endpoint of the study was incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by treatment type (cytotoxic chemotherapy (CT) vs non-cytotoxic therapies (endocrine and/or HER2 directed therapy (E/H)) diagnosed by either serology, RT-PCR, or documented clinical diagnosis. Probability of Treatment Weighting (IPTW) and Mann-Whitney Test were used to assess risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection by treatment and assess outcomes based on oncologic and non-oncologic risk factors respectively. Results: 3062 patients met inclusion criteria with 379 pts in CT, 2343 pts in E/H and 340 in NT groups. During study period 641 patients (20.9%) were tested by either PCR or serology with 64 patients (2.1%) diagnosed with COVID-19. All pts who tested positive by PCR and subsequently had serology testing were positive for IgG. The weighted risk of SARS-COV-2 infection was 3.5% in CT vs. 2.7% in E/H (p=0.523). 27 patients (0.9%) expired over follow up, with 10 deaths attributed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The weighted risk for death was 0.7% with CT vs. 0.1% with E/H, p=0.24 (Table A). Age, BMI,CCI and advanced cancer stage were associated with increased mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection (Table). Conclusions: CT was not associated with increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 infection or death following infection. BC cancer treatment, including CT, can be safely administered with enhanced infectious precautions and should not be withheld particularly when given for curative intent.