Patient, family and professional suggestions for pandemic-related surgical backlog recovery: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical shutdowns related to the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in prolonged wait times for nonemergency surgery. We aimed to understand informational needs and generate suggestions on management of the surgical backlog in the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic through focus groups with key stakeholders. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study with focus groups held between Sept. 29 and Nov. 30, 2021, in Ontario, with patients who underwent or were awaiting surgery during the pandemic and their family members, and health care leaders with experience or influence overseeing the delivery of surgical services. We conducted the focus groups virtually; focus groups for patients and family members were conducted separately from health care leaders to ensure participants could speak freely about their experiences. Our goal was to elicit information on the impact of communication about the surgical backlog, how this communication may be improved, and to generate and prioritize suggestions to address the backlog. Data were mapped onto 2 complementary frameworks that categorized approaches to reduction in wait times and strategies to improve health care delivery. RESULTS: A total of 11 patients and family members and 20 health care leaders (7 nursing surgical directors, 10 surgeons and 3 administrators) participated in 7 focus groups (2 patient and family, and 5 health care leader). Participants reported receiving conflicting information about the surgical backlog. Suggestions for communication about the backlog included unified messaging from a single source with clear language to educate the public. Participants prioritized the following suggestions for surgical recovery: increase supply through focusing on system efficiencies and maintaining or increasing health care personnel; incorporate patient-centred outcomes into triage definitions; and refine strategies for performance management to understand and measure inequities between surgeons and centres, and consider the impact of funding incentives on "nonpriority" procedures. INTERPRETATION: Patients and their families and health care leaders experienced a lack of communication about the surgical backlog and suggested this information should come from a single source; key suggestions to manage the surgical backlog included a focus on system efficiencies, incorporation of patient-centred outcomes into triage definitions, and improving the measurement of wait times to monitor health system performance. The suggestions generated in this study that may be used to address surgical backlog recovery in the Canadian setting.

Nimble Approach: fast, adapting, calculating and ethically mindful approach to managing colorectal cancer screening programmes during a pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a conceptual framework that provides understanding of the challenges encountered and the adaptive approaches taken by organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: This was a qualitative case study of international CRC screening programmes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with programme managers/leaders and programme experts, researchers and clinical leaders of large, population-based screening programmes. Data analysis, using elements of grounded theory, as well as cross-cases analysis was conducted by two experienced qualitative researchers. RESULTS: 19 participants were interviewed from seven programmes in North America, Europe and Australasia. A conceptual framework ('Nimble Approach') was the key outcome of the analysis. Four concepts constitute this approach to managing CRC screening programmes during COVID-19: Fast (meeting the need to make decisions and communicate quickly), Adapting (flexibly and creatively managing testing/colonoscopy capacity, access and backlogs), Calculating (modelling and actively monitoring programmes to inform decision-making and support programme quality) and Ethically Mindful (considering ethical conundrums emerging from programme responses). Highly integrated programmes, those with highly integrated communication networks, and that managed greater portions of the screening process seemed best positioned to respond to the crisis. CONCLUSIONS: The Nimble Approach has potentially broad applications; it can be deployed to effectively respond to programme-specific challenges or manage CRC programmes during future pandemics, other health crises or emergencies.