Patient and caregiver experience with telepharmacy in cancer care to support beginning systemic therapy: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Although the COVID-19 pandemic spurred telehealth adoption for many specialties and care team roles, the patient and caregiver experience for telepharmacy visits has been relatively understudied. To our knowledge, there is a paucity of studies that have attempted to qualitatively evaluate this. This study aimed to qualitatively assess the patient and caregiver experience of telepharmacy visits in a cancer center. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 21 patients with cancer and seven caregivers that had attended a telepharmacy visit between December 1, 2021, and May 24, 2022. The interviews assessed visit content, overall satisfaction, system experience, visit quality, and future preferences for pharmacy visits as telehealth versus in-person. We used both deductive and inductive coding to identify themes. RESULTS: Telepharmacy delivery was generally well-received. Reasons for having the telepharmacy visit included reviewing chemotherapy procedures, side effects to expect during treatment, providing education on recently prescribed medications, offering dietary recommendations (e.g., avoiding grapefruit juice), and performing medication reconciliation. Participants were receptive to having pharmacy visits through telehealth due to the perceived lack of a need to have a physical exam and prior relationship with the pharmacist. Participants also highlighted the main reason for the telepharmacy visits was primarily to provide patient education, which participants felt was suitable for telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: The patient and caregiver experience of telepharmacy is influenced by several factors, such as ease of connectivity, communicating effectively with the pharmacist, and timing of the telepharmacy visit (e.g., immediately after picking up medications from the pharmacy). Participants' recommendations to improve telepharmacy delivery included health systems raising awareness of telepharmacy services and providing a list of questions to patients to guide discussions.

Telemedicine Adoption in an NCI-Designated Cancer Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Report on Patient Experience of Care.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer require timely access to care so that healthcare providers can prepare an optimal treatment plan with significant implications for quality of life and mortality. The COVID-19 pandemic spurred rapid adoption of telemedicine in oncology, but study of patient experience of care with telemedicine in this population has been limited. We assessed overall patient experience of care with telemedicine at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center during the COVID-19 pandemic and examined changes in patient experience over time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of outpatient oncology patients who received treatment at Moffitt Cancer Center. Press Ganey surveys were used to assess patient experience. Data from patients with appointments between April 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, were analyzed. Patient experience was compared between telemedicine and in-person visits, and patient experience with telemedicine over time was described. RESULTS: A total of 33,318 patients reported Press Ganey data for in-person visits, and 5,950 reported Press Ganey data for telemedicine visits. Relative to patients with in-person visits, more patients with telemedicine visits gave higher satisfaction ratings for access (62.5% vs 75.8%, respectively) and care provider concern (84.2% vs 90.7%, respectively) (P<.001). When adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, insurance, and clinic type, telemedicine visits consistently outperformed in-person visits over time regarding access and care provider concern (P<.001). There were no significant changes over time in satisfaction with telemedicine visits regarding access, care provider concern, telemedicine technology, or overall assessment (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a large oncology dataset showed that telemedicine resulted in better patient experience of care in terms of access and care provider concern compared with in-person visits. Patient experience of care with telemedicine visits did not change over time, suggesting that implementing telemedicine was effective.

Digital health and telehealth in cancer care: a scoping review of reviews.

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated remote cancer care delivery via the internet and telephone, rapidly accelerating an already growing care delivery model and associated research. This scoping review of reviews characterised the peer-reviewed literature reviews on digital health and telehealth interventions in cancer published from database inception up to May 1, 2022, from PubMed, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Cochrane Reviews, and Web of Science. Eligible reviews conducted a systematic literature search. Data were extracted in duplicate via a pre-defined online survey. Following screening, 134 reviews met the eligibility criteria. 77 of those reviews were published since 2020. 128 reviews summarised interventions intended for patients, 18 addressed family caregivers, and five addressed health-care providers. 56 reviews did not target a specific phase of the cancer continuum, whereas 48 reviews tended to address the active treatment phase. 29 reviews included a meta-analysis, with results showing positive effects on quality of life, psychological outcomes, and screening behaviours. 83 reviews did not report intervention implementation outcomes but when reported, 36 reported acceptability, 32 feasibility, and 29 fidelity outcomes. Several notable gaps were identified in these literature reviews on digital health and telehealth in cancer care. No reviews specifically addressed older adults, bereavement, or sustainability of interventions and only two reviews focused on comparing telehealth to in-person interventions. Addressing these gaps with rigorous systematic reviews might help guide continued innovation in remote cancer care, particularly for older adults and bereaved families, and integrate and sustain these interventions within oncology.

Rapid adaptation of cancer screening practices during COVID-19: A multi-state qualitative study.

Context: The COVID-19 pandemic required primary care practices to rapidly adapt cancer screening procedures to comply with changing guidelines and policies. Objective: This study sought to: 1) identify cancer screening barriers and facilitators during the COVID-19 pandemic; 2) describe cancer screening adaptations; and 3) provide recommendations. Study design: A qualitative study was conducted (n= 42) with primary care staff. Individual interviews were conducted through videoconference from August 2020 - April 2021 and recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for themes using NVivo 12 Plus. Setting: Primary care practices included federally qualified health centers, tribal health centers, rural health clinics, hospital/health system-owned, and academic medical centers located across ten states including urban (55%) and rural (45%) sites. Population studied: Primary care staff included physicians (n=13), residents (n=10), advanced practice providers (n=9), and administrators (n=10). Outcome measures: The interviews assessed perceptions about cancer screening barriers and facilitators, necessary adaptations, and future recommendations. Results: Barriers to cancer screening included delays in primary and specialty care, staff shortages, lack of personal protective equipment, patient hesitancy to receive in-person care, postal service delays for mail-home testing, COVID-19 travel restrictions (for Mexico-US border-crossing patients) and organizational policies (e.g., required COVID-19 testing prior to screening). Facilitators included better care coordination and collaboration due to the pandemic and more time during telehealth visits to discuss cancer screening compared to in-person visits. Adaptations included delayed screening, patient triage (e.g., prioritizing patients overdue for screening), telehealth visits to discuss cancer screening, mail-home testing, coordinating cancer screenings (e.g., providing fecal immunochemical test materials during cervical cancer screening) and same-day cancer screening. Recommendations included more public health education about the importance of cancer screening during COVID-19, more mail-home testing, and expanded healthcare access (e.g., weekend clinic) to address patient backlogs for cancer screening. Conclusions: Primary care staff developed innovative strategies to adapt cancer screening during the COVID-19 pandemic. Unresolved challenges (e.g., patient backlogs) will require additional implementation stra.

Patient and caregiver experience with telehealth for surgical cancer care: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic led to telemedicine adoption for many medical specialties, including surgical cancer care. To date, the evidence for patient experience of telemedicine among patients with cancer undergoing surgery is limited to quantitative surveys. Thus, this study qualitatively assessed the patient and caregiver experience of telehealth visits for surgical cancer care. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 25 patients with cancer and three caregivers who had completed a telehealth visit for preanesthesia or postoperative visits. Interviews covered visit descriptions, overall satisfaction, system experience, visit quality, what roles caregivers had, and thoughts on what types of surgery-related visits would be appropriate through telehealth versus in-person. RESULTS: Telehealth delivery for surgical cancer care was generally viewed positively. Multiple factors influenced the patient experience, including prior experience with telemedicine, ease of scheduling visits, smooth connection experiences, having access to technical support, high communication quality, and visit thoroughness. Participants identified use cases on telehealth for surgical cancer care, including postoperative visits for uncomplicated surgical procedures and educational visits. CONCLUSIONS: Patient experiences with telehealth for surgical care are influenced by smooth system experiences, high-quality patient-clinician communications, and a patient-centered focus. Interventions are needed to optimize telehealth delivery (e.g., improve telemedicine platform usability).

Evaluation of Employment Loss and Financial Hardship Among US Adults With Disabilities During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This cross-sectional study estimates the prevalence and determinants of employment loss and financial hardship among adults with disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Financial hardship and mental health among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of the US COVID-19 Household Impact Survey.

Purpose: Our objective was to (1) identify associated characteristics of financial hardship (FH), and (2) evaluate associations of FH with mental health symptoms among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Using data from the nationally representative COVID-19 Impact Survey, we defined cancer survivors as those with a self-reported diagnosis of cancer (n = 854,7.6%). We defined FH using the following question: "Based on your current financial situation, how would you pay for an unexpected $400 expense?" Multivariable Poisson regression was used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) to identify associated characteristics of FH and associations of FH with mental health symptoms among cancer survivors overall and by age (18-59 years/60+ years). Results: Forty-one percent of cancer survivors reported FH, with 58% in 18-59 and 33% in 60+ year old respondents. Compared to cancer survivors aged 60+ years, those aged 30-44 (aPR:1.74,95% CI:1.35-2.24), and 45-59 years (aPR:1.60,95% CI:1.27-1.99) were more likely to report FH. Compared to non-Hispanic(NH)-White cancer survivors, NH-Black cancer survivors had a 56% higher prevalence of FH (aPR:1.56; 95% CI: 1.23-1.97). Among 60+ years aged cancer survivors, NH-Black (aPR:1.80; 95% CI: 1.32-2.45) and NH-Asian cancer survivors (aPR:10.70,95% CI:5.6-20.7) were more likely to experience FH compared to their NH-White counterparts. FH was associated with feeling anxious (aPR:1.51,95% CI:1.11-2.05), depressed (aPR:1.66,95% CI:1.25-2.22), and hopeless (aPR:1.84,95% CI:1.38-2.44). Conclusion: Minoritized communities, younger adults, and cancer survivors with low socioeconomic status had a higher burden of FH, which was associated with feelings of anxiety, depression, and hopelessness.

Estimated Indirect Cost Savings of Using Telehealth Among Nonelderly Patients With Cancer.

Importance: Patients with cancer typically have greater financial hardships and time costs than individuals without cancer. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this, while posing substantial challenges to delivering cancer care and resulting in important changes in care-delivery models, including the rapid adoption of telehealth. Objective: To estimate patient travel, time, and cost savings associated with telehealth for cancer care delivery. Design, Setting, and Participants: An economic evaluation of cost savings from completed telehealth visits from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021, in a single-institution National Cancer Institute-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. All patients aged 18 to 65 years who completed telehealth visits within the designated time frame and had a Florida mailing address documented in their electronic medical record were included in the study cohort. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to June 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was estimated patient cost savings from telehealth, which included 2 components: costs of travel (defined as roundtrip distance saved from car travel) and potential loss of productivity due to the medical visit (defined as loss of income from roundtrip travel plus loss of income from in-person clinic visits). Two different models with a combination of 2 different mileage rates ($0.56 and $0.82 per mile) and census tract-level median hourly wages were used. Results: The study included 25 496 telehealth visits with 11 688 patients. There were 4525 (3795 patients) new or established visits and 20 971 (10 049 patients) follow-up visits. Median (IQR) age was 55.0 (46.0-61.0) years among the telehealth visits, with 15 663 visits (61.4%) by women and 18 360 visits (72.0%) by Hispanic non-White patients. According to cost models, the estimated mean (SD) total cost savings ranged from $147.4 ($120.1) at $0.56/mile to $186.1 ($156.9) at $0.82/mile. For new or established visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit ranged from $176.6 ($136.3) at $0.56/mile to $222.8 ($177.4) at $0.82/mile, and for follow-up visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit was $141.1 ($115.3) at $0.56/mile to $178.1 ($150.9) at $0.82/mile. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation, telehealth was associated with savings in patients time and travel costs, which may reduce the financial toxicity of cancer care. Expansion of telehealth oncology services may be an effective strategy to reduce the financial burden among patients with cancer.

Self-Reported Unmet Healthcare Needs Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Emergency Services Use and Hospitalization Among Cancer Survivors.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly disrupted the entire healthcare system, resulting in unmet needs for medical care (e.g., delayed or forgone care) among patients with cancer. Methods: Using 2020 National Health Interview Survey data, we examined the prevalence of unmet healthcare needs and whether the self-reported experience of having delayed or forgone healthcare is associated with increased emergency services use and hospitalizations. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to assess the associations between unmet healthcare needs because of COVID-19 and emergency services use and hospitalization, controlling for potential confounding. All analysis was conducted in March and April 2022. Results: Among 2,386 study participants living with cancer (representing 25.6 million U.S. adults), 33.7% reported having unmet healthcare needs because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The prevalence of unmet healthcare needs was higher among younger cancer survivors and those with higher education. In the adjusted analysis, cancer survivors with unmet healthcare needs were 31% more likely to report any emergency services use (adjusted OR=1.31, 95% CI=1.05, 1.65) than those without. Having unmet healthcare needs was not significantly associated with hospitalization (p=0.465). Conclusions: Our findings highlight the unmet need for cancer care because of the pandemic and potential adverse health outcomes.

Financial hardship and mental health among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of the US COVID-19 Household Impact Survey

Purpose Our objective was to (1) identify associated characteristics of financial hardship (FH), and (2) evaluate associations of FH with mental health symptoms among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Using data from the nationally representative COVID-19 Impact Survey, we defined cancer survivors as those with a self-reported diagnosis of cancer (n = 854,7.6%). We defined FH using the following question: “Based on your current financial situation, how would you pay for an unexpected $400 expense?” Multivariable Poisson regression was used to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) to identify associated characteristics of FH and associations of FH with mental health symptoms among cancer survivors overall and by age (18–59 years/60+ years). Results Forty-one percent of cancer survivors reported FH, with 58% in 18–59 and 33% in 60+ year old respondents. Compared to cancer survivors aged 60+ years, those aged 30–44 (aPR:1.74,95% CI:1.35–2.24), and 45–59 years (aPR:1.60,95% CI:1.27–1.99) were more likely to report FH. Compared to non–Hispanic(NH)–White cancer survivors, NH–Black cancer survivors had a 56% higher prevalence of FH (aPR:1.56;95% CI: 1.23–1.97). Among 60+ years aged cancer survivors, NH–Black (aPR:1.80;95% CI: 1.32–2.45) and NH–Asian cancer survivors (aPR:10.70,95% CI:5.6–20.7) were more likely to experience FH compared to their NH–White counterparts. FH was associated with feeling anxious (aPR:1.51,95% CI:1.11–2.05), depressed (aPR:1.66,95% CI:1.25–2.22), and hopeless (aPR:1.84,95% CI:1.38–2.44). Conclusion Minoritized communities, younger adults, and cancer survivors with low socioeconomic status had a higher burden of FH, which was associated with feelings of anxiety, depression, and hopelessness.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination among a national sample of United States adults ages 18-45: A cross-sectional study

To assess how the COVID-19 pandemic affected catch-up HPV vaccination among age-eligible adults (ages 18-45). The current study leverages a national, cross-sectional sample of US adults ages 18-45 years to assess the prevalence and determinants of COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions to catch-up HPV vaccination in 2021. The sample was restricted to adults intending to receive the HPV vaccine. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess the probability of 1) pandemic-related HPV vaccination disruption and 2) uncertainty about pandemic-related HPV vaccination disruption. Report of ‘no pandemic-related HPV vaccination disruption’ served as the reference category. Among adults intending to get the HPV vaccine (n=1,683), 8.6% reported pandemic-related HPV vaccination disruption, 14.7% reported uncertainty about vaccination disruption, and 76.7% reported no disruption. Factors associated with higher odds of pandemic-related vaccination disruption included non-English language preference (OR: 3.20;95% CI: 1.99-5.13), being a parent/guardian (OR: 1.77;95% CI: 1.18-2.66), having at least one healthcare visit in the past year (OR: 1.97;95% CI: 1.10-3.53), being up-to-date on the tetanus vaccine (OR: 1.81;95% CI: 1.19-2.75), and being a cancer survivor (OR: 2.57;95% CI: 1.52-4.34). Catch-up HPV vaccination for age-eligible adults is a critical public health strategy for reducing HPV-related cancers. While a small percentage of adults reported pandemic-related disruptions to HPV vaccination, certain adults (e.g., individuals with a non-English language preference and cancer survivors) were more likely to report a disruption. Interventions may be needed that increase accessibility of catch-up HPV vaccination among populations with reduced healthcare access during the pandemic.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Women's Health Care Access: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: There has been limited study of how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected women's health care access. Our study aims to examine the prevalence and correlates of COVID-19-related disruptions to (1) primary care; (2) gynecologic care; and (3) preventive health care among women. Materials and Methods: We recruited 4,000 participants from a probability-based online panel. We conducted four multinomial logistic regression models, one for each of the study outcomes: (1) primary care access; (2) gynecologic care access; (3) patient-initiated disruptions to preventive visits; and (4) provider-initiated disruptions to preventive visits. Results: The sample included 1,285 women. One in four women (28.5%) reported that the pandemic affected their primary care access. Sexual minority women (SMW) (odds ratios [OR]: 1.67; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.19-2.33) had higher odds of reporting pandemic-related effects on primary care access compared to women identifying as heterosexual. Cancer survivors (OR: 2.07; 95% CI: 1.25-3.42) had higher odds of reporting pandemic-related effects on primary care access compared to women without a cancer history. About 16% of women reported that the pandemic affected their gynecologic care access. Women with a cancer history (OR: 2.34; 95% CI: 1.35-4.08) had higher odds of reporting pandemic-related effects on gynecologic care compared to women without a cancer history. SMW were more likely to report patient- and provider-initiated delays in preventive health care. Other factors that affected health care access included income, insurance status, and having a usual source of care. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted women's health care access and disproportionately affected access among SMW and women with a cancer history, suggesting that targeted interventions may be needed to ensure adequate health care access during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Public knowledge and information sources for clinical trials among adults in the USA: evidence from a Health Information National Trends Survey in 2020.

BACKGROUND: Lack of clinical trial awareness has been identified as a barrier to clinical trial recruitment. Identifying factors associated with clinical trial knowledge could inform ongoing efforts to improve diversity in clinical trials. METHODS: Using data from the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2020, we examined the knowledge of clinical trials, associated characteristics, sources of clinical trial information and motives to participate in clinical trials among the general population in the USA. RESULTS: Of 3,772 US adults, 41.3% reported not knowing about clinical trials. Prevalence of having no knowledge of clinical trials was higher among Hispanic adults (51.8%) and non-Hispanic Black adults (41.8%) compared with non-Hispanic White adults (37.4%; p=0.013). Other significant predictors of knowledge about clinical trials included higher education, online health information-seeking behaviour and patient portal access. Most respondents (73.2%) reported that healthcare providers were the most trusted source of information. Helping other people (71.6%) was the primary motivation for clinical trial participation, followed by financial compensation (12.5%) and receiving better treatment (5.1%). CONCLUSION: There is a gap in knowledge about clinical trials among the US population. Development of multimodal approaches, including online and offline information broadcasting, is needed to improve knowledge and clinical trial recruitment in diverse populations.

COVID-19 Vaccination Rates Among US Adults With Vision or Hearing Disabilities.

Importance: Despite persistent care delivery inequities, limited studies have assessed COVID-19 vaccination rates among adults with vision or hearing disabilities. Objective: To estimate the prevalence of and factors in COVID-19 vaccination among US adults with vision or hearing disabilities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study assessed data from adults who participated in the US Census Bureau Household Pulse Survey from April 2021 through March 2022. The survey assessed COVID-19 vaccine initiation, vaccine series completion, and determinants of health care access, including demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and social determinants of health. Exposures: Vision disability (serious difficulty seeing even with eyeglasses or blindness) and hearing disability (serious difficulty hearing even with a hearing aid or deafness). Main Outcomes and Measures: First dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Adjusted estimated probabilities and 95% CIs of COVID-19 vaccine initiation were calculated using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for survey week, demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and social determinants of health. Results: In this study of 916 085 US adults (weighted population, 192 719 992; mean [SD] age, 54.0 [15.9] years; 52.0% women), most participants had initiated the COVID-19 vaccine series (82.7%). Adults with serious difficulty seeing (mean difference, -6.3%; 95% CI, -7.5% to -5.1%; P < .001) and blindness (mean difference, -20.1%; 95% CI, -25.1% to -15.0%; P < .001) had lower vaccination rates compared with adults with little to no vision impairment. Adults with serious difficulty hearing (mean difference, -2.1%; 95% CI, -3.5% to -0.7%; P = .003) and deafness (mean difference, -17.7%; 95% CI, -21.8% to -13.6%; P < .001) were less likely to initiate the COVID-19 vaccine compared with adults with little to no hearing impairment. Controlling for other factors, adults with blindness (mean difference, -6.3%; 95% CI, -11.1% to -1.5%; P = .009) were less likely to initiate the COVID-19 vaccine compared with adults with little to no vision impairment. Controlling for other factors, adults with deafness (mean difference, -5.5%; 95% CI, -9.2% to -1.9%; P = .003) were less likely to initiate the COVID-19 vaccine compared with adults with little to no hearing impairment. Conclusion and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that COVID-19 vaccine initiation is lower among adults with vision or hearing disabilities compared with adults without disabilities; this information may inform initiatives to promote equitable and accessible vaccination. Additional research may be needed to monitor COVID-19 vaccination disparities among adults with vision or hearing disabilities and to address disparities.

Telestroke Infrastructure, Processes, and Support Needs: A Survey of Hospitals in Five States.

Introduction: Telestroke has been shown to be a cost-effective approach to promoting use and timeliness of evidence-based treatment. However, adoption of telestroke has been relatively low. Several barriers to telestroke implementation have been previously identified in the literature. These barriers, and the strategies needed to overcome them, may vary across hospitals. Our study aimed to examine telestroke programs to identify opportunities for future research and efforts to promote effective implementation and sustainment of telestroke services. Methods: We surveyed hospitals in five states to capture information about the current status of the hospital's telestroke program; the model(s) of delivery being used (e.g., hub-and-spoke and third-party vendor); and telestroke infrastructure, processes, and implementation strategies. The survey included both closed-ended and open-ended response options. Descriptive results are presented, complemented with illustrative examples of open-ended responses. Results: We received 89 responses, each representing a different hospital. Approximately one-third of telestroke programs in our sample began between 2018 and 2020. More than two-thirds reported participating in a collaboration with other organizations to improve telestroke services. The most commonly reported, high-priority topics for additional guidance involved monitoring process measures, using performance indicators for improvement, and sharing data from measures with physicians. Discussion: Results complement prior studies, specifically about impacts of COVID-19 on telestroke programs and capabilities that hospitals most need assistance with. Challenges faced and guidance needed differ across hospitals, suggesting a need for a tailored support. The results also suggest more work is needed to understand factors that threaten sustainability of telestroke programs.

Cancer Screening Among Rural and Urban Clinics During COVID-19: A Multistate Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: The effects of COVID-19 have been understudied in rural areas. This study sought to (1) identify cancer screening barriers and facilitators during the pandemic in rural and urban primary care practices, (2) describe implementation strategies to support cancer screening, and (3) provide recommendations. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted (N = 42) with primary care staff across 20 sites. Individual interviews were conducted through videoconference from August 2020 to April 2021 and recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive and inductive coding (hybrid approach) in NVivo 12 Plus. Practices included federally qualified health centers, tribal health centers, rural health clinics, hospital/health system-owned clinics, and academic medical centers across 10 states including urban (55%) and rural (45%) sites. Staff included individuals serving in the dual role of health care provider and administrator (21.4%), health care administrator (23.8%), physician (19.0%), advanced practice provider (11.9%), or resident (23.8%). The interviews assessed perceptions about cancer screening barriers and facilitators, implementation strategies, and future recommendations. RESULTS: Participants reported multilevel barriers to cancer screening including policy-level (eg, elective procedure delays), organizational (eg, backlogs), and individual (eg, patient cancellation). Several facilitators to screening were noted, such as home-based testing, using telehealth, and strong partnerships with referral sites. Practices used strategies to encourage screening, such as incentivizing patients and providers and expanding outreach. Rural clinics reported challenges with backlogs, staffing, telehealth implementation, and patient outreach. CONCLUSION: Primary care staff used innovative strategies during the pandemic to promote cancer screening. Unresolved challenges (eg, backlogs and inability to implement telehealth) disproportionately affected rural clinics.

Health Care Providers' and Professionals' Experiences With Telehealth Oncology Implementation During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid implementation of telehealth for cancer care during COVID-19 required innovative and adaptive solutions among oncology health care providers and professionals (HPPs). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this qualitative study was to explore oncology HPPs' experiences with telehealth implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study was conducted at Moffitt Cancer Center (Moffitt), an NCI (National Cancer Institute)-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Prior to COVID-19, Moffitt piloted telehealth visits on a limited basis. After COVID-19, Moffitt rapidly expanded telehealth visits. Telehealth visits included real-time videoconferencing between HPPs and patients and virtual check-ins (ie, brief communication with an HPP by telephone only). We conducted semistructured interviews with 40 oncology HPPs who implemented telehealth during COVID-19. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for themes using Dedoose software (version 4.12). RESULTS: Approximately half of the 40 participants were physicians (n=22, 55%), and one-quarter of the participants were advanced practice providers (n=10, 25%). Other participants included social workers (n=3, 8%), psychologists (n=2, 5%), dieticians (n=2, 5%), and a pharmacist (n=1, 3%). Five key themes were identified: (1) establishing and maintaining patient-HPP relationships, (2) coordinating care with other HPPs and informal caregivers, (3) adapting in-person assessments for telehealth, (4) developing workflows and allocating resources, and (5) future recommendations. Participants described innovative strategies for implementing telehealth, such as coordinating interdisciplinary visits with multiple HPPs and inviting informal caregivers (eg, spouse) to participate in telehealth visits. Health care workers discussed key challenges, such as workflow integration, lack of physical exam and biometric data, and overcoming the digital divide (eg, telehealth accessibility among patients with communication-related disabilities). Participants recommended policy advocacy to support telehealth (eg, medical licensure policies) and monitoring how telehealth affects patient outcomes and health care delivery. CONCLUSIONS: To support telehealth growth, implementation strategies are needed to ensure that HPPs and patients have the tools necessary to effectively engage in telehealth. At the same time, cancer care organizations will need to engage in advocacy to ensure that policies are supportive of oncology telehealth and develop systems to monitor the impact of telehealth on patient outcomes, health care quality, costs, and equity.

Preferences Towards Electronically Exchanging Digital Images With Healthcare Providers Among US Adults.

BACKGROUND: The rapid expansion of telemedicine, including teledermatology, during the COVID-19 pandemic has required both providers and patients alike to adapt to this digital transition. However, patient attitudes towards electronically shared images with their providers are poorly understood. To address this gap, we assessed digital image sharing preferences and associated determinants in a nationally representative sample. METHODS: We analyzed pooled data from the Health Information National Trends Survey 4, Cycle 3 and 4. Digital image sharing preferences were compared by patient characteristics and beliefs via chi-square at a significance level of p<0.05, using sampling and jackknife replicate weights to develop nationally representative sample estimates and account for the complex survey design. P-values were adjusted for multiple comparisons when appropriate. RESULTS: Among 6437 adults, 53.5% reported reluctance in electronically shared images and videos with providers. Greater aversion was observed among adults aged 75 or above (70.9%), retired (67.3%), and those with lower education (65.1%), lower annual income (60.9%), limited English proficiency (63.3%), distrust in health information from doctors (75.4%), and fair or poor health (60.4%). CONCLUSION: Patient hesitancy towards digital image sharing may present challenges for teledermatology adoption. Greater efforts may be needed to address the age and socioeconomic digital divide, multilingual telemedicine tools, and patient-physician dynamics to ensure vulnerable groups receive needed teledermatologic care.