"There's nothing like a good crisis for innovation": a qualitative study of family physicians' experiences with virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Prior to the pandemic, Canada lagged behind other Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development countries in the uptake of virtual care. The onset of COVID-19, however, resulted in a near-universal shift to virtual primary care to minimise exposure risks. As jurisdictions enter a pandemic recovery phase, the balance between virtual and in-person visits is reverting, though it is unlikely to return to pre-pandemic levels. Our objective was to explore Canadian family physicians' perspectives on the rapid move to virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic, to inform both future pandemic planning for primary care and the optimal integration of virtual care into the broader primary care context beyond the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 68 family physicians from four regions in Canada between October 2020 and June 2021. We used a purposeful, maximum variation sampling approach, continuing recruitment in each region until we reached saturation. Interviews with family physicians explored their roles and experiences during the pandemic, and the facilitators and barriers they encountered in continuing to support their patients through the pandemic. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed for recurrent themes. RESULTS: We identified three prominent themes throughout participants' reflections on implementing virtual care: implementation and evolution of virtual modalities during the pandemic; facilitators and barriers to implementing virtual care; and virtual care in the future. While some family physicians had prior experience conducting remote assessments, most had to implement and adapt to virtual care abruptly as provinces limited in-person visits to essential and urgent care. As the pandemic progressed, initial forays into video-based consultations were frequently replaced by phone-based visits, while physicians also rebalanced the ratio of virtual to in-person visits. Medical record systems with integrated capacity for virtual visits, billing codes, supportive clinic teams, and longitudinal relationships with patients were facilitators in this rapid transition for family physicians, while the absence of these factors often posed barriers. CONCLUSION: Despite varied experiences and preferences related to virtual primary care, physicians felt that virtual visits should continue to be available beyond the pandemic but require clearer regulation and guidelines for its appropriate future use.

Family physicians' responses to personal protective equipment shortages in four regions in Canada: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Despite well-documented increased demands and shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) during previous disease outbreaks, health systems in Canada were poorly prepared to meet the need for PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the primary care sector, PPE shortages impacted the delivery of health services and contributed to increased workload, fear, and anxiety among primary care providers. This study examines family physicians' (FPs) response to PPE shortages during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic to inform future pandemic planning. METHODS: As part of a multiple case study, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with FPs across four regions in Canada. During the interviews, FPs were asked to describe the pandemic-related roles they performed over different stages of the pandemic, facilitators and barriers they experienced in performing these roles, and potential roles they could have filled. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis approach was employed to identify recurring themes. For the current study, we examined themes related to PPE. RESULTS: A total of 68 FPs were interviewed across the four regions. Four overarching themes were identified: 1) factors associated with good PPE access, 2) managing PPE shortages, 3) impact of PPE shortages on practice and providers, and 4) symbolism of PPE in primary care. There was a wide discrepancy in access to PPE both within and across regions, and integration with hospital or regional health authorities often resulted in better access than community-based practices. When PPE was limited, FPs described rationing and reusing these resources in an effort to conserve, which often resulted in anxiety and personal safety concerns. Many FPs expressed that PPE shortages had come to symbolize neglect and a lack of concern for the primary care sector in the pandemic response. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic response, hospital-centric plans and a lack of prioritization for primary care led to shortages of PPE for family physicians. This study highlights the need to consider primary care in PPE conservation and allocation strategies and to examine the influence of the underlying organization of primary care on PPE distribution during the pandemic.

The roles of family physicians during a pandemic.

Family physicians play important roles throughout all stages of a pandemic response; however, actionable descriptions outlining these roles are absent from current pandemic plans. Using a multiple case study design, we conducted a document analysis and interviewed 68 family physicians in four Canadian regions. We identified roles performed by family physicians in five distinct stages of pandemic response: pre-pandemic, phased closure and re-opening, acute care crisis, vaccination, and pandemic recovery. In addition to adopting public health guidance to ensure continued access to primary care services, family physicians were often expected to operationalize public health roles (eg, staffing assessment centres), modulate access to secondary/tertiary services, help provide surge capacity in acute care facilities, and enhance supports and outreach to vulnerable populations. Future pandemic plans should include family physicians in planning, explicitly incorporate family physician roles, and ensure needed resources are available to allow for an effective primary care response.

Reliability and validity of the post COVID-19 condition stigma questionnaire: A prospective cohort study

Summary Background Many of the 10–20% percent of COVID-19 survivors who develop Post COVID-19 Condition (PCC, or Long COVID) describe experiences suggestive of stigmatization, a known social determinant of health. Our objective was to develop an instrument, the Post COVID-19 Condition Stigma Questionnaire (PCCSQ), with which to quantify and characterise PCC-related stigma. Methods We conducted a prospective cohort study to assess the reliability and validity of the PCCSQ. Patients referred to our Post COVID-19 Clinic in the Canadian City of Edmonton, Alberta between May 29, 2021 and May 24, 2022 who met inclusion criteria (attending an academic post COVID-19 clinic;age ≥18 years;persistent symptoms and impairment at ≥ 12 weeks since PCR positive acute COVID-19 infection;English-speaking;internet access;consenting) were invited to complete online questionnaires, including the PCCSQ. Analyses were conducted to estimate the instrument's reliability, construct validity, and association with relevant instruments and defined health outcomes. Findings Of the 198 patients invited, 145 (73%) met inclusion criteria and completed usable questionnaires. Total Stigma Score (TSS) on the PCCSQ ranged from 40 to 174/200. The mean (SD) was 103.9 (31.3). Cronbach's alpha was 0.97. Test-retest reliability was 0.92. Factor analysis supported a 6-factor latent construct. Subtest reliabilities were >0.75. Individuals reporting increased TSS occurred across all demographic groups. Increased risk categories included women, white ethnicity, and limited educational opportunities. TSS was positively correlated with symptoms, depression, anxiety, loneliness, reduced self-esteem, thoughts of self-harm, post-COVID functional status, frailty, EQ5D5L score, and number of ED visits. It was negatively correlated with perceived social support, 6-min walk distance, and EQ5D5L global rating. Stigma scores were significantly increased among participants reporting employment status as disabled. Interpretation Our findings suggested that the PCCSQ is a valid, reliable tool with which to estimate PCC-related stigma. It allows for the identification of patients reporting increased stigma and offers insights into their experiences. Funding The Edmonton Post COVID-19 Clinic is supported by the University of Alberta and Alberta Health Services. No additional sources of funding were involved in the execution of this research study.

Chemical and physical restraint use during acute care hospitalization of older adults: A retrospective cohort study and time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chemical and physical restraints are associated with harm in older adults, but our understanding of their use during acute care hospitalizations is limited. OBJECTIVES: To (1) describe restraint use during acute care hospitalizations of older adults at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to pre-pandemic levels and (2) describe between-hospital variability in restraint use. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with a time series analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Acute care hospital inpatients, aged 65 years or older, who were discharged from one of four Alberta hospitals or six Ontario hospitals in Canada, between November 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020. MAIN MEASURES: We used autoregressive linear models with restricted cubic splines to compare proportions of chemical restraint (that is, psychotropic medications, namely antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, and trazodone) and physical restraint (e.g., mittens) use immediately after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic with pre-pandemic levels. We describe between-hospital variability in restraint use using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and median odds ratios (OR). KEY RESULTS: We included 71,004 hospitalizations. Adjusted for the prevalence of dementia and psychotic disorders, chemical restraint use increased in Ontario hospitals from a pre-pandemic average of 27.1% to 30.8% (p<0.001) before returning to pre-pandemic levels within eight weeks. Physical restraint orders in Ontario increased from 5.9% to 8.3% (p = 0.012) and remained elevated at eight weeks. No significant changes in restraint use were observed in Alberta. There was moderate between-hospital variability in chemical restraint use (ICC 0.041 and median OR 1.43). Variability in physical restraint use was higher (ICC 0.11 and median OR 1.83). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted in-hospital use of chemical and physical restraints among older adults in Ontario but not Alberta. Substantial differences in chemical and physical restraint use by region and hospital suggests there are opportunities to improve best practices in geriatric care. Future research must support implementation of evidence-informed interventions that standardize appropriate restraint use.

Characteristics, treatment and delirium incidence of older adults hospitalized with COVID-19: a multicentre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected older adults disproportionately, and delirium is a concerning consequence; however, the relationship between delirium and corticosteroid use is uncertain. The objective of the present study was to describe patient characteristics, treatments and outcomes among older adults hospitalized with COVID-19, with a focus on dexamethasone use and delirium incidence. METHODS: We completed this retrospective cohort study at 7 sites (including acute care, rehabilitation and long-term care settings) in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. We included adults aged 65 years or older, consecutively hospitalized with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, between Mar. 11, 2020, and Apr. 30, 2021. We abstracted patient characteristics and outcomes from charts and analyzed them descriptively. We used a logistic regression model to determine the association between dexamethasone use and delirium incidence. RESULTS: During the study period, 927 patients were admitted to the acute care hospitals with COVID-19. Patients' median age was 79.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 72.0-87.0), and 417 (45.0%) were female. Most patients were frail (61.9%), based on a Clinical Frailty Scale score of 5 or greater. The prevalence of delirium was 53.6%, and the incidence was 33.1%. Use of restraints was documented in 20.4% of patients. In rehabilitation and long-term care settings (n = 115), patients' median age was 86.0 years (IQR 78.5-91.0), 72 (62.6%) were female and delirium occurred in 17 patients (14.8%). In patients admitted to acute care during wave 2 of the pandemic (Aug. 1, 2020, to Feb. 20, 2021), dexamethasone use had a nonsignificant association with delirium incidence (adjusted odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 0.77-2.50). Overall, in-hospital death occurred in 262 (28.4%) patients in acute care settings and 28 (24.3%) patients in rehabilitation or long-term care settings. INTERPRETATION: In-hospital death, delirium and use of restraints were common in older adults admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Further research should be directed to improving the quality of care for this population with known vulnerabilities during continued waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Family physician leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic: roles, functions and key supports.

PURPOSE: Strong leadership in primary care is necessary to coordinate an effective pandemic response; however, descriptions of leadership roles for family physicians are absent from previous pandemic plans. This study aims to describe the leadership roles and functions family physicians played during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada and identify supports and barriers to formalizing these roles in future pandemic plans. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This study conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with family physicians across four regions in Canada as part of a multiple case study. During the interviews, participants were asked about their roles during each pandemic stage and the facilitators and barriers they experienced. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis approach was used to identify recurring themes. FINDINGS: Sixty-eight family physicians completed interviews. Three key functions of family physician leadership during the pandemic were identified: conveying knowledge, developing and adapting protocols for primary care practices and advocacy. Each function involved curating and synthesizing information, tailoring communications based on individual needs and building upon established relationships. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Findings demonstrate the need for future pandemic plans to incorporate formal family physician leadership appointments, as well as supports such as training, communication aides and compensation to allow family physicians to enact these key roles. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique opportunity to examine the leadership roles of family physicians, which have been largely overlooked in past pandemic plans. This study's findings highlight the importance of these roles toward delivering an effective and coordinated pandemic response with uninterrupted and safe access to primary care.

Modeling the Impact of Vaccination on COVID-19 and Its Delta and Omicron Variants.

Vaccination is an important means to fight against the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its variants. In this work, we propose a general susceptible-vaccinated-exposed-infected-hospitalized-removed (SVEIHR) model and derive its basic and effective reproduction numbers. We set Hong Kong as an example and calculate conditions of herd immunity for multiple vaccines and disease variants. The model shows how the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Hong Kong during the second and third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic would have been reduced if vaccination were available then. We then investigate the relationships between various model parameters and the cumulative number of hospitalized COVID-19 cases in Hong Kong for the ancestral, Delta, and Omicron strains. Numerical results demonstrate that the static herd immunity threshold corresponds to one percent of the population requiring hospitalization or isolation at some point in time. We also demonstrate that when the vaccination rate is high, the initial proportion of vaccinated individuals can be lowered while still maintaining the same proportion of cumulative hospitalized/isolated individuals.

Mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID‐19 during three waves: A multicenter retrospective cohort study

BackgroundThe waves of COVID‐19 infections in Ontario, Canada, were marked by differences in patient characteristics and treatment. Our objectives were to (i) describe patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of hospitalized older adults with COVID‐19 between waves 1, 2, and 3, (ii) determine if there was an improvement in in‐hospital mortality in waves 2 and 3 after adjusting for covariates.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was done in five acute care hospitals in Toronto, Ontario. Consecutive hospitalized older adults aged ≥65 years with confirmed COVID‐19 infection were included. Wave 1 extended from March 11 to July 31, 2020, wave 2 from August 1, 2020 to February 20, 2021, and wave 3 from February 21 to June 30, 2021. Patient characteristics and outcomes were ed from charts. A logistic regression model was used to determine the association between COVID‐19 and in‐hospital mortality in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1.ResultsOf the 1671 patients admitted to acute care, 297 (17.8%) were admitted in wave 1, 751 (44.9%) in wave 2, and 623 (37.3%) in wave 3. The median age of our cohort was 77.0 years (interquartile range: 71.0–85.0) and 775 (46.4%) were female. The prevalence of frailty declined in progressive waves. The use of dexamethasone, remdesivir, and tocilizumab was significantly higher in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1. In the unadjusted analysis, in‐hospital mortality was unchanged between waves 1 and 2, but it was lower in wave 3 (18.3% vs. 27.4% in wave 1). After adjustment, in‐hospital mortality was unchanged in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1.ConclusionIn‐hospital mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID‐19 was similar between waves 1 and 3. Further research should be done to determine if COVID‐19 therapies have similar benefits for older adults compared with younger adults.

Mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19 during three waves: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Background: The waves of COVID-19 infections in Ontario, Canada, were marked by differences in patient characteristics and treatment. Our objectives were to (i) describe patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of hospitalized older adults with COVID-19 between waves 1, 2, and 3, (ii) determine if there was an improvement in in-hospital mortality in waves 2 and 3 after adjusting for covariates. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was done in five acute care hospitals in Toronto, Ontario. Consecutive hospitalized older adults aged ≥65 years with confirmed COVID-19 infection were included. Wave 1 extended from March 11 to July 31, 2020, wave 2 from August 1, 2020 to February 20, 2021, and wave 3 from February 21 to June 30, 2021. Patient characteristics and outcomes were abstracted from charts. A logistic regression model was used to determine the association between COVID-19 and in-hospital mortality in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1. Results: Of the 1671 patients admitted to acute care, 297 (17.8%) were admitted in wave 1, 751 (44.9%) in wave 2, and 623 (37.3%) in wave 3. The median age of our cohort was 77.0 years (interquartile range: 71.0-85.0) and 775 (46.4%) were female. The prevalence of frailty declined in progressive waves. The use of dexamethasone, remdesivir, and tocilizumab was significantly higher in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1. In the unadjusted analysis, in-hospital mortality was unchanged between waves 1 and 2, but it was lower in wave 3 (18.3% vs. 27.4% in wave 1). After adjustment, in-hospital mortality was unchanged in waves 2 and 3 compared with wave 1. Conclusion: In-hospital mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19 was similar between waves 1 and 3. Further research should be done to determine if COVID-19 therapies have similar benefits for older adults compared with younger adults.

Modeling the COVID-19 Pandemic Using an SEIHR Model With Human Migration.

The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak has become a worldwide problem. Due to globalization and the proliferation of international travel, many countries are now facing local epidemics. The existence of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmissions makes it more difficult to control disease transmission by isolating infectious individuals. To accurately describe and represent the spread of COVID-19, we suggest a susceptible-exposed-infected-hospitalized-removed (SEIHR) model with human migrations, where the "exposed" (asymptomatic) individuals are contagious. From this model, we derive the basic reproduction number of the disease and its relationship with the model parameters. We find that, for highly contagious diseases like COVID-19, when the adjacent region's epidemic is not severe, a large migration rate can reduce the speed of local epidemic spreading at the price of infecting the neighboring regions. In addition, since "infected" (symptomatic) patients are isolated almost immediately, the transmission rate of the epidemic is more sensitive to that of the "exposed" (asymptomatic) individuals. Furthermore, we investigate the impact of various interventions, e.g. isolation and border control, on the speed of disease propagation and the resultant demand on medical facilities, and find that a strict intervention measure can be more effective than closing the borders. Finally, we use some real historical data of COVID-19 caseloads from different regions, including Hong Kong, to validate the modified SEIHR model, and make an accurate prediction for the third wave of the outbreak in Hong Kong.

COVID-19 hospitalization is associated with pulmonary/diffusion abnormalities but not post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 severity.

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has resulted in much acute morbidity and mortality worldwide. There is now a growing recognition of the post-acute sequela of COVID-19, termed long COVID. However, the risk factors contributing to this condition remain unclear. Here, we address the growing controversy in the literature of whether hospitalization is a risk factor for long COVID. We found that hospitalization is associated with worse pulmonary restriction and reduction in diffusion capacity at 3 months post-infection. However, the impact on mental health, functional and quality of life is equally severe in those who have and have not been hospitalized during the acute infection. These findings suggest that hospitalization is a risk factor for pulmonary complications of long COVID but not the overall severity of long COVID.

A stochastic SEIHR model for COVID-19 data fluctuations.

Although deterministic compartmental models are useful for predicting the general trend of a disease's spread, they are unable to describe the random daily fluctuations in the number of new infections and hospitalizations, which is crucial in determining the necessary healthcare capacity for a specified level of risk. In this paper, we propose a stochastic SEIHR (sSEIHR) model to describe such random fluctuations and provide sufficient conditions for stochastic stability of the disease-free equilibrium, based on the basic reproduction number that we estimated. Our extensive numerical results demonstrate strong threshold behavior near the estimated basic reproduction number, suggesting that the necessary conditions for stochastic stability are close to the sufficient conditions derived. Furthermore, we found that increasing the noise level slightly reduces the final proportion of infected individuals. In addition, we analyze COVID-19 data from various regions worldwide and demonstrate that by changing only a few parameter values, our sSEIHR model can accurately describe both the general trend and the random fluctuations in the number of daily new cases in each region, allowing governments and hospitals to make more accurate caseload predictions using fewer compartments and parameters than other comparable stochastic compartmental models.

Australia and New Zealand Transplant and Cellular Therapies COVID-19 vaccination consensus position statement.

Australia and New Zealand have achieved excellent community control of COVID-19 infection. In light of the imminent COVID-19 vaccination roll out in both countries, representatives of all adult and paediatric allogeneic bone marrow transplant and cellular therapy (TCT) centres as well as representatives from autologous transplant only centres in Australia and New Zealand collaborated with infectious diseases specialists with expertise in TCT on this consensus position statement regarding COVID-19 vaccination in TCT patients in Australia and New Zealand. It is our recommendation that TCT patients, should have expedited access to high-efficacy COVID-19 vaccines given that these patients are at high risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 infection. We also recommend prioritising vaccination of TCT healthcare workers and household members of TCT patients. Vaccination should not replace other public health measures in TCT patients given the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in TCT patients is unknown. Furthermore, given the limited available data, prospective collection of safety and efficacy data of COVID-19 vaccination in this patient group is a priority.

Exertional intolerance and dyspnea with preserved lung function: an emerging long COVID phenotype?

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant acute morbidity and mortality worldwide. There is now a growing recognition of the longer-term sequelae of this infection, termed "long COVID". However, little is known about this condition. Here, we describe a distinct phenotype seen in a subset of patients with long COVID who have reduced exercise tolerance as measured by the 6 min walk test. They are associated with significant exertional dyspnea, reduced health-related quality of life and poor functional status. However, surprisingly, they do not appear to have any major pulmonary function abnormalities or increased burden of neurologic, musculoskeletal or fatigue symptoms.

Development of a primary care pandemic plan informed by in-depth policy analysis and interviews with family physicians across Canada during COVID-19: a qualitative case study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Given the recurrent risk of respiratory illness-based pandemics, and the important roles family physicians play during public health emergencies, the development of pandemic plans for primary care is imperative. Existing pandemic plans in Canada, however, do not adequately incorporate family physicians' roles and perspectives. This policy and planning oversight has become increasingly evident with the emergence of the novel coronavirus disease, COVID-19, pandemic. This study is designed to inform the development of pandemic plans for primary care through evidence from four provinces in Canada: British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, and Ontario. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will employ a multiple-case study of regions in four provinces. Each case consists of a mixed methods design which comprises: (1) a chronology of family physician roles in the COVID-19 pandemic response; (2) a provincial policy analysis; and (3) qualitative interviews with family physicians. Relevant policy and guidance documents will be identified through targeted, snowball and general search strategies. Additionally, these policy documents will be analysed to identify gaps and/or emphases in existing policies and policy responses. Interviews will explore family physicians' proposed, actual and potential roles during the pandemic, the facilitators and barriers they have encountered throughout and the influence of gender on their professional roles. Data will be thematically analysed using a content analysis framework, first at the regional level and then through cross-case analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval for this study has been granted by the Research Ethics of British Columbia, the Health Research Ethics Board of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Nova Scotia Health Authority Research Ethics Board and the Western University Research Ethics Board. Findings will be disseminated via conferences and peer-reviewed publications. Evidence and lessons learnt will be used to develop tools for government ministries, public health units and family physicians for improved pandemic response plans for primary care.

Tumor Treating Fields for Glioblastoma Therapy During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed excessive strain on health care systems and is especially evident in treatment decision-making for cancer patients. Glioblastoma (GBM) patients are among the most vulnerable due to increased incidence in the elderly and the short survival time. A virtual meeting was convened on May 9, 2020 with a panel of neuro-oncology experts with experience using Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields). The objective was to assess the risk-to-benefit ratio and provide guidance for using TTFields in GBM during the COVID-19 pandemic. PANEL DISCUSSION: Topics discussed included support and delivery of TTFields during the COVID-19 pandemic, concomitant use of TTFields with chemotherapy, and any potential impact of TTFields on the immune system in an intrinsically immunosuppressed GBM population. Special consideration was given to TTFields' use in elderly patients and in combination with radiotherapy regimens. Finally, the panel discussed the need to better capture data on COVID-19positive brain tumor patients to analyze longitudinal outcomes and changes in treatment decision-making during the pandemic. EXPERT OPINION: TTFields is a portable home-use device which can be managed via telemedicine and safely used in GBM patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. TTFields has no known immunosuppressive effects which is important during a crisis where other treatment methods might be limited, especially for elderly patients with multiple co-morbidities. It is too early to estimate the full impact of COVID-19 on the global healthcare system and on patient outcomes and the panel strongly recommended collaboration with existing cancer COVID-19 registries to follow CNS tumor patients.