Access to General Practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic in Portugal-A survey study of patient experiences in an urban setting.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, Portugal had high levels of unmet health care needs. Primary Care was reported as the main source of unmet needs. OBJECTIVES: To describe face-to-face and remote access to GPs in Portugal during the COVID-19 pandemic. To discover patient experiences and attitudes to access to care. To identify determinants of access to care. METHODS: A survey of a random sample of 4,286 adults registered in a group of Family Practices was conducted in 2021. Paper questionnaires were sent by post to patients who had no e-mail address registered with the practice. Patients with an e-mail address were sent a link to an online questionnaire. Outcomes were reported waiting times for face-to-face and remote contacts with GPs, dichotomized to ascertain compliance with standards. Associations between participant characteristics and outcome variables were tested using logistic regression. RESULTS: Waiting times for face-to-face consultations with GPs during the pandemic often exceeded the maximum waiting times (MWT) set by the National Health Service. Remote contacts were mostly conducted within acceptable standards. Waiting times for speaking with the GP over the phone were rated as 'poor' by 40% and 27% reported requests for these calls as unmet. The odds of getting care over MWT increased for participants who reported poorer digital skills. Participants were less likely to get non-urgent consultations over MWT if they found it easy to use the online patient portal to book appointments (odds ratio 0.24; 99% confidence intervals 0.09-0.61), request prescriptions (0.18; 0.04-0.74) or insert personal data (0.18; 0.04-0.95). CONCLUSION: Patient reported access to GPs during the pandemic was uneven in Portugal. Obtaining non-urgent consultations and remote contacts over MWT affected mainly those patients with poor digital skills. Telephone access to GPs received the worse ratings. Access through traditional pathways must remain available, to prevent the widening of inequities.

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.

Patient experience with telehealth service in a mental health setting.

The purpose of the quality improvement project is to explore the patient experience of telehealth services in a mental health setting during the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional survey design was deployed in an outpatient psychiatric setting. Forty-five participants completed the survey, and the smartphone was the most frequently used and preferred device for their telehealth service. Participants exhibited a high level of usability for telehealth services (Mean = 5.82, SD = 1.21). Telehealth can be a way to solve the problem of not having enough mental health services available, even though there are potential barriers such as digital literacy and human engagement.

Switching from natalizumab administration at the day hospital to administration at home. A 1 year prospective study of patient experience and quality of life in 30 consecutive patients with multiple sclerosis (TYSAD-35).

BACKGROUND: In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, French health authorities allowed the home administration of natalizumab by a healthcare-at-home service. We evaluated the patients' perception of care quality following the transition from day-hospital to home natalizumab administration. METHODS: Thirty relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) patients treated with natalizumab were prospectively evaluated for one year after changing onto a home treatment procedure, using MusiCare, the first MS-specific questionnaire to evaluate patient experience and MusiQol. A numerical rating scale score for satisfaction and a dedicated questionnaire concerning patient experience were completed after each infusion. The primary endpoint was the mean difference in MusiCare score between baseline and 12 months. RESULTS: From June 2020 to November 2021, 306 infusions were performed at home. Three patients withdrew from the study (one lost to follow-up and two preferred to return at the day hospital). No worsening of patient experience or quality of life was observed. The mean scores of the Musicare dimensions were higher at 12 months than at baseline, significantly for the "relationship with healthcare professionals" (p = 0.0203). The MusiQol global score remained stable but the coping and friendship dimensions were significantly better at M12 than at baseline (p = 0.0491 and p = 0.0478, respectively). The satisfaction questionnaire highlighted some pain during the infusions (21.8%) and contradictions between healthcare professionals (17.2%). The mean score for satisfaction with care was 9.1/10. No safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSION: The positive experience of patients with home natalizumab administration provides an important opportunity to improve the quality of patient care.

Existing gaps and missed opportunities in delivering quality nutrition services in primary healthcare: a descriptive analysis of patient experience and provider competence in 11 low-income and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the competence of primary healthcare (PHC) providers in delivering maternal and child nutrition services at the PHC level and patients' experience in receiving the recommended components of care. DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: Healthcare facilities in low/middle-income countries (LMICs) with available service provision assessment surveys (Afghanistan (2018), Democratic Republic of Congo (2018), Haiti (2017), Kenya (2010), Malawi (2013-2014), Namibia (2009), Nepal (2015), Rwanda (2007), Senegal (2018), Tanzania (2015) and Uganda (2007). PARTICIPANTS: 18 644 antenatal visits and 23 262 sick child visits in 8458 facilities across 130 subnational areas in 11 LMICs from 2007 to 2019. OUTCOMES: (1) Provider competence assessed as the direct observations of actions performed during antenatal care (ANC) and sick child visits; and (2) patients' experience defined as the self-reported awareness of the nutrition services received during ANC and sick child visits and provider effectiveness in delivering these services. RESULTS: Except for DRC, all countries scored below 50% on patients' experience and provider competence. More than 70% of clients were advised on taking iron supplements during pregnancy; however, less than 32% of patients were advised on iron side effects in all the studied countries. Across all countries, providers commonly took anthropometric measurements of expectant mothers and children; however, such assessments were rarely followed up with advice or counselling about growth patterns. In addition, less than 20% of observed providers advised on early/immediate breast feeding in all countries with available data. CONCLUSION: The 11 assessed countries demonstrated the delivery of limited nutrition services; nonetheless, the apparent deficiency in the extent and depth of questions asked for the majority of tracer activities revealed significant opportunities for improving the quality of nutrition service delivery at the PHC level.

Provider and Patient Experiences of Delays in Primary Care During the Early COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The necessary suspension of nonacute services by healthcare systems early in the COVID-19 pandemic was predicted to cause delays in routine care in the United States, with potentially serious consequences for chronic disease management. However, limited work has examined provider or patient perspectives about care delays and their implications for care quality in future healthcare emergencies. OBJECTIVE: This study explores primary care provider (PCP) and patient experiences with healthcare delays during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: PCPs and patients were recruited from four large healthcare systems in three states. Participants underwent semistructured interviews asking about their experiences with primary care and telemedicine. Data were analyzed using interpretive description. RESULTS: Twenty-one PCPs and 65 patients participated in interviews. Four main topics were identified: (1) types of care delayed, (2) causes for delays, (3) miscommunication contributing to delays, and (4) patient solutions to unmet care needs. CONCLUSIONS: Both patients and providers reported delays in preventive and routine care early in the pandemic, driven by healthcare system changes and patient concerns about infection risk. Primary care practices should develop plans for care continuity and consider new strategies for assessing care quality for effective chronic disease management in future healthcare system disruptions.

Patient experiences of methadone treatment changes during the first wave of COVID-19: a national community-driven survey.

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) allowed Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) programs to relax in-person MMT requirements to reduce COVID-19 exposure. This study examines patient-reported changes to in-person methadone clinic attendance requirements during COVID-19. METHODS: From June 7, 2020, to July 15, 2020, a convenience sample of methadone patients (N = 392) were recruited in collaboration with National Survivors Union (NSU) in 43 states and Washington D.C. through social media (Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, and Web site pop-ups). The community-driven research (CDR) online survey collected information on how patient take-home methadone dosing and in-person drug testing, counseling, and clinic visit frequency changed prior to COVID-19 (before March 2020) to during COVID-19 (June and July 2020). RESULTS: During the study time period, the percentage of respondents receiving at least 14 days of take-home doses increased from 22 to 53%, while the percentage receiving one or no take-home doses decreased from 22.4% before COVID-19 to 10.2% during COVID-19. In-person counseling attendance decreased from 82.9% to 19.4%. While only 3.3% of respondents accessed counseling through telehealth before COVID-19, this percentage increased to 61.7% during COVID-19. Many respondents (41.3%) reported visiting their clinics in person once a week or more during COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of COVID-19, methadone patients report decreased in-person clinic attendance and increased take-home doses and use of telehealth for counseling services. However, respondents reported considerable variations, and many were still required to make frequent in-person clinic visits, which put patients at risk of COVID-19 exposure. Relaxations of MMT in-person requirements during COVID-19 should be consistently implemented and made permanent, and patient experiences of these changes should be explored further.

Telemedicine Use and the Perceived Risk of COVID-19: Patient Experience.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 outbreak resulted in an increased demand for telemedicine worldwide. Telemedicine is a technology-based virtual platform that allows the exchange of clinical data and images over remote distances. This study aims to examine the impact of the perceived risk of COVID-19 on telemedicine use in Bangladesh. METHODS: This explanatory study was conducted in hospital settings across Dhaka city in Bangladesh. Patients were eligible to participate if they were aged 18 years or over and had used telemedicine in a hospital at least once since the COVID-19 outbreak. Outcome variables included sociodemographic, the perceived risk of COVID-19, and telehealth use. Study data were collected using an online and paper-based survey. RESULTS: A total of 550 patients participated in this study, mostly male (66.4%), single (58.2%), and highly educated (74.2%). The means of the different domains of telemedicine use reflected a high degree of perceived benefit, accessibility, and satisfaction but a lower degree of privacy and discomfort, care personnel expertise, and usability. COVID 19 perceived risk predicted between 13.0% and 26.6% of variance in telemedicine domains, while the effects of demographic variables were controlled or removed. The perceived risk of COVID-19 was negatively correlated with privacy and discomfort, as well as care personnel concerns. Low and high levels of perceived COVID-19 risk were less likely to encourage the use of telemedicine as a risk reduction tool. DISCUSSION: The participants were mainly satisfied with telemedicine, finding it beneficial and accessible; however, many were concerned about privacy, care personnel expertise, and its usability. The perceived risk of COVID-19 was a strong predictor (contributor) of telemedicine use, suggesting that risk perception can be used to encourage telemedicine use as a risk reduction strategy during pandemics; however, a medium level of risk was more promising.

Analysis of local qualitative cancer patient experience alongside the 2019 results of the UK National Cancer Patient Experience Survey.

OBJECTIVES: This study analyses data from local qualitative interviewing about what matters most to patients with information from the National Cancer Patient Experience Survey (NCPES) to formulate an accurate improvement plan. This study seeks to provide a deeper analysis of the results of the 2019 NCPES. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected through a focus group, telephone and virtual interviews from patients in North East London. Ten questions from the NCPES were asked. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using an NVivo framework matrix. The results were analysed considering the 2019 National Cancer Patient Experience report. KEY FINDINGS: In total, 17 patients and 4 carers participated. The interview answers provided a more in-depth response when compared with the NCPES results, allowing for a deeper understanding of patient experience. This provided an insightful understanding of what matters most to our patients. CONCLUSIONS: The NCPES results are not always reflective of the patient population. Limitations of the survey make it hard for healthcare providers to develop accurate improvement plans. It is important to use other data sources such as qualitative interviewing alongside the NCPES. The data collated during this study have been used to identify themes and deliverables for achievable and sustainable improvements to be made.

Patient experiences of COVID-19-induced changes to methadone treatment in a large community-based opioid treatment program in Baltimore.

INTRODUCTION: Following the March 2020 federal declaration of a COVID-19 public health emergency, in line with recommendations for social distancing and decreased congregation, federal agencies issued sweeping regulation changes to facilitate access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) treatment. These changes allowed patients new to treatment to receive multiple days of take-home medications (THM) and to use remote technology for treatment encounters-allowances that previously had been reserved exclusively for "stable" patients who met minimum adherence and time-in-treatment criteria. The impact of these changes on low-income, minoritized patients (frequently the largest recipients of opioid treatment program [OTP]-based addiction care), however, is not well characterized. We aimed to explore the experiences of patients who were enrolled in treatment prior to COVID-19 OTP regulation changes, with the goal of understanding patients' perceptions of the impact of these changes on treatment. METHODS: This study included semistructured, qualitative interviews with 28 patients. We used a purposeful sampling method to recruit individuals who were active in treatment just before COVID-19-related policy changes went into effect, and who were still in treatment several months later. To ensure a diverse array of perspectives, we interviewed individuals who either had or had not experienced challenges with methadone medication adherence from 3/24/21 to 6/8/21, approximately 12-15 months following the onset of COVID-19. Interviews were transcribed and coded using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants were majority male (57 %), Black/African American (57 %), with a mean age of 50.1 (SD = 9.3). Fifty percent received THM prior to COVID-19, which increased to 93 % during the pandemic. COVID-19 program changes had mixed effects on treatment and recovery experiences. Themes identified convenience, safety, and employment as reasons for preferring THM. Challenges included difficulty with managing/storing medications, experiencing isolation, and concern about relapse. Furthermore, some participants reported that telebehavioral health encounters felt less personal. CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers should consider patients' perspectives to foster a more patient-centered approach to methadone dosing that is safe, flexible, and accommodating to a diverse array of patients' needs. Additionally, technical support should be provided to OTPs to ensure interpersonal connections are maintained in the patient-provider relationship beyond the pandemic.

Brain Fog and Fatigue following COVID-19 Infection: An Exploratory Study of Patient Experiences of Long COVID.

Post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC) is a poorly understood condition with significant impact on quality of life. We aimed to better understand the lived experiences of patients with PASC, focusing on the impact of cognitive complaints ("brain fog") and fatigue on (1) daily activities, (2) work/employment, and (3) interpersonal relationships. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 15 patients of a Midwestern academic hospital's post-COVID-19 clinic. We audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed interviews thematically using a combined deductive-inductive approach and collected participants' characteristics from chart review. Participants frequently used descriptive and metaphorical language to describe symptoms that were relapsing-remitting and unpredictable. Fatigue and brain fog affected all domains and identified subthemes included symptoms' synergistic effects, difficulty with multitasking, lack of support, poor self-perception, and fear of loss of income and employment. Personal relationships were affected with change of responsibilities, difficulty parenting, social isolation, and guilt due to the burdens placed on family. Furthermore, underlying social stigma contributed to negative emotions, which significantly affected emotional and mental health. Our findings highlight PASC's negative impact on patients' daily lives. Providers can better support COVID-19 survivors during their recovery by identifying their needs in a sensitive and timely manner.

Let Us Take It into Our Own Hands: Patient Experience during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced new health situations for patients and health professionals alike and, with them, opportunities to study these new patient experiences, gain insights into changed healthcare practices, and propose potential new healthcare solutions. The aim of our study was to explore how people coped with their health issues during the pandemic. We utilized a consensual qualitative analysis. The convenience sample that was gathered online through social media comprised 1683 participants with a mean age of 31.02 years (SD = 11.99). The 50 participants from the convenience sample who scored the highest on subscales of the COPE inventory were selected for in-depth interviews. In-depth interviews with 27 participants from the convenience sample who reported a health issue were analyzed. The final sample in our study therefore comprised 17 women (63%) and 10 men (37%) with a mean age of 28.35 years (SD = 9.31). The results showed that behavioral coping with health problems was mentioned across all participants' accounts. However, participants facing a health issue during the COVID-19 pandemic mostly relied on their own self-help instead of on healthcare services. They utilized healthcare services only when absolutely necessary. Furthermore, the participants had two main sources of resilience: themselves and other people.

Nothing really changed: Arizona patient experience of methadone and buprenorphine access during COVID.

OBJECTIVE: To understand patient experience of federal regulatory changes governing methadone and buprenorphine (MOUD) access in Arizona during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This community-based participatory and action research study involved one-hour, audio-recorded field interviews conducted with 131 people who used methadone and/or buprenorphine to address opioid use disorder at some point during COVID (January 1, 2020- March 31, 2021) in Arizona. Transcribed data were analyzed using a priori codes focused on federally recommended flexibilities governing MOUD access. Data were quantitated to investigate associations with COVID risk and services access. RESULTS: Telehealth was reported by 71.0% of participants, but the majority were required to come to the clinic to attend video appointments with an offsite provider. Risk for severe COVID outcomes was reported by 40.5% of the sample. Thirty-eight percent of the sample and 39.7% of methadone patients were required to be at the clinic daily to get medication and 47.6% were at high risk for COVID severe outcomes. About half (54.2%) of methadone patients indicated that some form of multi-day take home dosing was offered at their clinic, and 45.8% were offered an extra day or two of multi-day doses; but no participants received the federally allowed 14- or 28-day methadone take-home doses for unstable and stable patients respectively. All participants expressed that daily clinic visits interrupted their work and home lives and desired more take-home dosing and home delivery options. CONCLUSIONS: MOUD patients in Arizona were not offered many of the federally allowed flexibilities for access that were designed to reduce their need to be at the clinic. To understand the impact of these recommended treatment changes in Arizona, and other states where they were not well implemented, federal and state regulators must mandate these changes and support MOUD providers to implement them.

"It Made Me Feel like Things Are Starting to Change in Society:" A Qualitative Study to Foster Positive Patient Experiences during Phone-Based Social Needs Interventions.

Many healthcare organizations are screening patients for health-related social needs (HRSN) to improve healthcare quality and outcomes. Due to both the COVID-19 pandemic and limited time during clinical visits, much of this screening is now happening by phone. To promote healing and avoid harm, it is vital to understand patient experiences and recommendations regarding these activities. We conducted a pragmatic qualitative study with patients who had participated in a HRSN intervention. We applied maximum variation sampling, completed recruitment and interviews by phone, and carried out an inductive reflexive thematic analysis. From August to November 2021 we interviewed 34 patients, developed 6 themes, and used these themes to create a framework for generating positive patient experiences during phone-based HRSN interventions. First, we found patients were likely to have initial skepticism or reservations about the intervention. Second, we identified 4 positive intervention components regarding patient experience: transparency and respect for patient autonomy; kind demeanor; genuine intention to help; and attentiveness and responsiveness to patients' situations. Finally, we found patients could be left with feelings of appreciation or hope, regardless of whether they connected with HRSN resources. Healthcare organizations can incorporate our framework into trainings for team members carrying out phone-based HRSN interventions.

Patient Experiences after Physical Trauma: The Negative Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Recovery.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic generated a crisis within the healthcare system, during which acute, COVID-19-related health needs were prioritized over less urgent needs, including vulnerable subgroups. This study explored experiences of recovery among survivors of physical injuries associated with severe pain during the COVID-19 pandemic in Norway. In-depth interviews were conducted among 13 participants. Findings generated by a thematic analysis revealed that the pandemic, including the contagion control measures and interrupted healthcare, were of negative consequence for the participants' recovery experiences and mental and physical health. Despite experiencing severe pain and perceived needs for support, the participants experienced being deprioritized by the healthcare system. They experienced a reduced capacity to cope with pandemic-related stress and to perform everyday tasks, which they perceived as generating an additional burden for their loved ones. Alcohol was reported to be used in an effort to relieve the associated mental distress. As suggested by this study, injury survivors constitute a vulnerable subgroup for whom the continuity of rehabilitation services during a national crisis, as well as the integration of mental health support, can be essential for mitigating the negative impact of the crisis on recovery and for promoting optimal long-term health outcomes.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patient Experience in Acute Care Hospitals.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals and health systems have had to make changes to balance treating patients with COVID-19 and those in the hospital for other reasons. This shift from routine hospital practice and policies affected the delivery of healthcare to patients in hospitals across Canada. Data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information's Canadian Patient Experiences Inpatient Care survey suggest that despite the changes to hospital procedures during the pandemic, most admitted patients - including those with COVID-19 - had a positive experience. Hospital visitor restrictions, however, did likely impact the involvement of a patient's family and friends. Compared to previous years, fewer patients reported that their family and friends were involved in their care as much as they wanted. This type of patient feedback on care experiences can play a valuable role in highlighting areas of best practice and informing decision making to improve patient care.

Exploring Nurse and Patient Experiences of Developing Rapport During Oncology Ambulatory Care Videoconferencing Visits: Qualitative Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: Although videoconferencing between oncology patients and nurses became routine during the pandemic, little is known about the development of clinician-patient rapport in this care environment. Evidence that virtual visits may challenge nurses' ability to form connections with patients, demonstrate empathy, and provide support suggests that videoconferencing may not ensure optimal care for persons with cancer. Establishing rapport during videoconferencing visits (VCVs) is important in oncology nursing, as rapport enables the nurse to provide emotional support and assistance to patients as they navigate their cancer journey. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the nature of nurse-patient rapport in ambulatory cancer care videoconferencing telehealth visits. Objectives included exploring (1) how patients with cancer and nurses describe experiences of and strategies for cultivating rapport and (2) similarities and differences between rapport in videoconferencing and in-person visits (IPVs). METHODS: In this qualitative descriptive study, interviews were conducted from October 2021 to March 2022 with 22 participants, including patients with cancer (n=10, 45%) and oncology nurses (n=12, 55%), about their experiences of rapport building during VCVs. All interviews were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Data from nurses and patients were analyzed separately using identical procedures, with a comparative analysis of patient and nurse results performed in the final analysis. RESULTS: Most patients in the study had experienced 3-5 video visits within the past 12 months (n=7, 70%). Half of the nurse participants (n=6, 50%) reported having participated in over 100 VCVs, and all had experiences with videoconferencing (ranging from 3 to 960 visits) over the past 12 months. In total, 3 themes and 6 categories were derived from the patient data, and 4 themes and 13 categories were derived from the nurse data. Comparisons of themes derived from participant interviews identified similarities in how nurses and patients described experiences of rapport during VCVs. Three themes fit the collective data: (1) person-centered and relationship-based care is valued and foundational to nurse-patient rapport in oncology ambulatory care regardless of how care is delivered, (2) adapting a bedside manner to facilitate rapport during VCVs is feasible, and (3) nurses and patients can work together to create person-centered options across the care trajectory to ensure quality care outcomes. Barriers to relationship building in VCVs included unexpected interruptions from others, breaks in the internet connection, concerns about privacy, and limitations associated with not being physically present. CONCLUSIONS: Person-centered and relationship-based approaches can be adapted to support nurse-patient rapport in VCVs, including forming a personal connection with the patient and using active listening techniques. Balancing the challenges and limitations with the benefits of videoconferencing is an essential competency requiring additional research and guidelines. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/27940.

Exploring patient experiences with a telehealth approach for the PRO-ACTIVE trial intervention in head and neck cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Following the COVID-19 directive to cease non-essential services, a rapid shift was made in the delivery of Speech Language Pathology (SLP) dysphagia management in the 3-arm, randomized PRO-ACTIVE trial. To inform future programs, this study explored patients' experiences with telehealth when the planned in-person SLP intervention was moved to a telehealth modality. METHODS: A theory-guided qualitative descriptive approach was used. Willing participants who had received at least one telehealth swallowing therapy session participated in a one-time semi-structured interview. Interview transcripts were subjected to a standard qualitative content/theme analysis. Researchers reviewed all transcripts and used a multi-step analysis process to build a coding framework through consensus discussion. Summaries and key messages were generated for each code. RESULTS: Eleven participants recounted their telehealth experiences and reported feeling satisfied, comfortable and confident with the session(s). They identified that previous experience with teleconferencing, access to optimal technical equipment, clinician skill, and caregiver assistance facilitated their telehealth participation. Participants highlighted that telehealth was beneficial as it reduced commuting time, COVID-19 exposure and fatigue from travel; and also allowed caregiver participation particularly during COVID. In comparing their in-person SLP sessions to telehealth sessions, limitations were also identified, including: lack of previous experience with and/or poor access to technology, and less opportunity for personalization. Participants indicated that use of phone alone was less preferred than an audio/video platform. DISCUSSION: Patients reported that overall, telehealth sessions did not compromise their learning experience when compared to in-person sessions. Patients benefited from use of telehealth in several ways despite some limitations of the use of technology. Patient feedback about telehealth provides an important perspective that may be critical to inform best practices for care delivery.

Immunodeficient patient experience of emergency switch from intravenous to rapid push subcutaneous immunoglobulin replacement therapy during coronavirus disease 2019 shielding.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Welsh immunodeficient patients on immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT) who were considered high risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were directed to shield. Consequently, patients receiving hospital-based intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) quickly transitioned to home-based self-administered subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIg). This evaluation aimed to assess patients' perceptions and experiences and laboratory outcomes of emergency IgRT transition during COVID-19. RECENT FINDINGS: A quick transition from in-hospital IVIg to home-based rapid push SCIg is achievable, however, patient IgRT administration preference remains key outside of emergency shielding measures. SUMMARY: Subjective self-reported experiences ( n  = 23) and objective immunoglobulin G (IgG) concentration ( n  = 28) assessments were prospectively collected from patients pre/post-IgRT switch. In total, 41/55 (75%) patients transitioned from IVIg to rapid push SCIg and all completed training to self-administer subcutaneously within 24 days. Twenty-two percent ( n  = 5) of patients preferred SCIg and 35% ( n  = 8) wanted to return to hospital-based IVIg at 6 weeks post-transition. Mean IgG levels were similar pre vs. post-SCIg switch (10.3 g/l vs. 10.6 g/l, respectively). Patients reported greater infection anxiety during COVID-19 and adapted behaviours to mitigate risk. Although a third of patients wished to return to IVIg following cessation of shielding, over time the percentage electing to remain on SCIg rose from 22% to 59%.

The impact of anti-tumor approaches on the outcomes of cancer patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis based on 52 cohorts incorporating 9231 participants.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to investigate the impact of anti-tumor approaches (including chemotherapy, targeted therapy, endocrine therapy, immunotherapy, surgery and radiotherapy) on the outcomes of cancer patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched to identify relevant trials. The primary endpoints were severe disease and death of cancer patients treated with anti-tumor therapy before COVID-19 diagnosis. In addition, stratified analyses were implemented towards various types of anti-tumor therapy and other prognostic factors. Furthermore, odds ratios (ORs) were hereby adopted to measure the outcomes with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: As indicated in the study consisting of 9231 individuals from 52 cohorts in total, anti-tumor therapy before COVID-19 diagnosis could elevate the risk of death in cancer patients (OR: 1.21, 95%CI: 1.07-1.36, P = 0.0026) and the incidence of severe COVID-19 (OR: 1.19, 95%CI: 1.01-1.40, P = 0.0412). Among various anti-tumor approaches, chemotherapy distinguished to increase the incidence of death (OR = 1.22, 95%CI: 1.08-1.38, P = 0.0013) and severe COVID-19 (OR = 1.10, 95%CI: 1.02-1.18, P = 0.0165) as to cancer patients with COVID-19. Moreover, for cancer patients with COVID-19, surgery and targeted therapy could add to the risk of death (OR = 1.27, 95%CI: 1.00-1.61, P = 0.0472), and the incidence of severe COVID-19 (OR = 1.14, 95%CI: 1.01-1.30, P = 0.0357) respectively. In the subgroup analysis, the incidence of death (OR = 1.17, 95%CI: 1.03-1.34, P = 0.0158) raised in case of chemotherapy adopted for solid tumor with COVID-19. Besides, age, gender, hypertension, COPD, smoking and lung cancer all served as potential prognostic factors for both death and severe disease of cancer patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-tumor therapy, especially chemotherapy, augmented the risk of severe disease and death for cancer patients with COVID-19, so did surgery for the risk of death and targeted therapy for the incidence of severe COVID-19.