Dataset Information

Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Oncology Patients: Perceptions of Oncology Health Care Providers.

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted psychological well-being worldwide. Oncology health care professionals' (OHCPs') perceptions of psychological effects of COVID-19 among people in active cancer treatment were explored. Semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of OHCPs actively providing care were conducted. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded using Atlas.ti v8 and thematic analysis. In total, 30 OHCPs participated. Most were registered nurses (70%), worked in outpatient setting (56.7%) and were in their current position 1-5 years (53.3%). Overarching themes are as follows: (a) cancer treatment disrupted due to patients' fear of exposure to COVID-19; (b) social distancing restrictions caused discontinued social support and supportive services that exacerbated psychological distress; (c) pandemic-related stressors led to overwhelmed coping skills; and (d) OHCPs played a vital role in providing emotional support and connecting patients with family/friends through technology. Behavioral health interventions should focus within the "new world of COVID-19" of reduced face-to-face support and increased online support for patients.

SUBMITTER: Chavez MN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10079896 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Oncology Patients: Perceptions of Oncology Health Care Providers.

Chavez Melody N MN Marshall Victoria K VK Martinez Tyson Dinorah D Mason Tina M TM Rechenberg Kaitlyn K

Western journal of nursing research 20220727 2

The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted psychological well-being worldwide. Oncology health care professionals' (OHCPs') perceptions of psychological effects of COVID-19 among people in active cancer treatment were explored. Semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of OHCPs actively providing care were conducted. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded using Atlas.ti v8 and thematic analysis. In total, 30 OHCPs participated. Most were registered nurses (70%), worked in ...[more]

PMID: 35897163

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRapid implementation of telehealth for cancer care during COVID-19 required innovative and adaptive solutions among oncology health care providers and professionals (HPPs).ObjectiveThe aim of this qualitative study was to explore oncology HPPs' experiences with telehealth implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis 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).ResultsApproximately 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.ConclusionsTo 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.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has generated worldwide scarcity of critical resources to protect against and treat disease. Shortages of face masks and other protective equipment place health workers, already on the frontline of the disease, at higher risk. Moral distress from making difficult decisions about allocating scarce resources and care to patients ill with COVID-19 can further add to burdens health workers face. This study investigates clinical health workers' risk perceptions and concerns about the ethics of their clinical decision-making, the actions of their institutions to address resource scarcity concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic, and their ability to voice safety concerns, as well as their own views on how scarce resources should be allocated.MethodsAn online survey was open to health care workers who provide clinical care to patients, with no specialty training or geographic location requirements, from May 19 to June 30, 2020. Participants were recruited through purposive sampling using medical association and institutional email lists, and by snowball sampling.ResultsOf 839 participants, a majority were physicians (540, 69.4%) working in academic medical centers (270, 35.2%) or private health systems in the community (234, 30.5%) in the USA (760, 90.7%). Most reported being concerned about their own health (494, 73.6%) and about the possibility of spreading COVID-19 to family and friends (534, 85.9%) during the pandemic. All respondents reported shortages or rationing of at least one type of medical resource (e.g., sanitizing supplies and personal protective equipment). More than half of respondents (351, 53.9%) did not feel they received sufficient training in how to allocate scarce resources in the pandemic. Many felt moral distress related to conflicts between institutional constraints and what they believed was right (459, 66.5%). Though a majority (459, 67.7%) reported feeling "comfortable" internally communicating with their administration about safety issues, far fewer reported feeling "confident" speaking publicly about safety issues without retaliation from their institution (255, 37.3%).ConclusionsIn the face of limited resources, surveyed health care workers reported concern about their own and their families' health from exposure. Securing adequate protective equipment must be a high priority for pandemic management. In addition, more governmental and facility-level ethical guidance is required for allocation of resources given ongoing scarcity, and facilities must create conditions so health care workers can speak openly about safety issues without fear of retaliation.

Project description:BackgroundIncreased psychological pressure on oral healthcare professionals (OHP) due to COVID-19 has been shown, yet little is known about the long-term psychological impacts. We aimed to study the psychological impact of COVID-19 and associated factors including perceived risk and preparedness and vaccination status among OHP in the first year after the lockdown period in Norway.MethodsA structured questionnaire sent electronically to dentists, dental hygienists and dental assistants inquired experiences and perceptions during the second year following the outbreak in Norway. The questionnaire comprised a COVID-19 fear scale and questions about risk perception, preparedness and vaccination status. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) were used to assess psychological impact, perception of risk and preparedness according to vaccination status of the respondents.ResultsThe majority of the 708 respondents were female (92.8%), had ten or more years of work experience (67.1%), and worked in public dental clinics (95.9%). Fears and concerns related to COVID-19 were common, 72.6% feared getting infected and 85.4% feared infecting others. Of the 642 respondents who agreed that their workplaces handled the situation well, 55.6% were fully vaccinated. Three factors were retrieved from EFA: Insecurity, Instability and Infection. SEM showed that females were more concerned with Infection, and respondents with long clinical experience were less likely to express fear about Instability. Fully vaccinated individuals felt more insecure about becoming infected, and those agreeing that their workplaces handled the current situation well were concerned with Insecurity.ConclusionsDespite widespread perception of adequate preparedness and high vaccine coverage, a considerable psychological impact and high levels of fear of COVID-19 were observed among the majority of OHP. Fully vaccinated individuals had a larger psychological burden than not fully vaccinated and those with unknown vaccination status. These findings can inform means and interventions to reduce negative impacts of fear in populations with a high psychological burden.

Project description:IntroductionVaccination against COVID-19 is a key global public health strategy. Health professionals including midwives and doctors support and influence vaccination uptake by childbearing women. There is currently no evidence regarding the COVID-19 vaccination perceptions and intentions of those who receive or provide maternity care in Australia. The aim of this study was to address this gap in knowledge and explore the perceptions and intentions regarding COVID-19 vaccination from consumers and providers of maternity care in Australia.MethodsA national cross-sectional online study conducted in early 2021 in Australia, a country that has had a very low number of COVID-19 cases and deaths. Recruitment was undertaken through parenting and health professional social media sites and professional college distribution lists. A total of 853 completed responses, from women (n = 326), maternity care providers including doctors (n = 58), midwives (n = 391) and midwifery students (n = 78).FindingsPersonal intention to be vaccinated ranged from 48-89% with doctors most likely and women least likely. Doctors and midwifery students were significantly more likely to recommend the vaccine to pregnant women in their care than midwives (p<0.001). Fewer doctors (2%) felt that women should wait until breastfeeding had concluded before being vaccinated compared with 24% of midwives and 21% of midwifery students (p<0.001). More than half of the midwives (53%) had concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine for the women in their care compared with 35% of doctors and 46% of midwifery students. Despite national guidelines recommending vaccination of breastfeeding women, 54% of practitioners were unlikely to recommend vaccination for this group.ConclusionThis is the first study to explore the perceptions and intentions regarding COVID-19 vaccination from the perspective of those who receive and provide maternity care in Australia. Findings have utility to support targeted public health messaging for these and other cohorts.

Dataset Information

Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Oncology Patients: Perceptions of Oncology Health Care Providers.

Publications

Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Oncology Patients: Perceptions of Oncology Health Care Providers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets