First statement on preparation for the COVID-19 pandemic in large German Speaking University-based radiation oncology departments.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Combs SE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7136995 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
First statement on preparation for the COVID-19 pandemic in large German Speaking University-based radiation oncology departments.
Combs Stephanie E SE Belka Claus C Niyazi Maximilian M Corradini Stefanie S Pigorsch Steffi S Wilkens Jan J Grosu Anca L AL Guckenberger Matthias M Ganswindt Ute U Bernhardt Denise D
Radiation oncology (London, England) 20200407 1
The COVID-19 pandemic is challenging modern radiation oncology. At University Hospitals, we have a mandate to offer high-end treatments to all cancer patients. However, in times of crisis we must learn to prioritize resources, especially personnel. Compromising oncological outcome will blur all statistics, therefore all measures must be taken with great caution. Communication with our neighboring countries, within societies and between departments can help meet the challenge. Here, we report on ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeThis survey aimed to determine the perception of brachytherapy training among residents in the DACH region, consisting of Austria, Germany and Switzerland.Material & methodsAn online questionnaire containing 22 questions related to trainee demographics (n = 5) and to brachytherapy training (n = 17) was sent in two iterations in 11/2019 and 02/2020. The following topics were evaluated: institutional support, barriers to training, extent of training, site-specific training (prostate, gynaecology, breast, gastrointestinal and skin), preferences for further training and outlook on overall development of brachytherapy. The responses were mostly based on a Likert scale of 1 to 5, thereby reflecting strength of opinion. Descriptive statistics were used to describe frequencies.ResultsAmong the 108 respondents, approximately 69% of residents considered the ability to perform brachytherapy independently to be important or somewhat important. However, only 31% of respondents reported to have a dedicated brachytherapy training during residency. The major limitation to achieve independence in performing brachytherapy was seen in a low case load in Austria, in the lack of training in Switzerland and in both of them in Germany.ConclusionThe interest in brachytherapy training among residents in German-speaking countries was generally high, but there is a perceived lack of sufficient case volumes and partially also in formal training opportunities. Fellowships at departments with a high case load as part of a formalised curriculum and dedicated hands-on workshops at national or international conferences might help to overcome these issues.
| S-EPMC10450005 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose: COVID-19 reached Belgium in February and quickly became a major public health challenge. It is of importance to evaluate the actual impact of COVID-19 on patients and staff in Belgian radiotherapy departments (RTDs). This was evaluated through a weekly national survey sent to departments measuring key factors that were affected by the pandemic. Materials and Methods: The Belgian SocieTy for Radiation Oncology (BeSTRO) together with the Belgian College for physicians in Radiation Oncology invited all 26 RTD to participate in a survey that started on March 2nd and was re- submitted weekly for 4 months to assess variations in time. The survey focused on: (1) the COVID-19 status of patients and staff; (2) the management of clinically suspected COVID patients and COVID positive patients; (3) the impact of COVID-19 on RTD activities; (4) its impact in radiotherapy indications and fractionation schemes. Results: Seventy-three percent of 26 RTDs completed the first survey and 57% responded to all weekly surveys. In the RTD staff, 24 members were COVID-positive of whom 67% were RTTs. Over the study period, the number of patients treated dropped by a maximum of 18.8% when compared to March 2nd. In 32.3% of COVID-positive and 54% of COVID suspected patients, treatment was continued without any interruptions. Radiotherapy indications were adapted within the 1st weeks of the survey in 47.4% of RTD, especially for urological and breast tumors. Fractionation schemes were changed in 68.4% of RTD, mainly for urological, breast, gastro-intestinal, and lung tumors. Conclusions: Between March and June 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an important decrease in treatment activity in RTD in Belgium (18.8%). The COVID-19 infection status of patients influenced the continuity of the radiotherapy schedule. Changes in indications and fractionation schedules of radiotherapy were rapidly incorporated in the different RTD.
| S-EPMC8017334 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The results of this survey reveal current clinical practice in the handling of combined radioimmunotherapy with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (RT + ICI). We aim to provide a basis to open a discussion for clinical application of RT + ICI by analyzation of experts' assessment. We conducted a survey with 24 items with a focus on side effects of RT + ICI, common practice of scheduling and handling of adverse events. After pilot testing by radiation oncology experts the link to the online survey was sent to all members of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). In total, 51 radiation oncologists completed the questionnaire. Pulmonary toxicity under RT + ICI with ICIs was reported most frequently. Consensus was observed for bone and soft tissue RT of the limbs in favor for no interruption of ICIs. For cranial RT half of the participants do not suspend ICIs during normofractionated radiotherapy (nfRT) or stereotactic hypofractionated RT (SRT). More participants pause ICIs for central than for peripheral thoracic region. Maintenance therapy with ICIs is mostly not interrupted prior to RT. For management of RT associated pneumonitis under durvalumab the majority of 86.3% suggest corticosteroid therapy and 76.5% would postpone the next cycle of ICI therapy. The here obtained assessment and experiences by radiation oncologists reveal a large variability in practical handling of combined RT + ICI. Until scientific evidence is available a discussion for current clinical application of RT + ICI should be triggered. Interdisciplinary consensus guidelines with practical recommendations are required.
| S-EPMC8027172 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPositron emission tomography-(PET) has evolved as a powerful tool to guide treatment for prostate cancer (PC). The aim of this survey was to evaluate the acceptance and use of PET-especially with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) targeting tracers-in clinical routine for radiotherapy (RT) and the impact on target volume definition and dose prescription.MethodsWe developed an online survey, which we distributed via e-mail to members of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). The survey included questions on patterns of care of RT for PC with/without PET. For evaluation of doses we used the equivalent dose at fractionation of 2 Gy with α/β = 1.5 Gy [EQD2(1.5 Gy)].ResultsFrom 109 participants, 78.9% have the possibility to use PET for RT planning. Most centers use PSMA-targeting tracers (98.8%). In 39.5%, PSMA-PET for biochemical relapse after prior surgery is initiated at PSA ≥ 0.5 ng/mL, while 30.2% will perform PET at ≥ 0.2 ng/mL (≥ 1.0 ng/mL: 16.3%, ≥ 2.0 ng/mL: 2.3%, regardless of PSA: 11.7%). In case of PET-positive local recurrence (LR) and pelvic lymph nodes (LNs), 97.7% and 96.5% of the participants will apply an escalated dose. The median total dose in EQD2(1.5 Gy) was 70.00 Gy (range: 56.89-85.71) for LR and 62.00 Gy (range: 52.61-80.00) for LNs. A total number of ≤ 3 (22.0%) or ≤ 5 (20.2%) distant lesions was most often described as applicable for the definition as oligometastatic PC.ConclusionPSMA-PET is widely used among German radiation oncologists. However, specific implications on treatment planning differ among physicians. Therefore, further trials and guidelines for PET-based RT are warranted.
| S-EPMC8088662 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, German health care centres were restructured for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. This was accompanied by the suspension of the surgical programme. The aim of the survey was to determine the effects of COVID-19 on surgical care in non-university hospitals in Germany.MethodsThis cross-sectional study was based on an anonymous online survey, which was accessible from April 24th to May 10th, 2020 for surgeons of the Konvent der leitenden Krankenhauschirurgen (Convention of leading Hospital Surgeons) in Germany. The analysis comprised of 22.8% (n = 148/649) completed surveys.ResultsCommunication and cooperation with authorities, hospital administration and other departments were largely considered sufficient. In the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, 28.4% (n = 42/148) of the respondents complained about a short supply of protective equipment available for the hospital staff. 7.4% (n = 11/148) of the participants stated that emergency operations had to be postponed or rescheduled. A decreased quantity of emergency surgical procedures and a decreased number of surgical emergency patients treated in the emergency room was reported in 43.9% (n = 65/148) and 63.5% (n = 94/148), respectively. Consultation and treatment of oncological patients in the outpatient clinic was decreased in 54.1% (n = 80/148) of the surveyed hospitals. To increase the capacity for COVID-19 patients, a reduction of bed and operating room occupancy of 50.8 ± 19.3% and 54.2 ± 19.1% were reported, respectively. Therefore, 90.5% (n = 134/148) of all participants expected a loss of revenue of 28.2 ± 12.9% in 2020.ConclusionThe first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on surgical care in Germany. The reduction in the bed and the operating room capacity may have lead to considerable delays in urgent and semi-elective surgical interventions. In addition to the risk of worsening patient care, we anticipate severe financial damage to the clinics in 2020 and beyond. National and supranational planning is urgently needed to ensure the surgical care of patients during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC7711305 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe current COVID-19 pandemic, despite the availability of rapid tests and the start of the vaccination campaign, continues to pose major challenges to emergency departments (ED). Structured collection of demographic, clinical, as well as treatment-related data provides the basis for establishing evidence-based processes and treatment concepts.Aim of the workTo present the systematic collection of clinical parameters in patients with suspected COVID-19 in the Registry for COVID-19 in the Emergency Room (ReCovER) and descriptive presentation of the first 1000 patients.Materials and methodsData from patients with suspected COVID-19, regardless of evidence of SARS-CoV‑2 infection, are continuously entered into a web-based, anonymized registry in ED at six university hospitals.ResultsBetween 19 May 2020 and 13 January 2021, 1000 patients were entered into the registry, of whom 594 patients (59.4%) were in the SARS-CoV‑2 positive group (PG) and 406 patients (40.6%) were in the negative group (NG). Patients of the PG had significantly fewer pre-existing conditions and a significantly longer latency between symptom onset and presentation to the ED (median 5 vs. 3 days), were more likely to suffer from cough, myalgia, fatigue, and loss of smell/taste and had significantly higher oxygen requirements than NG patients. The rate of severe disease progression was significantly higher in the PG, and persistent symptoms were more common after discharge (11.1 vs. 4.6%).ConclusionsThe multicenter collection of comprehensive clinical data on COVID-19 suspected cases in the ED allows analysis of aspects specific to the situation in Germany in particular. This is essential for a targeted review and adaptation of internationally published strategies.
| S-EPMC8408818 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe coronavirus pandemic is affecting global health systems, endangering daily patient care. Hemato-oncological patients are particularly vulnerable to infection, requiring decisive recommendations on treatment and triage. The aim of this survey amongst experts on radiation therapy (RT) for lymphoma and leukemia is to delineate typical clinical scenarios and to provide counsel for high-quality care.MethodsA multi-item questionnaire containing multiple-choice and free-text questions was developed in a peer-reviewed process and sent to members of the radiation oncology panels of the German Hodgkin Study Group and the German Lymphoma Alliance. Answers were assessed online and analyzed centrally.ResultsOmission of RT was only considered in a minority of cases if alternative treatment options were available. Hypofractionated regimens and reduced dosages may be used for indolent lymphoma and fractures due to multiple myeloma. Overall, there was a tendency to shorten RT rather than to postpone or omit it. Even in case of critical resource shortage, panelists agreed to start emergency RT for typical indications (intracranial pressure, spinal compression, superior vena cava syndrome) within 24 h. Possible criteria to consider for patient triage are the availability of (systemic) options, the underlying disease dynamic, and the treatment rationale (curative/palliative).ConclusionRT for hemato-oncological patients receives high-priority and should be maintained even in later stages of the pandemic. Hypofractionation and shortened treatment schedules are feasible options for well-defined constellations, but have to be discussed in the clinical context.
| S-EPMC7596809 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeNearly two-thirds of cancer patients seek information about their diagnosis online. We assessed the readability of online patient education materials found on academic radiation oncology department Web sites to determine whether they adhered to guidelines suggesting that information be presented at a sixth-grade reading level.Methods and materialsThe Association of American Medical Colleges Web site was used to identify all academic radiation oncology departments in the United States. One-third of these department Web sites were selected for analysis using a random number generator. Both general information on radiation therapy and specific information regarding various radiation modalities were collected. To test the hypothesis that the readability of these online educational materials was written at the recommended grade level, a panel of 10 common readability tests was used. A composite grade level of readability was constructed using the 8 readability measures that provide a single grade-level output.ResultsA mean of 5605 words (range, 2058-12,837) from 30 department Web sites was collected. Using the composite grade level score, the overall mean readability level was determined to be 13.36 (12.83-13.89), corresponding to a collegiate reading level. This was significantly higher than the target sixth-grade reading level (middle school, t (29) = 27.41, P < .001).ConclusionsOnline patient educational materials from academic radiation oncology Web sites are significantly more complex than recommended by the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Health and Human Services. To improve patients' comprehension of radiation therapy and its role in their treatment, our analysis suggests that the language used in online patient information should be simplified to communicate the information at a more appropriate level.
| S-EPMC5219938 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince the beginning of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, German emergency departments (ED) have been working in the area of conflict between high case load and demanding hygienic and organizational challenges. The aim of this study was to gain an overview of the current status of isolation measures, diagnostics and patient allocation of suspected COVID-19 cases.MethodsSupported by the German Society for Interdisciplinary Emergency and Acute Medicine (DGINA) we invited leading ED physicians to answer an anonymous online survey regarding isolation measures, diagnostics and organization in emergency rooms during the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsA total of 139 responders from all federal states and all levels of care took part in the survey. Standard operating procedures on COVID-19 exist in almost all participating EDs, although concrete measures to end isolation are often missing. Most EDs screen patients for the "classic" COVID-19 symptoms such as fever, respiratory symptoms or contact to positive subjects in a standardized fashion, although the threshold for prophylactic isolation varies greatly. The individual swab-testing and allocation strategies vary relatively strongly. Less than half of all EDs have a separate procedure for uninterrogatable patients (e.g. major trauma). In about 8% of suspected cases, COVID-19-specific thoracic computed tomography is performed in the ED.ConclusionThe current survey shows that the German EDs are well positioned for the moment, even though the isolation threshold is too high at some locations. In view of a possible increase in the number of cases during the winter season, a more precise differentiation of the previous recommendations of the Robert Koch Institute, especially for emergency admission patients, would be desirable. In this context, we propose a universal algorithm for the (de-)isolation of suspect cases in the ED.
| S-EPMC7829031 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeRisk management (RM) is a key component of patient safety in radiation oncology (RO). We investigated current approaches on RM in German RO within the framework of the Patient Safety in German Radiation Oncology (PaSaGeRO) project. Aim was not only to evaluate a status quo of RM purposes but furthermore to discover challenges for sustainable RM that should be addressed in future research and recommendations.MethodsAn online survey was conducted from June to August 2021, consisting of 18 items on prospective and reactive RM, protagonists of RM, and self-assessment concerning RM. The survey was designed using LimeSurvey and invitations were sent by e‑mail. Answers were requested once per institution.ResultsIn all, 48 completed questionnaires from university hospitals, general and non-academic hospitals, and private practices were received and considered for evaluation. Prospective and reactive RM was commonly conducted within interprofessional teams; 88% of all institutions performed prospective risk analyses. Most institutions (71%) reported incidents or near-events using multiple reporting systems. Results were presented to the team in 71% for prospective analyses and 85% for analyses of incidents. Risk conferences take place in 46% of institutions. 42% nominated a manager/committee for RM. Knowledge concerning RM was mostly rated "satisfying" (44%). However, 65% of all institutions require more information about RM by professional societies.ConclusionOur results revealed heterogeneous patterns of RM in RO departments, although most departments adhered to common recommendations. Identified mismatches between recommendations and implementation of RM provide baseline data for future research and support definition of teaching content.
| S-EPMC10033570 | biostudies-literature