Dataset Information

Cancer Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: Results From a National Physician Cross-sectional Survey.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has significantly impacted health care delivery across the United States, including treatment of cancer. We aim to describe the determinants of treatment plan changes from the perspective of oncology physicians across the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS:Participants were recruited to an anonymous cross-sectional online survey of oncology physicians (surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists) using social media from March 27 to April 10, 2020. Physician demographics, practice characteristics, and cancer treatment decisions were collected. RESULTS:The analytic cohort included 411 physicians: 241 (58.6%) surgeons, 106 (25.8%) medical oncologists, and 64 (15.6%) radiation oncologists. In all, 38.0% were practicing in states with 1001 to 5000 confirmed COVID-19 cases as of April 3, 2020, and 37.2% were in states with >5000 cases. Most physicians (N=285; 70.0% of surgeons, 64.4% of medical oncologists, and 73.4% of radiation oncologists) had altered cancer treatment plans. Most respondents were concerned about their patients' COVID-19 exposure risks, but this was the primary driver for treatment alterations only for medical oncologists. For surgeons, the primary driver for treatment alterations was conservation of personal protective equipment, institutional mandates, and external society recommendations. Radiation oncologists were primarily driven by operational changes such as visitor restrictions. CONCLUSIONS:The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a majority of oncologists to alter their treatment plans, but the primary motivators for changes differed by oncologic specialty. This has implications for reinstitution of standard cancer treatment, which may occur at differing time points by treatment modality.

SUBMITTER: Hui JYC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7513953 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cancer Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: Results From a National Physician Cross-sectional Survey.

Hui Jane Yuet Ching JYC Yuan Jianling J Teoh Deanna D Thomaier Lauren L Jewett Patricia P Beckwith Heather H Parsons Helen H Lou Emil E Blaes Anne H AH Vogel Rachel I RI

American journal of clinical oncology 20201001 10

<h4>Objectives</h4>The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has significantly impacted health care delivery across the United States, including treatment of cancer. We aim to describe the determinants of treatment plan changes from the perspective of oncology physicians across the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.<h4>Methods</h4>Participants were recruited to an anonymous cross-sectional online survey of oncology physicians (surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists) usin ...[more]

PMID: 32852291

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCurrent international guidelines on dyslipidemia are not concordant on various aspects of management. Also, there are no uniformly accepted Indian guidelines. We, therefore, performed a physician survey to understand lipid management practices in India.MethodsAn anonymous survey questionnaire was administered to gauge physicians' self-reported behavior regarding lipid management aspects. Results were expressed in terms of percentages based on the number of responses obtained.ResultsA total of 404 physicians participated in the survey. Eighty-eight percent respondents ordered a lipid profile before starting statin therapy, and 80% preferred to set lipid targets, though the tools used for calculating cardiovascular risk varied. Atorvastatin was preferred over rosuvastatin in primary prevention (72.9 vs. 32.4%), secondary prevention (54.6 vs. 46.7%), diabetic patients (56.3 vs. 40.3%) and post-ACS (78.3 vs. 34%). High-intensity statins were preferred by 73.7% of respondents in post-ACS cases. Fifty percent doctors chose not to use a statin in diabetic patients, irrespective of their LDL-C levels. The most preferred drug option for managing atherogenic dyslipidemia and moderate hypertriglyceridemia was statin-fibrate combination (55.1%) and fibrates (35.4%), respectively. Sixty-three percent doctors preferred to prescribe statins in patients with moderately high LDL-C and normal triglycerides, without CHD or CHD risk equivalents. Around 28% of doctors preferred not to use pharmacotherapy for managing isolated low HDL. Of the participants, 73% used fibrates in ?20% of their dyslipidemic patients, with fenofibrate being the most preferred (90.5%). Ezetimibe was mainly used in patients with uncontrolled LDL-C despite statin therapy (52.4% respondents). Most preferred approaches to manage statin intolerance included reducing statin dose (39%) and stopping and restarting statins at a lower dose (34.5%). Fifty-two percent of doctors chose not to alter pre-existing therapy in patients who had LDL-C levels at goal but elevated non-HDL-C levels.ConclusionThis is the first survey in India that provides useful insights into Indian physicians' self-reported perspectives on managing dyslipidemia in routine clinical practice. Despite concordance with the currently available guidelines in certain aspects, there is incongruence in managing specific dyslipidemia problems. Further continuing medical education and the development of evidence-based, India-specific lipid guidelines can help reduce some of these differences.

Project description:The purpose of this study was (1) to describe intakes of total grain and whole grain in the United States over the past 12 years and major dietary sources, and (2) to determine the relationship between whole grain intake and adiposity measures for children and adults.Cross-sectional dietary data from the continuous National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2001-12 (6 2-year cycles) for children 6-18 years (n = 15,280) and adults 19+ years (n = 29,683) were linked to the My Pyramid and Food Patterns Equivalents Databases to assess daily intake of total grain and whole grain. These populations were classified into groups based on average whole grain intake: 0 ounce equivalents (oz eq)/day, > 0 and <1 oz eq/day, and ≥1 oz eq/day. Within these classifications, body mass index, waist circumference, and percent overweight/obese were identified. Regression and logistic regression analyses were used to assess associations between these dependent variables and whole grain intake.Adults consumed a mean 0.72 whole grain oz eq/day in 2001-02 and 0.97 oz eq/day in 2011-12 and children consumed a mean 0.56 whole grain oz eq/day in 2001-02 and 0.74 oz eq/day in 2011-12. While over 70 % of children and 60 % of adults met daily intake recommendations for total grain, less than 1.0 and 8.0 % percent of children and adults, respectively, met whole grain recommendations in 2011-12. Adults and children who consumed whole grain had significantly better intakes of nutrients and dietary fiber compared to non-consumers. From 2001 to 2012, grain mixed dishes and yeast breads were the leading sources of total grain, while yeast breads and ready to eat cereals were the leading sources of whole grain for both children and adults. Multiple regression analysis showed a significant, inverse relationship between body mass index and waist circumference with respect to whole grain intake after adjustment for covariates in both children and adults (p < 0.05). Similarly, logistic regression analysis showed a significant inverse relationship between percent overweight/obese and whole grain intake (p < 0.05).Although most children and adults meet daily intake goals for grain foods overall, whole grain as a portion of total grain intake continues to be consumed at levels well below recommendations. The data from the current study suggest that greater whole grain consumption is associated with better intakes of nutrients and healthier body weight in children and adults. Continued efforts to promote increased intake of whole grain foods are warranted.

Project description:To describe the levels of insomnia, fatigue and intershift recovery, and psychological well-being (burnout, post-traumatic stress and psychological distress), and to examine differences in these measures based on work-related characteristics among nursing staff during COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. The COVID-19 pandemic has created a major physical and psychological burden on nursing staff in the United States and worldwide. A better understanding of these conditions will lead to tailored support and resources for nursing staff during and after the pandemic. Cross-sectional study. Hospital nurses and nursing assistants (N = 587) were recruited online between May-June 2020. The survey included measures on insomnia (Insomnia Severity Index) fatigue and intershift recovery (Occupational Fatigue and Exhaustion Recovery-15), burnout (Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey), post-traumatic stress (Short Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Rating Interview) and psychological distress (Patient Health Questionnaire-4), and questions on work and demographics. The STROBE checklist was followed for reporting. The sample had subthreshold insomnia, moderate-to-high chronic fatigue, high acute fatigue and low-to-moderate intershift recovery. The sample experienced increased emotional exhaustion and depersonalisation, increased personal accomplishment, moderate psychological distress and high post-traumatic stress. Nurses who cared for COVID-19 patients had significantly scored worse on almost all measures than their co-workers. Certain factors such as working hours per week and the frequency of 30-min breaks were significant. Nursing staff experienced poor sleep, fatigue and multiple psychological problems during the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, staff who were involved in the care of COVID-19 patients, worked more than 40 h per week and skipped 30-min breaks showed generally worse self-reported outcomes. Nursing administration is recommended to monitor for fatigue and distress on nursing units, re-visit current scheduling practices, reinforce rest breaks and provide access to mental health and sleep wellness resources with additional support for their front-line nursing groups.

Dataset Information

Cancer Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: Results From a National Physician Cross-sectional Survey.

Publications

Cancer Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: Results From a National Physician Cross-sectional Survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure