Perspectives on the COVID-19 pandemic impact on cardio-oncology: results from the COVID-19 International Collaborative Network survey.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Re-allocation of resources during the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in delays in care delivery to patients with cardiovascular disease and cancer. The ability of health care providers to provide optimal care in this setting has not been formally evaluated.Objectives
To assess the impact of COVID-19 resource re-allocation on scheduling, testing, elective procedures, telemedicine access, use of new COVID-19 therapies, and providers' opinions on healthcare policies among oncology and cardiology practitioners.Methods
An electronic survey was conducted by a cardio-oncology collaborative network through regional and state chapters of the American College of Cardiology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and the International Cardio-Oncology Society. Descriptive statistics were reported by frequency and proportion for analyses, and stratified categorically by geographic region and specialty.Results
One thousand four hundred fifteen providers (43 countries) participated: 986 cardiologists, 306 oncologists, and 118 trainees/internal medicine. 63% (195/306) of oncologists vs 92% (896/976) of cardiologists reported cancellations of treatments/elective procedures (p?=?0.01). 46% (442/970) of cardiologists and 25% (76/303) of oncologists modified the scope of their practice (p?=?ConclusionsThese results support initiatives to promote expanded coverage for telemedicine, increased access to PPE, better testing availability and involvement of medical professional societies to help with preparedness for future health care crisis.
SUBMITTER: Sadler D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7691954 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Perspectives on the COVID-19 pandemic impact on cardio-oncology: results from the COVID-19 International Collaborative Network survey.
Sadler Diego D DeCara Jeanne M JM Herrmann Joerg J Arnold Anita A Ghosh Arjun K AK Abdel-Qadir Husam H Yang Eric H EH Szmit Sebastian S Akhter Nausheen N Leja Monika M Silva Carolina Maria Pinto Domingues Carvalho CMPDC Raikhelkar Jayant J Brown Sherry-Ann SA Dent Susan S O'Quinn Rupal R Thuny Franck F Moudgil Rohit R Raez Luis E LE Okwuosa Tochukwu T Daniele Andres A Bauer Brenton B Kondapalli Lavanya L Ismail-Khan Roohi R Lax Jorge J Blaes Anne A Nahleh Zeina Z Elson Leah L Baldassarre Lauren A LA Zaha Vlad V Rao Vijay V Lara Daniel Sierra DS Skurka Kerry K
Cardio-oncology (London, England) 20201127 1
<h4>Background</h4>Re-allocation of resources during the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in delays in care delivery to patients with cardiovascular disease and cancer. The ability of health care providers to provide optimal care in this setting has not been formally evaluated.<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the impact of COVID-19 resource re-allocation on scheduling, testing, elective procedures, telemedicine access, use of new COVID-19 therapies, and providers' opinions on healthcare policies among ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Overlapping commonalities between coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) and cardio-oncology regarding cardiovascular toxicities (CVT), pathophysiology, and pharmacology are special topics emerging during the pandemic. In this perspective, we consider an array of CVT common to both COVID-19 and cardio-oncology, including cardiomyopathy, ischemia, conduction abnormalities, myopericarditis, and right ventricular (RV) failure. We also emphasize the higher risk of severe COVID-19 illness in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) or its risk factors or cancer. We explore commonalities in the underlying pathophysiology observed in COVID-19 and cardio-oncology, including inflammation, cytokine release, the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system, coagulopathy, microthrombosis, and endothelial dysfunction. In addition, we examine common pharmacologic management strategies that have been elucidated for CVT from COVID-19 and various cancer therapies. The use of corticosteroids, as well as antibodies and inhibitors of various molecules mediating inflammation and cytokine release syndrome, are discussed. The impact of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) is also addressed, since these drugs are used in cardio-oncology and have received considerable attention during the COVID-19 pandemic, since the culprit virus enters human cells via the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor. There are therefore several areas of overlap, similarity, and interaction in the toxicity, pathophysiology, and pharmacology profiles in COVID-19 and cardio-oncology syndromes. Learning more about either will likely provide some level of insight into both. We discuss each of these topics in this viewpoint, as well as what we foresee as evolving future directions to consider in cardio-oncology during the pandemic and beyond. Finally, we highlight commonalities in health disparities in COVID-19 and cardio-oncology and encourage continued development and implementation of innovative solutions to improve equity in health and healing.
| S-EPMC7746643 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has put a tremendous pressure over health care systems worldwide. Physicians were faced to fight this novel, emerging disease, without evidence-based recommendations. Our aim was to investigate physicians' point of view regarding the new coronavirus disease. We designed an on-line survey with 30 questions to assess physicians' perception of personal impact as well as epidemiology, clinical features, management, and outcome in COVID-19. A total of 194 physicians from 43 countries, of which 42.3% were male, 45.4% had more than 5 years' experience and 10.8% were heads of department/professors, filled-out the questionnaire. Although 47.4% of the physicians were currently treating patients, over 80% thought that they might get in contact with COVID-19 patients. A total of 36.6% physicians thought that they are not and 30.9% were not sure if they were being protected by the ongoing procedures. A total of 21.1% of the doctors felt that they are avoided by the persons with whom they usually interact in daily life and 24.7% were isolated from the household members they usually live with. A total of 72.7% of physicians considered that COVID-19-free patients are currently neglected. The results of the current survey raise awareness about the impact of COVID-19 on physicians' practice.
| S-EPMC7551682 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as a global pandemic and public health crisis. Increasing waves of intermittent infectious outbreaks have dramatically influenced care among broad populations. Over the past 2 decades, there has been a rapid increase in cancer survival, with >400 000 new survivors each year. The increasingly common presence of cardiovascular disease in patients during or after cancer treatment led to the rapid growth of the field of cardio-oncology with a mandate of identifying, treating, and preventing the various forms of cardiovascular disease seen among this population. This review evaluates the implications of the pandemic on the practice and study of cardio-oncology. The evolving understanding of the relationship between comorbid disease and clinical outcomes among this population is assessed. With the impetus of the pandemic, cardio-oncology can be deliberate in embracing changes to cardiac screening, monitoring, and intervention during oncology care. Bridging 2 specialties, consideration of the lessons learned in cancer and cardiovascular may pivotally inform ongoing therapeutic efforts. Further, the development of multicenter registries focused on understanding and optimizing outcomes among these patients should be considered. Together, these insights may critically inform strategies for the care of cardio-oncology patients in future phases of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.
| S-EPMC7792393 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPatients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) do not seem to be at increased risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2, but there is a concern whether immunosuppressive therapy may be associated with more severe disease. Several clinical practice recommendations have been published to help guide IBD care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nonetheless, few studies have addressed patients' perspectives and fears. We aimed to evaluate Portuguese IBD patients' perspectives on the clinical management of their disease during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic as well as the impact on their professional life.MethodsAn anonymous electronic survey was created using REDCap and was distributed by the Portuguese Association of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (APDI) between May and August 2020. Patients' perspectives on immunosuppressive therapy, disease management, interaction with gastroenterology departments, and the impact of the pandemic in their professional life were assessed. Patients' proposals to improve medical care were also evaluated. Descriptive analysis and logistic regression were performed.ResultsA total of 137 participants answered the survey (79.6% females, mean age 41.7 ± 12.1 years). Although having IBD and receiving treatment with immunosuppressors (thiopurines, steroids, or biologics) were considered promotors of anxiety, most patients (85.4%) agreed that disease remission was a priority and only a minority of patients interrupted their treatment during the pandemic. In multivariate analysis, active disease, biologic treatment, and use of corticosteroids in the last 3 months were perceived by the patients as high-risk features for increased risk of SARS-Cov-2 infection and more severe disease. Fifty-nine patients (44%) believed that their follow-up was influenced by the pandemic and only 58.8% felt that they had the opportunity to discuss their therapeutic options with their doctor. Sixty-three patients (46.0%) were working from home during the pandemic, although this decision was related to IBD and immunosuppressive therapy in only 36.5 and 39.7% of the cases, respectively. Areas where care could have been improved during the pandemic were identified by patients, namely enhancement of the communication with IBD professionals, conciliation of telemedicine with face-to-face appointments, and facilitation of the interaction between patients and employers.ConclusionMost patients agreed that maintaining IBD remission is crucial, and only a minority of the patients stopped their treatment as per their own initiative. IBD status only had a small influence on patients' professional activity during the COVID-19 outbreak, with most changes being related to the pandemic itself.
| S-EPMC8678223 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruptions in international communications and travel for academic global health programs (AGHPs) in both high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Given the importance of international travel and communication to AGHPs, the pandemic has likely had considerable impact on the education, research, and administrative components of these programs. To date, no substantive study has determined the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on AGHPs in HICs and LMICs. This study assessed the impacts and resultant adaptations of AGHPs to pandemic realities with the goal of sharing strategies and approaches. Methods: This study applied a mixed methods sequential explanatory design to survey AGHPs in HICs and LMICs about the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on three program domains: education, research, and administration. First, we surveyed a range of AGHP stakeholders to capture quantitative data on the pandemic’s impact. Subsequently we conducted semi-structured interviews with select survey participants to gather qualitative data expanding on specific survey responses. Data from both phases were then compared and interpreted together to develop conclusions and suggest adaptive/innovative approaches for AGHPs. Results: AGHPs in both HICs and LMICs were significantly impacted by the pandemic in all three domains, though in different ways. While education initiatives managed to adapt by pivoting towards virtual learning, research programs were impacted more negatively by the disruptions in communication and international travel. The impact of the pandemic on scholarly output as well as on funding for education and research was quite variable, although LMIC programs were more negatively impacted. Administratively, AGHPs implemented a range of safety and risk mitigation strategies and showed a low risk tolerance for international travel. The pandemic posed many challenges but also revealed opportunities for AGHPs. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted AGHPs in HICs and LMICs in expected and unexpected ways. Programs noted some unanticipated reductions in education program funding, negative impacts on research programs, and reduced scholarly output. Many programs reported well-coordinated adaptive responses to the pandemic including, for instance, virtual (in place of in-person) collaboration in research. The pandemic will likely have lasting impacts with regard to education, research collaborations, and administration of programs.
| S-EPMC9524235 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus pandemic continues to shake the embedded structures of traditional in-person education across all learning levels and across the globe. In healthcare simulation, the pandemic tested the innovative and technological capabilities of simulation programs, educators, operations staff, and administration. This study aimed to answer the question: What is the state of distance simulation practice in 2021?MethodsThis was an IRB-approved, 34-item open survey for any profession involved in healthcare simulation disseminated widely and internationally in seven languages from January 14, 2021, to March 3, 2021. Development followed a multistep process of expert design, testing, piloting, translation, and recruitment. The survey asked questions to understand: Who was using distance simulation? What driving factors motivated programs to initiate distance sim? For what purposes was distance sim being used? What specific types or modalities of distance simulation were occurring? How was it being used (i.e., modalities, blending of technology and resources and location)? How did the early part of the pandemic differ from the latter half of 2020 and early 2021? What information would best support future distance simulation education? Data were cleaned, compiled, and analyzed for dichotomized responses, reporting frequencies, proportions, as well as a comparison of response proportions.ResultsFrom 32 countries, 618 respondents were included in the analysis. The findings included insights into the prevalence of distance simulation before, during, and after the pandemic; drivers for using distance simulation; methods and modalities of distance simulation; and staff training. The majority of respondents (70%) reported that their simulation center was conducting distance simulation. Significantly more respondents indicated long-term plans for maintaining a hybrid format (82%), relative to going back to in-person simulation (11%, p < 0.001).ConclusionThis study gives a perspective into the rapid adaptation of the healthcare simulation community towards distance teaching and learning in reaction to a radical and quick change in education conditions and environment caused by COVID-19, as well as future directions to pursue understanding and support of distance simulation.
| S-EPMC8980782 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance and study objectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic has produced unprecedented changes in social, work, and leisure activities, which all have had major impact on sleep and psychological well-being. This study documented the prevalence of clinical cases of insomnia, anxiety, and depression and selected risk factors (COVID-19, confinement, financial burden, social isolation) during the first wave of the pandemic in 13 countries throughout the world.Design and participantsInternational, multi-center, harmonized survey of 22 330 adults (mean age = 41.9 years old, range 18-95; 65.6% women) from the general population in 13 countries and four continents. Participants were invited to complete a standardized web-based survey about sleep and psychological symptoms during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic from May to August 2020.ResultsClinical insomnia symptoms were reported by 36.7% (95% CI, 36.0-37.4) of respondents and 17.4% (95% CI, 16.9-17.9) met criteria for a probable insomnia disorder. There were 25.6% (95% CI, 25.0-26.2) with probable anxiety and 23.1% (95% CI, 22.5-23.6) with probable depression. Rates of insomnia symptoms (>40%) and insomnia disorder (>25%) were significantly higher in women, younger age groups, and in residents of Brazil, Canada, Norway, Poland, USA, and United Kingdom compared to residents from Asian countries (China and Japan, 8% for disorder and 22%-25% for symptoms) (all Ps < 0.01). Proportions of insomnia cases were significantly higher among participants who completed the survey earlier in the first wave of the pandemic relative to those who completed it later. Risks of insomnia were higher among participants who reported having had COVID-19, who reported greater financial burden, were in confinement for a period of four to five weeks, and living alone or with more than five people in same household. These associations remained significant after controlling for age, sex, and psychological symptoms.Conclusion and relevanceInsomnia, anxiety, and depression were very prevalent during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public health prevention programs are needed to prevent chronicity and reduce long-term adverse outcomes associated with chronic insomnia and mental health problems.
| S-EPMC8425785 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designAn online survey.ObjectivesTo follow-up with and re-query the international spinal cord community's response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic by revisiting questions posed in a previous survey and investigating new lines of inquiry.SettingAn international collaboration of authors and participants.MethodsTwo identical surveys (one in English and one in Spanish) were distributed via the internet. Responses from both surveys were pooled and analyzed for demographic and response data.ResultsThree hundred and sixty-six respondents were gathered from multiple continents and regions. The majority (63.1%) were rehabilitation physicians and only 12.1% had patients with spinal cord injury/disease (SCI/D) that they knew had COVID-19. Participants reported that the COVID-19 pandemic had caused limited access to clinician and support services and worsening medical complications. Nearly 40% of inpatient clinicians reported that "some or all" of their facilities' beds were being used by medical and surgical patients, rather than by individuals requiring inpatient rehabilitation. Respondents reported a 25.1% increase in use of telemedicine during the pandemic (35% used it before; 60.1% during), though over 60% felt the technology incompletely met their patients' needs.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the ability of individuals with SCI/D to obtain their "usual level of care." Moving forward into a potential "second wave" of COVID-19, patient advocacy and efforts to secure access to thorough and accessible care are essential.
| S-EPMC7880520 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The cancellation of in-person classes in March 2020 due to COVID-19 caused a sudden shift in the educational experiences of health profession students enrolled at the University of Michigan (U-M). With the move to remote learning, educators engaging in interprofessional education (IPE) were faced with the challenge of preparing students for interprofessional collaboration from a distance. A survey was designed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on IPE practices and discover educator development needs. Faculty and staff from 10 health sciences schools within the U-M and Michigan Medicine were invited to complete a survey investigating their use of IPE competencies prior to, during, and after the pandemic; their development needs; and their ideas for future implementation of IPE and collaborative practice. Fifty-six percent of respondents reported their ability to teach IPE competencies was impacted by changes related to COVID. There was a significant (p ≤ 0.001) difference between self-report of incorporating IPE competencies prior to and during pandemic and during and into the future across all five competencies. Technology was reported as a challenge when teaching IPE, and a need for future faculty development. Leveraging virtual and case-based learning and increasing collaboration between schools were identified as ideas for future implementation.
| S-EPMC9250902 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant changes to professional and personal lives of oncology professionals globally. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Resilience Task Force collaboration aimed to provide contemporaneous reports on the impact of COVID-19 on the lived experiences and well-being in oncology.MethodsThis online anonymous survey (July-August 2020) is the second of a series of global surveys launched during the course of the pandemic. Longitudinal key outcome measures including well-being/distress (expanded Well-being Index-9 items), burnout (1 item from expanded Well-being Index), and job performance since COVID-19 were tracked.ResultsA total of 942 participants from 99 countries were included for final analysis: 58% (n = 544) from Europe, 52% (n = 485) female, 43% (n = 409) ≤40 years old, and 36% (n = 343) of non-white ethnicity. In July/August 2020, 60% (n = 525) continued to report a change in professional duties compared with the pre-COVID-19 era. The proportion of participants at risk of poor well-being (33%, n = 310) and who reported feeling burnout (49%, n = 460) had increased significantly compared with April/May 2020 (25% and 38%, respectively; P < 0.001), despite improved job performance since COVID-19 (34% versus 51%; P < 0.001). Of those who had been tested for COVID-19, 8% (n = 39/484) tested positive; 18% (n = 7/39) felt they had not been given adequate time to recover before return to work. Since the pandemic, 39% (n = 353/908) had expressed concerns that COVID-19 would have a negative impact on their career development or training and 40% (n = 366/917) felt that their job security had been compromised. More than two-thirds (n = 608/879) revealed that COVID-19 has changed their outlook on their work-personal life balance.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact the well-being of oncology professionals globally, with significantly more in distress and feeling burnout compared with the first wave. Collective efforts from both national and international communities addressing support and coping strategies will be crucial as we recover from the COVID-19 crisis. In particular, an action plan should also be devised to tackle concerns raised regarding the negative impact of COVID-19 on career development, training, and job security.
| S-EPMC8256184 | biostudies-literature