Project description:PURPOSE:People with cancer face an elevated risk of infection and severe sequelae from COVID-19. Dexamethasone is commonly used for antiemetic prophylaxis with systemic therapy for cancer. However, dexamethasone is associated with increased risk of viral and respiratory infections, and causes lymphopenia, which is associated with worse outcomes during COVID-19 infections. Our purpose was to minimize dexamethasone exposure during antiemetic prophylaxis for systemic therapy for solid tumors during the COVID-19 pandemic, while maintaining control of nausea and emesis. METHODS:We convened an expert panel to systematically review the literature and formulate consensus recommendations. RESULTS:No studies considered the impact of dexamethasone-based antiemetic regimens on the risk and severity of COVID-19 infection. Expert consensus recommended modifications to the 2019 Cancer Care Ontario Antiemetic Recommendations. CONCLUSION:Clinicians should prescribe the minimally effective dose of dexamethasone for antiemetic prophylaxis. Single-day dexamethasone dosing is recommended over multi-day dosing for regimens with high emetogenic risk excluding high-dose cisplatin, preferably in combination with palonosetron, netupitant, and olanzapine. For regimens with low emetogenic risk, 5-HT3 antagonists are recommended over dexamethasone.
Project description:Effective communication by governmental organizations is essential to keep the public informed during a public health emergency. Examining the content of these communications can provide insight into their alignment with best practices for risk communication. We used content analysis to determine whether news releases by the Ontario government contained key elements of effective risk communication, as outlined by the Health Canada and Public Health Agency of Canada Strategic Risk Communication Framework. News releases between 25 January 2020 and 31 December 2022 were coded following the five elements of the framework: situational transparency, stakeholder-centered content; evidence-based rationales for decisions; continuous improvements in updating information; and descriptions of risk management. All 322 news releases contained at least one element of the framework, and all five elements were identified at least once across the dataset. Risk management, transparency, and stakeholder-centered content were the most frequently identified elements. News releases near the beginning of the pandemic contained most elements of the framework; however, over time, there was an increase in the use of vague language and lack of evidence-based rationales. Increasing transparency regarding evidence-based decisions, as well as changes in decisions, is recommended to improve risk communication and increase compliance with public health measures.
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the population-level impact of COVID-19 pandemic-related obstetric practice changes on maternal and newborn outcomes.MethodsSegmented regression analysis examined changes that occurred 240 weeks pre-pandemic through the first 32 weeks of the pandemic using data from Ontario's Better Outcomes Registry & Network. Outcomes included birth location, length of stay, labour analgesia, mode of delivery, preterm birth, and stillbirth. Immediate and gradual effects were modelled with terms representing changes in intercepts and slopes, corresponding to the start of the pandemic.ResultsThere were 799 893 eligible pregnant individuals included in the analysis; 705 767 delivered in the pre-pandemic period and 94 126 during the pandemic wave 1 period. Significant immediate decreases were observed for hospital births (relative risk [RR] 0.99; 95% CI 0.98-0.99), length of stay (median change -3.29 h; 95% CI -3.81 to -2.77), use of nitrous oxide (RR 0.11; 95% CI 0.09-0.13) and general anesthesia (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.58- 0.81), and trial of labour after cesarean (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.83-0.96). Conversely, there were significant immediate increases in home births (RR 1.35; 95% CI 1.21-1.51), and use of epidural (RR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01-1.04) and regional anesthesia (RR 1.01; 95% CI 1.01-1.02). There were no significant immediate changes for any other outcomes, including preterm birth (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93-1.05) and stillbirth (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.87-1.42).ConclusionProvincial health system changes implemented at the start of the pandemic resulted in immediate clinical practice changes but not insignificant increases in adverse outcomes.
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate how primary care access, intensity and quality of care changed among patients living with schizophrenia before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada.MethodsThis cohort study was performed using primary care electronic medical record data from the University of Toronto Practice-Based Research Network (UTOPIAN), a network of > 500 family physicians in Ontario, Canada. Data were collected during primary care visits from 2643 patients living with schizophrenia. Rates of primary care health service use (in-person and virtual visits with family physicians) and key preventive health indices indicated in antipsychotic monitoring (blood pressure readings, hemoglobin A1c, cholesterol and complete blood cell count [CBC] tests) were measured and compared in the 12 months before and after onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsAccess to in-person care dropped with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the first year of the pandemic only 39.5% of patients with schizophrenia had at least one in-person visit compared to 81.0% the year prior. There was a corresponding increase in virtual visits such that 78.0% of patients had a primary care appointment virtually during the pandemic period. Patients prescribed injectable antipsychotics were more likely to continue having more frequent in-person appointments during the pandemic than patients prescribed only oral or no antipsychotic medications. The proportion of patients who did not have recommended tests increased from 41.0% to 72.4% for blood pressure readings, from 48.9% to 60.2% for hemoglobin A1c, from 57.0% to 67.8% for LDL cholesterol and 45.0% to 56.0% for CBC tests during the pandemic.ConclusionsThere were substantial decreases in preventive care after the onset of the pandemic, although primary care access was largely maintained through virtual care. Addressing these deficiencies will be essential to promoting health equity and reducing the risk of poor health outcomes.
Project description:This cross-sectional study compares rates of emergency department visits and hospitalizations for assault and maltreatment by age category and sex in Ontario, Canada, before vs during the COVID-10 pandemic.
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal substance abuse and neonatal outcomes.Study designCross-sectional observational study of neonates admitted to the NICU and born to mothers with evidence of substance abuse pre-pandemic compared to during the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultWe noted a significant increase in fentanyl (12% vs. 0.6%, p < 0.001) and tobacco use (64% vs. 33%, p < 0.001) during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic, including an increase in fentanyl use among mothers enrolled in opioid maintenance therapy (OMT) during the pandemic (32.3% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001). There was a significant increase in preterm births (58% vs. 48%, p = 0.022) and lower birth weight (2315 ± 815 vs. 2455 ± 861 g, p = 0.049) during pandemic.ConclusionThere was a significant increase in maternal fentanyl use during the pandemic, even with OMT enrollment, with an increase in preterm births and lower birth weights among infants born to mothers with substance use.
Project description:The present study, conducted during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada, addressed the association between family responsibilities and mental health (depression and anxiety) among kindergarten educators. Participants comprised 1790 (97.9% female) kindergarten educators (73.6% kindergarten teachers; 26.4% early childhood educators) across Ontario. Results revealed that educators were more likely to report moderate levels of depressive symptoms if they had the responsibility of caring for their own children, and more likely to report moderate levels of depressive and anxious symptoms if they had the responsibility of caring for an older adult. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
Project description:ObjectiveSignificant changes to the delivery of obstetrical care that occurred with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic may be associated with higher risks of adverse maternal outcomes. We evaluated preeclampsia/HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets) syndrome and composite severe maternal morbidity (SMM) among pregnant people who gave birth during the COVID-19 pandemic and compared these data with those of people who gave birth before the pandemic in Ontario, Canada.MethodsThis was a population-based, retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data sets from ICES. Data on pregnant people at ≥20 weeks gestation who gave birth between March 15, 2020, and September 30, 2021, were compared with those of pregnant people who gave birth within the same date range for the years 2015-2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the effect of the pandemic period on the odds of preeclampsia/HELLP syndrome and composite SMM, adjusting for maternal baseline characteristics and comorbidities.ResultsThere were no differences between the study periods in the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for preeclampsia/HELLP syndrome among primiparous (aOR 1.00; 95% CI 0.91-1.11) and multiparous (aOR 0.94; 95% CI 0.81-1.09) patients and no differences for composite SMM (primiparous, aOR 1.00; 95% CI 0.95-1.05; multiparous, aOR 1.01; 95% CI 0.95-1.08).ConclusionAdverse maternal outcomes were not higher among pregnant people who gave birth during the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada, when compared with those who gave birth before the pandemic.
Project description:BackgroundAmid the opioid crisis, the health care system is restructuring to prevent and treat COVID-19. Individuals in opioid agonist treatment (OAT) are uniquely challenged because of disruption to treatment, medication diversion, and isolation during the pandemic.MethodsBetween January and September 2020, we utilized the electronic medical record from a chain of 67 opioid agonist treatment clinics in Ontario, Canada, to examine routinely collected urine drug screen results of patients in opioid agonist treatment by Public Health Units.ResultsWe present evidence of a 108% increase in the percentage of fentanyl positive urine drug screens from April to September (p< 0.001). During the same period, health regions in northern and southwestern Ontario, areas with a high concentration of rural communities, have seen the most notable increase in the percent of fentanyl positive urine drug screen results.ConclusionThe use of fentanyl increased by 108% among OAT patients in Ontario during the COVID 19 pandemic. We argue that the persistent increase of fentanyl exposure over time, specifically in the OAT population, suggests that reduced monitoring may decrease OAT's effectiveness and negatively impact patient outcomes.