Dataset Information

Priorities, actions and risks in the COVID-19 pandemic: a flash SoMe survey among surgical oncologists.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Corona virus-induced disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has globally affected the surgical treatment of cancer patients and has challenged the ethical principles of surgical oncologists around the world. Not only treatment but also diagnosis and follow-up have been disrupted.

Methods

An online survey was sent through Twitter and by the surgical societies worldwide. The survey consisted of 29 closed-ended questions and was conducted over a period of 24 days beginning in March 26, 2020.

Results

Overall, 394 surgical oncologists from 41 different countries answered the questionnaire. The predominant guiding principle was "saving lives" 240 (62%), and the different aspects of lock-down found hence large support (mean 7.1-9.3 out of 10). Shut-down of elective surgery and modification of cancer care found a mean support of 7.0 ± 3.0 and 5.8 ± 3.1, respectively. Modification of cancer care longer than two weeks was considered unacceptable to 114 (29%) responders. Hundred and fifty six (40%) and 138 (36%) expect "return to normal" beyond six months for surgical practice and cancer care, respectively.

Conclusions

Surgical oncologists show strong and long-lasting support for lock-down measures aiming to save lives. The impact of the pandemic on surgical oncology is perceived controversially, but the majority was forced already now to accept what is inacceptable for many of their colleagues.

SUBMITTER: Cortes-Guiral D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8223800 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPalliative care is an essential intervention to improve the quality of life for patients with cancer, whereas the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic poses a challenge to supportive and palliative care providers. This survey aims to explore the current status of palliative care practice for cancer and the influence of COVID-19, from the perspective of oncologists.MethodsThe semi-structure electronic questionnaire was designed. Mixed-mode surveys including electronic questionnaires, face-to-face interactions, and telephone interviews were adopted according to the willingness of respondents. Face-to-face and telephone interviews were based on same questions in the online questionnaire. Participants working in cancer-related departments with frontline palliative care experience during the COVID-19 outbreak were included. Surveys covered experiences and perspectives regarding the impact of COVID-19 on clinical work, personal lives, and palliative care practice. Suggestions on coping strategies were further proposed and qualitatively analyzed.ResultsThirty-seven oncologists participated in this study from September 2021 to January 2022. The majority of them believed COVID-19 significantly and negatively affected their clinical work routines (75.7%), personal daily lives (67.6%), and palliative care practice (64.9%). Most specialists considered that currently the palliative care system remained underdeveloped (73.0%), and other factors besides COVID-19 were associated with this situation (78.4%). Seventeen participants further made suggestions on how to promote palliative care during COVID-19, and three themes emerged through the qualitative analysis: (1) Remote or online service (88.2%); (2) Publicity, education, or shared decision-making for patients (29.4%); (3) Guidelines, training, or programs for care providers (23.6%).ConclusionOncologists consider that COVID-19 has an adverse impact on their palliative care practice and daily routine. In addition to COVID-19, other factors affecting palliative care should not be neglected. Corresponding measures are warranted to encourage palliative care practice during COVID-19.

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify research priorities for primary care in Scotland following the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignModified James Lind Alliance methodology; respondents completed an online survey to make research suggestions and rank research themes in order of priority.SettingScotland primary care.ParticipantsHealthcare professionals in primary care in Scotland and members of primary care patient and public involvement groups. 512 respondents provided research suggestions; 8% (n=40) did not work in health or social care; of those who did work, 68.8% worked in primary care, 16.3% community care, 11.7% secondary care, 4.5% third sector, 4.2% university (respondents could select multiple options). Of those respondents who identified as healthcare professionals, 33% were in nursing and midwifery professions, 25% were in allied health professions (of whom 45% were occupational therapists and 35% were physiotherapists), 20% were in the medical profession and 10% were in the pharmacy profession.Main outcomesSuggestions for research for primary care made by respondents were categorised into themes and subthemes by researchers and ranked in order of priority by respondents.ResultsThere were 1274 research suggestions which were categorised under 12 themes and 30 subthemes. The following five themes received the most suggestions for research: disease and illness (n=461 suggestions), access (n=202), workforce (n=164), multidisciplinary team (MDT; n=143) and integration (n=108). One hundred and three (20%) respondents to the survey participated in ranking the list of 12 themes in order of research priority. The five most highly ranked research priorities were disease and illness, health inequalities, access, workforce and MDTs. The disease and illness theme had the greatest number of suggestions for research and was scored the most highly in the ranking exercise. The subtheme ranked as the most important research priority in the disease and illness theme was 'mental health'.ConclusionsThe themes and subthemes identified in this study should inform research funders so that the direction of primary healthcare is informed by evidence.