Dataset Information

Telehealth Utilization Among Surgical Oncology Patients at a Large Academic Cancer Center.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic increased the use of telehealth within medicine. Data on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with telehealth utilization among cancer surgical patients have not been well-defined.

Methods

Cancer patients who had a surgical oncology visit at the James Cancer Hospital in March 2020-May 2021 were included. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded; access to modern information technology was measured using the Digital Divide Index (DDI). A logistic regression model was used to assess odds of receiving a telehealth.

Results

Among 2942 patients, median DDI was 18.2 (interquartile range 17.4-22.1). Patients were most often insured through managed care (n = 1459, 49.6%), followed by Medicare (n = 1109, 37.7%) and Medicaid (n = 267, 9.1%). Overall, 722 patients (24.5%) received at least one telehealth visit over the study period. On multivariable analysis, age (odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-0.98 per 10-year increase), sex (male vs. female: OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.45-2.32), cancer type (pancreatic vs. breast: OR 9.19, 95% CI 6.38-13.23; colorectal vs. breast: OR 5.31, 95% CI 3.71-7.58), insurance type (Medicare vs. Medicaid: OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.04-2.41) and county of residence (distant vs. neighboring: OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06-1.66) were associated with increased odds of receiving a telehealth visit. Patients from high DDI counties were not less likely to receive telehealth visits versus patients from low DDI counties (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.85-1.57).

Conclusions

Several patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics had an impact on the likelihood of receiving a telehealth visit versus an in-person visit, suggesting that telehealth may not be equally accessible to all surgical oncology patients.

SUBMITTER: Paro A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9331038 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Telehealth Utilization Among Surgical Oncology Patients at a Large Academic Cancer Center.

Paro Alessandro A Rice Daniel R DR Hyer J Madison JM Palmer Elizabeth E Ejaz Aslam A Shaikh Chanza Fahim CF Pawlik Timothy M TM

Annals of surgical oncology 20220727 12

<h4>Background</h4>The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic increased the use of telehealth within medicine. Data on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with telehealth utilization among cancer surgical patients have not been well-defined.<h4>Methods</h4>Cancer patients who had a surgical oncology visit at the James Cancer Hospital in March 2020-May 2021 were included. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded; access to modern information techno ...[more]

PMID: 35896926

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly impacted health care systems. However, to date, the trend of hospitalizations in the oncology patient population has not been studied, and the frequency of nosocomial spread to patients with cancer is not well understood. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on inpatient oncology census and determine the nosocomial rate of COVID-19 in patients with cancer admitted at a large academic center.Materials and methodsMedical records of patients with cancer diagnosed with COVID-19 and admitted were reviewed to evaluate the temporal trends in inpatient oncology census during pre-COVID-19 (January 2019 to February 2020), COVID-19 (March to May 2020), and post-COVID-19 surge (June to August 2020) in the region. In addition, nosocomial infection rates of SARS-CoV-2 were reviewed.ResultsOverall, the daily inpatient census was steady in 2019 (median, 103; range, 92-118) and until February 2020 (median, 112; range, 102-114). However, there was a major decline from March to May 2020 (median, 68; range, 57-104), with 45.4% lower admissions during April 2020. As the COVID-19 surge eased, the daily inpatient census over time returned to the pre-COVID-19 baseline (median, 103; range, 99-111). One patient (1/231, 0.004%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 13 days after hospitalization, and it is unclear if it was nosocomial or community spread.ConclusionIn this study, inpatient oncology admissions decreased substantially during the COVID-19 surge but over time returned to the pre-COVID-19 baseline. With aggressive infection control measures, the rates of nosocomial transmission were exceedingly low and should provide reassurance to those seeking medical care, including inpatient admissions when medically necessary.Implications for practiceThe COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact on the health care system, and cancer patients are a vulnerable population. This study observes a significant decline in the daily inpatient oncology census from March to May 2020 compared with the same time frame in the previous year and examines the potential reasons for this decline. In addition, nosocomial rates of COVID-19 were investigated, and rates were found to be very low. These findings suggest that aggressive infection control measures can mitigate the nosocomial infection risk among cancer patients and the inpatient setting is a safe environment, providing reassurance.

Project description:Despite increasing use, proton therapy (PT) remains a relatively limited resource. The purpose of this study was to assess clinical and demographic differences in PT use for prostate cancer compared to intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) at a single institution.All patients with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer (N = 633) who underwent definitive radiation therapy between 2010 and 2015 were divided into PT (n = 508) and IMRT (n = 125) comparison groups and compared using ?2 and independent sample t tests. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the associations between PT use and demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics.The PT and IMRT cohorts varied by age, race, poverty, distance, treatment year, and treating physician. Patients who underwent IMRT were more likely to be older (mean age, 66 vs. 68 years), black (51% vs. 75%), and living in poverty or close to the facility (mean distance between residence and facility, 90 vs. 21 miles; P < .05). Prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, and International Index of Erectile Function were significantly higher in the IMRT cohort (P < .05), but insurance type, risk group, tumor stage, Gleason score, and patient-reported urinary and bowel scores did not differ significantly (P > .05). Patients who underwent PT were more likely to receive hypofractionated therapy and less likely to receive androgen deprivation therapy (P < .01). On multivariable analysis, black (odds ratio [OR], 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.57) and other race (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20-0.90); distance (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.24); treatment years 2011 (OR, 4.87; 95% CI, 2.23-10.6), 2012 (OR, 8.27; 95% CI, 3.43-19.9), and 2014 (OR, 4.44; 95% CI, 1.94-10.2) relative to 2010; and a single treating physician (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.81) relative to the reference physician with the highest rate of use were associated with PT use, whereas clinical factors such as prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, International Index of Erectile Function, and androgen deprivation therapy were not.Sociodemographic disparities exist in PT use for prostate cancer at an urban academic institution. Further investigation of potential barriers to access is warranted to ensure equitable distribution across all demographic groups.

Project description:BackgroundWe describe the implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs designed to minimize postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and pain and reduce opioid use in patients undergoing selected procedures at an ambulatory cancer surgery center. Key components of the ERAS included preoperative patient education regarding the postoperative course, liberal preoperative hydration, standardized PONV prophylaxis, appropriate intraoperative fluid management, and multimodal analgesia at all stages.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed data on patients who underwent mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction, minimally invasive hysterectomy, thyroidectomy, or minimally invasive prostatectomy from the opening of our institution on January 2016 to December 2018. Data collected included use of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), rate of PONV rescue, time to first oral opioid, and total intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption. Compliance with ERAS elements was determined for each service. Quality outcomes included time to first ambulation, postoperative length of stay (LOS), rate of reoperation, rate of transfer to acute care hospital, 30-day readmission, and urgent care visits ≤30 days.ResultsWe analyzed 6781 ambulatory surgery cases (2965 mastectomies, 1099 hysterectomies, 680 thyroidectomies, and 1976 prostatectomies). PONV rescue decreased most appreciably for mastectomy (28% decrease; 95% confidence interval [CI], -36 to -22). TIVA use increased for both mastectomies (28%; 95% CI, 20-40) and hysterectomies (58%; 95% CI, 46-76). Total intraoperative opioid administration decreased over time across all procedures. Time to first oral opioid decreased for all surgeries; decreases ranged from 0.96 hours (95% CI, 2.1-1.4) for thyroidectomies to 3.3 hours (95% CI, 4.5 to -1.7) for hysterectomies. Total postoperative opioid consumption did not change by a clinically meaningful degree for any surgery. Compliance with ERAS measures was generally high but varied among surgeries.ConclusionsThis quality improvement study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing ERAS at an ambulatory surgery center. However, the study did not include either a concurrent or preintervention control so that further studies are needed to assess whether there is an association between implementation of ERAS components and improvements in outcomes. Nevertheless, we provide benchmarking data on postoperative outcomes during the first 3 years of ERAS implementation. Our findings reflect progressive improvement achieved through continuous feedback and education of staff.

Project description:IntroductionTelehealth utilization surged during the COVID-19 pandemic, offering expanded health care access. Audio-only visits emerged as a crucial tool for patients facing technology or connectivity barriers to still use telehealth. This qualitative study aims to better understand patient perceptions of audio-only versus video telehealth visits during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how patients perceive the role of each in their overall health care.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 adult patients seeking care at an academic medical center located in the Southeast region of the United States. Patients had experienced both an audio-only and video telehealth visit within the past 6 months. Topics covered in the interview included comfort, preference, quality, and communication during each type of visit. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded, and analyzed using a general inductive approach.ResultsParticipants valued having both modalities available largely due to convenience and saw these visits as supplemental or supporting their in-person care. Preferences for visit types were varied among participants and were context-specific, influenced by visit purpose and provider rapport. Patients viewed audio-only visits favorably for informational follow-ups and highlighted their convenience, particularly for multitasking and caregiving duties. In contrast, video visits were seen as more effective for communication due to visual cues and better suited for demonstrating health conditions. Audio-only visits were also seen as less technology-dependent and served as a vital back-up to failed video encounters.DiscussionDespite varied preferences, patients perceived both modalities as complementary to in-person care. Concerns around the quality of care were mitigated by patients' and providers' judicious use of visit types based on clinical appropriateness and existing rapport. The results emphasize the necessity and flexibility of audio-only visits in ensuring equitable access to telehealth, especially for those with technology limitations or demanding responsibilities. To maintain the access and convenience afforded by telehealth and ensure these benefits are offered equitably, policy makers and health care organizations must continue to provide flexible telehealth options, including audio-only visits.

Project description:ImportanceSome patients are avoiding essential care for fear of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in hospitals. There are few data, however, on the risk of acquiring COVID-19 in US hospitals.ObjectiveTo assess the incidence of COVID-19 among patients hospitalized at a large US academic medical center in the 12 weeks after the first inpatient case was identified.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included all patients admitted to Brigham and Women's Hospital (Boston, Massachusetts) between March 7 and May 30, 2020. Follow-up occurred through June 17, 2020. Medical records for all patients who first tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on hospital day 3 or later or within 14 days of discharge were reviewed.ExposuresA comprehensive infection control program was implemented that included dedicated COVID-19 units with airborne infection isolation rooms, personal protective equipment in accordance with US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations, personal protective equipment donning and doffing monitors, universal masking, restriction of visitors, and liberal RT-PCR testing of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients.Main outcomes and measuresWhether infection was community or hospital acquired based on timing of tests, clinical course, and exposures.ResultsOver the 12-week period, 9149 patients (mean [SD] age, 46.1 [26.4] years; median [IQR] age, 51 years [30-67 years]; 5243 female [57.3%]) were admitted to the hospital, for whom 7394 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests were performed; 697 COVID-19 cases were confirmed, translating into 8656 days of COVID-19-related care. Twelve of the 697 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (1.7%) first tested positive on hospital day 3 or later (median, 4 days; range, 3-15 days). Of these, only 1 case was deemed to be hospital acquired, most likely from a presymptomatic spouse who was visiting daily and diagnosed with COVID-19 before visitor restrictions and masking were implemented. Among 8370 patients with non-COVID-19-related hospitalizations discharged through June 17, 11 (0.1%) tested positive within 14 days (median time to diagnosis, 6 days; range, 1-14 days). Only 1 case was deemed likely to be hospital acquired, albeit with no known exposures.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of patients in a large academic medical center with rigorous infection control measures, nosocomial COVID-19 was rare during the height of the pandemic in the region. These findings may inform practices in other institutions and provide reassurance to patients concerned about contracting COVID-19 in hospitals.

Dataset Information

Telehealth Utilization Among Surgical Oncology Patients at a Large Academic Cancer Center.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Telehealth Utilization Among Surgical Oncology Patients at a Large Academic Cancer Center.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets