Impact of the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 pandemic in cancer diagnosis in the first and second waves in one of the most affected cancer areas in the city of Madrid (Spain)

Rogado, Jacobo; Obispo, Berta; Gullón, Pedro; Lara, Miguel Ángel

doi:10.1002/ijc.33462

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The following stage of the care pathway reported on is cancer treatment. A total of 41 indicators (from 9 articles [35,60,65,72,91,96,103,106,107]) reported on the "number of cancer patients' referrals". Most of the indicators (37, 90%) signalled a decrease in the number of first encounters for oncological examination, namely in Slovenia, UK, US, France, Spain, and the Netherlands.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority (n=8 indicators, 57%) showed patients presenting in a more severe clinical condition than before the pandemic, namely in US (endometrial cancer), Portugal (hepatocellular carcinoma), Italy, and Turkey (colorectal cancer).The following stage of the care pathway reported on is cancer treatment. A total of 41 indicators (from 9 articles[35,60,65,72,91,96,103,106,107]) reported on the "number of cancer patients'[35,42,44,52,55,60,65,90,91,93,96,106,110,111] regarding the outpatient care of patients diagnosed with cancer. Of these indicators, 46 (93%) showed a decrease in the number of outpatient visits (in Korea,…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Changes in the quality of cancer care as assessed through performance indicators during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: a Scoping Review

Carvalho

Fernandes

Lange

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Summarize performance indicators used in the literature to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care (January-June 2020), and to assess changes in the quality of care as assessed via selected indicators. Methods: Scoping review. Indicators and their reported trends were collated following the cancer care pathway. Results: Database searches retrieved 6277 articles, 838 articles met the inclusion criteria, and 135 articles were included after full-text screening, from which 917 indicators were retrieved. Indicators assessing the diagnostic process showed a decreasing trend: from 33 indicators reporting on screening, 30 (91%) signalled a decrease during the pandemic (n=30 indicators, 91%). A reduction was also observed in the number of diagnostic procedures (n=64, 58%) and in the diagnoses (n=130, 89%). The proportion of diagnoses in the emergency setting and waiting times showed an increasing trend (n=8, 89% and n=14, 56%, respectively). Nine indicators (64%) showed stability in cancer stages distribution. A decreasing trend in the proportion of earliest stage cancers was reported by 63% of indicators (n=9), and 70% (n=43) of indicators showed an increasing trend in the proportion of advanced-stage cancers. Indicators reflecting the treatment process signalled a reduction in the number of procedures: 79% (n=82) of indicators concerning surgeries, 72% (n=41) of indicators assessing trends in radiotherapy, and 93% (n=40) of indicators related to systemic therapies. Modifications in cancer treatment were frequently reported: 64% (n=195) of indicators revealed changes in treatment. Ten indicators (83%) signalled a decreasing number of hospital admissions. Conclusion: Health systems struggled to ensure continuity of cancer care. As this pandemic keeps evolving, the trends reported over the first 6 months of 2020 provide an argument to monitor these changes closely. This information needs to be transparent, standardised, and timely, allowing to monitor quality and outcomes of care during crises and inform policy responses.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in the quality of cancer care as assessed through performance indicators during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: a Scoping Review

Carvalho

Fernandes

Lange

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…8,9 This decrement in new diagnosis is probably caused by fear of the patients to visit hospitals where the virus is present. 10 Ensuring safety of cancer patients along with the healthcare workers during this second wave of COVID was of prime importance. However, we could not have utmost control in our hands.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of the second wave of COVID-19 on cancer care at Birat Medical College and Teaching Hospital, Nepal

Sapkota¹,

Priyadarshini²

2022

Asian J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The second wave of COVID-19 has plunged Nepal into a public health disaster and has also impacted cancer service to our department of Oncology. Aims and Objectives: To evaluate the impacts of COVID-19 second wave on outpatient department, inpatient department of oncology, Cancer screening, Cancer patients and Healthcare staffs of oncology department respectively. Materials and Methods: We did a prospective descriptive study from April 15, 2021 to June 14 2021 in our Oncology Department at Birat Medical College and Teaching Hospital. All the histopathologically proven cancer patients attending the oncology unit during the specific study periods were taken as study population. Proforma comprising patient details were maintained in excel sheet and the collected data were analyzed with the help of Statistical Package for Social Sciences. Results: We have 78% decrement in outpatient visits and 30% decrement in admissions during the study period. We had 89% reduction in the newly diagnosed cases and total fourteen COVID positive cases. About 50% of the COVID-positive cases expired due to desaturation caused by COVID lung while 50% survived with the medical support. Majority of the infection was due to community spread. PCR test was advised for all the COVID suspects with features of fever and separate isolation ward was implemented for such patients. All of the healthcare staffs of oncology unit were immunized with vaccines as per the government protocol and none of them contractedCOVID during the pandemic. Conclusion: Second wave of COVID-19 had a severe impact on cancer service at our Institution. With the decrement in COVID cases and ease of lockdown, slowly we are trying to gain our momentum with utmost COVID precautions.

show abstract

“…Thus, although COVID-19 was not a diagnostic possibility during the index consultation, patients were exposed to the new disease during the follow-up period. Moreover, the Spanish National Health System stopped all non-urgent activity during the first months of the pandemic, probably delaying some cancer diagnoses 43,44 . We considered COVID-19 to be a serious disease when patients suffered complications, needed hospitalization, or died.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective Observational Study on the Prevalence and Diagnostic Value of General Practitioners’ Gut Feelings for Cancer and Serious Diseases

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background General practitioners (GPs) have recognized the presence of gut feelings in their diagnostic process. However, little is known about the frequency or determinants of gut feelings or the diagnostic value of gut feelings for cancer and other serious diseases. Objective To assess the prevalence of gut feelings in general practice, examine their determinants and impact on patient management, and measure their diagnostic value for cancer and other serious diseases. Design This prospective observational study was performed using the Gut Feelings Questionnaire (GFQ). Participants Participants included 155 GPs and 1487 of their patients, from four Spanish provinces. Main Measures Sociodemographic data from patients and GPs; the reasoning style of GPs; the characteristics of the consultation; the presence and kind of gut feeling; the patient’s subsequent contacts with the health system; and new cancer and serious disease diagnoses reported at 2 and 6 months post-consultation. Key Results GPs experienced a gut feeling during 97% of the consultations: a sense of reassurance in 75% of consultations and a sense of alarm in 22% of consultations. A sense of alarm was felt at higher frequency given an older patient, the presence of at least one cancer-associated symptom, or a non-urban setting. GPs took diagnostic action more frequently after a sense of alarm. After 2 months, the sense of alarm had a sensitivity of 59% for cancer and other serious diseases (95% CI 47–71), a specificity of 79% (95% CI 77–82), a positive predictive value of 12% (95% CI 9–16), and a negative predictive value of 98% (95% CI 86–98). Conclusions Gut feelings are consistently present in primary care medicine, and they play a substantial role in a GP’s clinical reasoning and timely diagnosis of serious disease. The sense of alarm must be taken seriously and used to support diagnostic evaluation in patients with a new reason for encounter.

show abstract

Impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic in cancer diagnosis in the first and second waves in one of the most affected cancer areas in the city of Madrid (Spain)

Cited by 11 publications

References 8 publications

Changes in the quality of cancer care as assessed through performance indicators during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: a Scoping Review

Changes in the quality of cancer care as assessed through performance indicators during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: a Scoping Review

Impact of the second wave of COVID-19 on cancer care at Birat Medical College and Teaching Hospital, Nepal

Prospective Observational Study on the Prevalence and Diagnostic Value of General Practitioners’ Gut Feelings for Cancer and Serious Diseases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About