Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34031624›Full record

ArticleDer Onkologe : Organ der Deutschen Krebsgesellschaft e.V2021

[Outpatient care of oncological patients in palliative treatment situations and their relatives during the COVID-19 pandemic].

Jan P Weber, Jannik M Tielker, Nilab Kamandi, Steffen T Simon, Claudia Bausewein, Stephanie Stiel, Nils Schneider

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Der Onkologe : Organ der Deutschen Krebsgesellschaft e.V, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jan P WeberInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625 Hannover, Deutschland.
Jannik M TielkerInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625 Hannover, Deutschland.
Nilab KamandiInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625 Hannover, Deutschland.
Steffen T SimonMedizinische Fakultät, Zentrum für Palliativmedizin und Centrum für Integrierte Onkologie Aachen Bonn Cologne Düsseldorf (CIO ABCD), Uniklinik Köln, Universität zu Köln, Köln, Deutschland.
Claudia BauseweinKlinik und Poliklinik für Palliativmedizin, LMU Klinikum München, München, Deutschland.
Stephanie StielInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625 Hannover, Deutschland.
Nils SchneiderInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625 Hannover, Deutschland.
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DELMU Klinikum · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the current pandemic situation, the public health care system must ensure the ongoing provision of regular medical care as well as the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected patients. Resident oncologists and their practices are equally affected.

objectivesThe study examines resident oncologists' challenges, experiences and approaches in the delivery of care for oncological patients receiving palliative treatment and their relatives during the pandemic. Findings will support future pandemic preparedness for cancer treatment in outpatients. MATERIALS AND

methodsContent analyses of 13 guideline-based telephone interviews with resident oncologists.

resultsSolid local networks, staff and structural rearrangements and infection control within offices helped oncologists maintaining quality of care. Required treatments have been continued. The interrupted information flow towards patients' relatives and catching up on previously postponed primary, control or follow-up consultations have been reported as a challenge. Other issues have been linked to suspected SARS-CoV‑2 infection in patients and staff. The lack of information, temporal inaccessibility of health care authorities and physicians' associations, and additional costs for infection control material caused further problems.

conclusionsDue to the firmly implemented infection control and the re-organisation of facilities and staff, oncologists have been able to maintain treatment and care for cancer patients and their relatives. Hygiene procedures proved to work well and might be re-activated. An increased use of digital applications for treatment monitoring might be considered. Furthermore, solutions to meet additional financial and personnel demands caused by infection control must be identified. The design of suitable concepts for the prevention of health-related hazards due to visiting bans for relatives and therapeutic staff such as physio- and occupational therapists is inevitable.

Indexed as

Cancer careGeneralist palliative careHealth services researchOncologyOutpatient care

Identifiers

PMID34031624
PMCPMC8134804
OpenAlexW3164174142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.