Take Home Message
The total burden of urolithiasis in terms of incidence, disability-adjusted life years, and deaths has increased globally since 1990, while age-standardized rates have decreased. Importantly, areas of lower sociodemographic index have seen an increased burden. Understanding variation and factors affecting the burden of urolithiasis is necessary for policymakers.
Background
The aim of this study is to evaluate the extent and associations with patient‐reported disruptions to cancer treatment and cancer‐related care during the COVID‐19 pandemic utilizing nationally representative data.
Methods
This analysis uses data from the 2020 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), an annual, cross‐sectional survey of US adults. Adults (age >18) who reported requiring current cancer treatment or other cancer‐related medical care in the second half of 2020 were included. Estimated proportions of patients with self‐reported changes, delays, or cancelations to cancer treatment or other cancer care due to the COVID‐19 pandemic were calculated using sampling weights and associations with sociodemographic and other health‐related variables were analyzed.
Results
In total, 574 (sample‐weighted estimate of 2,867,326) adults reported requiring cancer treatment and/or other cancer care since the start of the COVID‐19 pandemic. An estimated 32.1% reported any change, delay, or cancelation. On sample‐weighted univariable analysis, patients who were younger, female, had one or fewer comorbidities, and uninsured were significantly more likely to report disruptions. On sample‐weighted, multivariable analysis, patients who were younger and female remained significant predictors. Nearly 90% of patients included in the study reported virtual appointment use. Patients reporting disruptions were also significantly more likely to report feelings of anxiety.
Conclusions
An estimated 1/3 of patients experienced disruptions to cancer care due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Patients experiencing disruptions in care were more likely to be female or younger which may reflect risk stratification strategies in the early stages of the pandemic, and also had higher rates of anxiety. The longitudinal impact of these disruptions on outcomes merits further study.
Introduction:
YouTube™ has grown into one of the largest disseminators of health care information. We assessed the quality of information on varicoceles and their treatment, available on YouTube™.
Methods:
Using a YouTube™ search query with the keyword “varicocele,” the quality of the first 50, nonrepeat videos in English were assessed as a representative group for the topic. DISCERN and Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Materials (PEMAT-AV) standardized tools were utilized by three independent reviewers to grade the quality of these videos based on content, understandability, and actionability.
Results:
The average and median DISCERN score was 31.34 (±9.37) and 31 (interquartile range 25–35), respectively, indicating poor quality. The interrater reliability (IRR) scores ranged from 0.51 to 0.93, indicating fair to excellent reliability. The average PEMAT-AV understandability and actionability scores were 69.8% ±15.4% and 11.0% ±24.6%, respectively, indicating mostly understandable but poor actionability. The
t
-test results showed that international videos scored higher without statistical significance in the DISCERN or PEMAT-AV scores (
P
= 0.18, 0.59, and 0.20).
Conclusions:
The current quality of videos on YouTube™ on the topic of varicoceles is of poor quality due to a lack of a holistic approach in explaining the wide range of treatment options available. With the ease of access to produce and disseminate health information, there is a need to create high-quality videos on varicoceles that empower a patient to make an informed decision.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.