The COVID-19 pandemic poses a barrier to equal and evidence-based management of cancer in older adults. The International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) formed a panel of experts to develop consensus recommendations on the implications of the pandemic on several aspects of cancer care in this age group including geriatric assessment (GA), surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatment, palliative care and research.
Age and cancer diagnosis are significant predictors of adverse outcomes of the COVID-19 infection. In this setting, GA is particularly valuable to drive decision-making. GA may aid estimating physiologic reserve and adaptive capability, assessing risk-benefits of either providing or temporarily withholding treatments, and determining patient preferences to help inform treatment decisions. In a resource-constrained setting, geriatric screening tools may be administered remotely to identify patients requiring comprehensive GA. Tele-health is also crucial to ensure adequate continuity of care and minimize the risk of infection exposure.
In general, therapeutic decisions should favor the most effective and least invasive approach with the lowest risk of adverse outcomes. In selected cases, this might require deferring or omitting surgery, radiotherapy or systemic treatments especially where benefits are marginal and alternative safe therapeutic options are available.
Ongoing research is necessary to expand knowledge of the management of cancer in older adults. However, the pandemic presents a significant barrier and efforts should be made to ensure equitable access to clinical trials and prospective data collection to elucidate the outcomes of COVID-19 in this population.
The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) appears to be an effective alternative for assessing not only medical knowledge, but also clinical skills, including effective communication and physical examination skills. The purpose of the current study was to implement an OSCE model in a geriatrics fellowship program and to compare the instrument with traditional essay examination. Seventy first- and second-year geriatric fellows were initially submitted to a traditional essay examination and scored from 0 to 10 by a faculty member. The same fellows subsequently underwent an OSCE with eight 10-minute stations covering a wide range of essential aspects of geriatric knowledge. Each OSCE station had an examiner responsible for its evaluation according to a predefined checklist. Checklist items were classified for analysis purposes as clinical knowledge items (CKI) and communication skills items (CSI); fellow responses were scored from 0 to 10.Although essay examinations took from 30 to 45 minutes to complete, 180-200 minutes were required to evaluate fellows using the proposed OSCE method. Fellows scored an average of 6.2 ± 1.2 on the traditional essay examination and 6.6 ± 1.0 on the OSCE (P < .001). Subanalyses of OSCE scores indicated that average performance on CKI was lower than the average on CSI (6.4 ± 1.1 vs. 8.4 ± 1.1; P < .001). Fellow performance on the essay examination was similar to their performance on CKI (P = .13). Second-year fellows performed better than first-year fellows on the essay examination (P < .001) and CKI (P = .05), but not on CSI (P = .25).The OSCE was successfully implemented as an educational strategy during a geriatrics fellowship program. Combining different testing modalities may provide the best assessment of competence for various domains of knowledge, skills, and behavior.
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.