Cancer care disruption during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada: A sequential mixed-methods study
Timilshina, N.; Jacobson, D.; Birze, A.; Wodchis, W. P.; Kuluski, K.; Strumpf, E.; Ammi, M.
Show abstract
Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly disrupted healthcare delivery worldwide, with cancer care among the most affected services. Prior studies documented delays in referrals, reduced specialist access, and increased provider burden. However, the extent to which these experiences were reflected at the system level remains unclear. Objective To document cancer care experiences and examine whether these experiences were reflected in population-level health system indicators across Ontario, Canada. Methods We used an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design. Qualitative data were collected through focus groups and semi-structured interviews with 32 participants, including patients with cancer (n=8), caregivers (n=5), healthcare providers (n=14), and decision-makers (n=5) across two hospital settings in Ontario, Canada. Emergent themes informed the development of quantitative indicators. We then conducted a retrospective population-based analysis of linked administrative health databases for cancer patients in Ontario (n=87,786) to assess the prevalence of identified themes. Results Four themes emerged: (I) delays in diagnosis and screening; (II) disrupted access to primary care; (III) barriers to specialist and mental health services; and (IV) fragmented care for patients with multimorbidity. Quantitative findings corroborated major themes. Screening rates declined for cervical (64.8% to 57.5%) and breast cancer (64.5% to 57.2%). While in-person primary care shifted almost entirely to virtual modalities (8.5% to 95.4%), overall visit volumes remained stable. Specialist care showed uneven patterns, with increased oncology visits but declines in cardiology and mental health services. Patients with multiple comorbidities experienced the largest reductions in non-oncology specialist care. Conclusion The pandemic disrupted key components of cancer care, particularly screening, access to certain specialist services, and care for patients with complex needs. Integrating qualitative and quantitative evidence highlights areas of system vulnerability and underscores the need for coordinated, resilient cancer care capable of maintaining essential services during future crises.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Do people with disabilities experience disparities in cancer care? A systematic review 93%
- From many voices, one question: Community co-design of a population-based qualitative cancer research study 93%
- “All of the things to everyone everywhere”: A mixed methods analysis of community perspectives on equitable access to monoclonal antibody treatment for COVID-19 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Impact of Primary Care Team Configuration on Access and Quality of Care 93%
- Association of patients’ past misdiagnosis experiences with trust in their current physician: the TRUMP 2 -Net study 92%
- An Evaluation of the Vulnerable Physician Workforce in the United States During the Coronavirus Disease-19 Pandemic 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Pre-Post Analysis of the Impact of British Columbia Nurse Practitioner Primary Care Clinics on Patient Health and Care Experience 94%
- Challenges and facilitators in pathways to cancer diagnosis in Southern Africa: A qualitative study 93%
- Trends in patient attachment to an aging primary care workforce: a population-based serial cross-sectional study in Ontario, Canada 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- “I don’t know what to do or where to go”. Experiences of accessing healthcare support from the perspectives of people living with Long Covid and healthcare professionals: A qualitative study in Bradford, UK 92%
- Challenges of visibility and inclusion in Long COVID: a population-based interview study 92%
- Patients’ and carers’ experiences of, and engagement with remote home monitoring services for COVID-19 patients: a rapid mixed-methods study 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Navigating uncertain illness trajectories for young children with serious infectious illness: a mixed-methods modified grounded theory study 92%
- Barriers to help-seeking for Malaysian women with symptoms of breast cancer: a mixed-methods, two-step cluster analysis 91%
- Health professionals beliefs and attitudes towards preconception care: A systematic review 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.