Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 42678573

Tele-Oncology in the Post-Pandemic Era: Clinical Integration, Access Disparities and Medico-Legal Accountability.

Abstract

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: Tele-health has evolved from a marginal tool confined to rural populations and selected follow-up programs into a structurally integrated component of modern cancer care. Prior to COVID-19, its adoption was constrained by regulatory fragmentation, non-uniform reimbursement, and licensure barriers. This narrative review evaluates the evolutionary integration of tele-health in oncology post-COVID-19, examines digital disparities across patient populations, and addresses the medico-legal implications of this integration, with the objective of providing a comprehensive and clinically actionable framework for the governance of virtual oncology care. RECENT FINDINGS: The pandemic acted as a global catalyst, driving telehealth to over 50% of oncology outpatient encounters in some settings, before stabilising post-pandemic at approximately 10-20% of consultations within hybrid care models. Evidence supports meaningful clinical benefits - improved access to specialist services, reduced travel burden, and sustained continuity of care - with outcomes comparable to in-person care in postoperative follow-up, symptom monitoring, and survivorship. However, persistent disparities in device availability, connectivity, and digital literacy disproportionately affect older, rural, and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients, raising the risk that geographic inequalities are replaced by technological ones. From a medico-legal standpoint, the remote modality does not modify the applicable standard of care, yet restricted physical examination and reliance on patient-reported data introduce risks of diagnostic delay and incomplete clinical assessment, with direct implications for professional liability, data protection under HIPAA and GDPR, cross-border licensure, and multi-party accountability across physicians, institutions, and technology providers. Tele-oncology has become a permanent structural feature of modern cancer care, offering demonstrable benefits in access, continuity, and patient satisfaction. Yet its integration has been uneven, its governance remains fragmented, and its medico-legal landscape is still evolving. Realising the full potential of virtual oncology care - equitably and safely - requires coherent regulatory frameworks, sustained investment in digital infrastructure, and explicit attention to the populations at greatest risk of being left behind.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Dimitrios Stylianakis, Serafina Martella, Josie Pearce, Alexia Tomara, Michele Porcu, Christos Tsagkaris, Ioannis Stylianakis, Nerina Denaro, Matteo Lambertini, Luca Saba, Mario Scartozzi, Cinzia Solinas, Marco Soddu. 2026-09-01. Tele-Oncology in the Post-Pandemic Era: Clinical Integration, Access Disparities and Medico-Legal Accountability.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-026-01827-x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Implementation of a Face-To-Face Vs Virtual Peer-Integrated Collaborative Care Intervention for Mental Health Treatment of Physical Trauma Survivors: A Qualitative Study of Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the implementation of a peer-integrated enhancement of integrated clinical care intervention to address the mental health needs of 450 patients undergoing treatment for a physical injury. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected by 7 clinician investigators of a randomized controlled trial acting as participant observers in a trauma care setting of a major U.S. metropolitan hospital and analyzed in collaboration with an external mixed methods specialist. RESULTS: The pandemic created or exacerbated several implementation barriers, including increased risk of infection, homelessness, hospitalizations and comorbid conditions such as fentanyl overdoses that increased demand on emergency department and Trauma Center services, imposition of safety measures to reduce risk of infection in clinical settings, transition from face-to-face to virtual interactions with study patients, shortages of specialty mental health providers, suspension of recruitment of patients into the study, scheduling calls with patients, and an increased workload for the study clinical interventionists. Peer specialists perceived the transition to virtual interactions with patients reduced their effectiveness; however, this was not reflected in assessments of patient satisfaction with services received and may have inadvertently increased adoption by Trauma Center staff. Reduction in reach of the intervention to target population was temporary. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated existing barriers and created new barriers to successfully implementing evidence-based practices in trauma care settings, resulting in an attenuation of their effectiveness. However, the shift from face-to-face to virtual services delivery may have actually led to improved implementation outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03569878. Registered June 15, 2018.

Humans

A profile of firearm-related fatalities admitted to the Diepkloof Forensic Pathology Service Soweto medico-legal mortuary during the COVID-19 and post COVID-19 periods.

This retrospective descriptive study examined firearm-related fatalities during (April-December 2020; n&#x2009;=&#x2009;241) and after (April-December 2023; n&#x2009;=&#x2009;299) COVID-19 lockdowns using 540 cases from the Diepkloof Forensic Pathology Service, Soweto, South Africa. Data was obtained from autopsy reports, forensic records, police statements, and death scene documentation. Firearm violence affected young adult Black males (22-43&#x2009;years), with only minor demographic shifts post-pandemic. The overall burden and core patterns of violence remained stable, with criminal activity - primarily robbery and interpersonal violence - persisting as the leading contexts, and homicide the dominant manner of death. Post-COVID-19 findings demonstrated contextual shifts, including increased incidents in public and social environments, reflecting greater mobility and resumption of social activity. A significant rise in mean blood alcohol concentration (0.09&#x2009;g/100&#x2009;mL vs 0.14&#x2009;g/100&#x2009;mL; p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.0001) suggests increased alcohol involvement following easing of restrictions. Unfortunately, persistent information gaps, noted particularly in circumstantial history, incident location, firearm type, highlighting the need for improved data provision and capture systems. While the epidemiology of firearm-related fatalities remained unchanged, the post-COVID-19 period was characterised by increased alcohol involvement, shifts toward public-space violence, and fewer gunshot wounds per victim, suggesting changes in situational and behavioural dynamics rather than underlying drivers of violence.

Humans

Safety and immunogenicity of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administered to adults: A phase 2, randomized, active-controlled trial.

We conducted a phase 2, randomized, active-controlled, observer-blind study (NCT05960097) among healthy adults&#x2009;&#x2265;18 y of age who completed a primary COVID-19 mRNA vaccination series, with or without a booster, &#x2265;3&#x2009;months earlier. Participants were randomized (1:1:1:1:1) to either receive an investigational bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine encoding ancestral D614G and Omicron BA.4-5 spike proteins (CV0701 mRNA vaccine) at one of three dose levels, an investigational monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine encoding the Omicron BA.4-5 spike protein (CV0601 mRNA vaccine), or a licensed Original Wuhan/Omicron BA.4-5 bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. The primary objectives were to evaluate reactogenicity, safety and immunogenicity post-vaccination. Secondary and tertiary objectives were to further evaluate humoral and cell-mediated immunity post-vaccination. In total, 425 participants were vaccinated and 381 were included in the Day 29 per-protocol immunogenicity analysis. Most solicited events were mild to moderate. No vaccine-related serious adverse events or myocarditis/pericarditis cases were reported. For the CV0701 mRNA vaccine, a dose-dependent increase in Day 29 neutralizing titers against ancestral D614G and Omicron BA.4-5 was observed. Neutralizing titers against ancestral D614G and Omicron BA.4-5 declined by Days 91 and 181, but remained above baseline. Similar immune responses were observed for the CV0601 mRNA vaccine. At Day 8, CD4+ T cells (Th1 profile) increased in all study groups and CD8+ T cells increased in all study groups, except the lowest CV0701 dose group. The CV0701 and CV0601 mRNA vaccines elicited robust humoral and cellular immunity with an acceptable safety profile, comparable to a licensed, bivalent mRNA vaccine. Clinical Trial Registration EU CT number: 2023-504596-25-00 ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05960097.

Humans