Adult Congenital Heart Disease in Australia and New Zealand A Call for Optimal Care

Background: Adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) is a relatively new subspecialty in the cardiology field. The prevalence of ACHD is estimated at ∼ 3,000 per million adult population. The ACHD patient group is estimated to grow at ∼ 5% per year and in the next decade it is forecast that 1 in 150 young adults will carry some form of ACHD diagnosis. These estimates translate to ∼ 72,000 ACHD patients in Australia and ∼ 14,000 in New Zealand, although no current numbers are available. The Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (CSANZ) has recently published Recommendations for Standards of Care for Adult Congenital Heart Disease (ACHD) in 2016. There is currently no long-term plan or proposal to address this huge health care burden within the federal government. This document details the size of the problem insofar as it is known and recommends solutions to be implemented. Methods: This document was developed by the Adult Congenital Heart Disease Working Group of the Paediatric and Congenital Council (the Congenital Heart Alliance of Australia and New Zealand) as a response to the chronic under resourcing in this area, the risk this poses to patients and clinicians, and the clear need for long-term planning to develop safe care pathways. Results: These issues were raised with the CSANZ Board in December 2015 and the document was developed in response to the Board's request for more information. The current iteration was finalised on 14 November 2017. Conclusions: The authorship group comprised participants in the CSANZ adult CHD standards of care recommendations from 2013 with the inclusion of some newly trained ACHD cardiologists, who represented most states and territories across ANZ. None of the authors has any academic or professional conflict of interest

The state of neuro-oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic: a worldwide assessment.

It remains unknown how the COVID-19 pandemic has changed neuro-oncology clinical practice, training, and research efforts. We performed an international survey of practitioners, scientists, and trainees from 21 neuro-oncology organizations across 6 continents, April 24-May 17, 2020. We assessed clinical practice and research environments, institutional preparedness and support, and perceived impact on patients. Of 582 respondents, 258 (45%) were US-based and 314 (55%) international. Ninety-four percent of participants reported changes in their clinical practice. Ninety-five percent of respondents converted at least some practice to telemedicine. Ten percent of practitioners felt the need to see patients in person, specifically because of billing concerns and pressure from their institutions. Sixty-seven percent of practitioners suspended enrollment for at least one clinical trial, including 62% suspending phase III trial enrollments. More than 50% believed neuro-oncology patients were at increased risk for COVID-19. Seventy-one percent of clinicians feared for their own personal safety or that of their families, specifically because of their clinical duties; 20% had inadequate personal protective equipment. While 69% reported increased stress, 44% received no psychosocial support from their institutions. Thirty-seven percent had salary reductions and 63% of researchers temporarily closed their laboratories. However, the pandemic created positive changes in perceived patient satisfaction, communication quality, and technology use to deliver care and mediate interactions with other practitioners. The pandemic has changed treatment schedules and limited investigational treatment options. Institutional lack of support created clinician and researcher anxiety. Communication with patients was satisfactory. We make recommendations to guide clinical and scientific infrastructure moving forward and address the personal challenges of providers and researchers