Author Year Country	Aim	Study Design Sample Size, Age	Context and Setting Study Timeframe	Data Source	Data Collection Data Analysis	Results
Akhtar et al. (2021) [38] India	To describe the hospital experience during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic including the functioning of the department, clinical outcomes, problems faced by patients, and lessons learned	Retrospective N = 1 institution NA	Hospital COVID-19 period: April to Sept 2020. Pre-COVID-19 period: April to Sept, 2019.	Secondary data; hospital record database Primary data; questionnaire	Hospital data Patient data of difficulties encountered Desc. stats; chi-square	Introduced teleconsultations to decrease workload in outpatient dept.
Akuamoa-Boateng et al. (2020) [33] Germany	To compare hospital management of 2019 and 2020	Retrospective N = 1 institution NA	Hospital Pre-COVID-19: 18/03/19–10/05/19 COVID-19 period: 16/03/20–8/05/20	Secondary data; hospital records	Hospital data Desc. stats; t-test	The hospital offered telemedicine appointments to patients and implemented a modified workflow. Telemedical cancer board meetings via video call were implemented.
Alterio et al. (2020) [34] Italy	To report organisation strategies at a radiation oncology department, focusing on procedures and scheduling (i.e.: delays, interruptions)	Retrospective N = 1 institution N = 43 patients 57–74 years	Hospital Pre-COVID-19: 01/03 to 30/04/19 COVID-19 period: 01/03 to 30/04/20	Secondary data; Electronic medical charts	Medical records Desc. stats	Hospital transferred into an oncology hub and used telehealth for follow-up visit surveillance.
Araujo et al. (2020) [56] Latin America	To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on patient volume in a cancer centre in an epidemic of the pandemic	Provider Retrospective N = 1 institution NA	Hospital Pre-COVID-19: Mar–May 2019 COVID-19 period: Mar–May 2020	Secondary data; electronic health record database	Medical records Desc. stats; chi-squared; Wilcoxon nonparametric test	Offered telemedicine (virtual tumour boards, virtual consultations/appointments) in redesign of oncology care to replace face-to-face visits where possible. Total number of medical appointments declined by 45%.
Atreya et al. (2020) [50] India	(1) To assess changes in the hospital-based practice of palliative care during the pandemic (2) Patient/caregivers perception about the provision of palliative telehealth services (which were in place since 2014)	Patient & caregivers Cross-sectional N = 50 >18 years old	Hospital 01/01–19/05/20	Primary data; interview Secondary data; electronic medical records	Structured telephone interview Desc. stats	51% reduction in outpatient footfalls using telemedicine 82% satisfied with advice given by palliative team. 64% felt comfortable using telehealth services Participants mentioned that telemedicine gave them “support and connectedness”. 76% expressed their willingness to pay for telehealth service in the future.
Biswas et al. (2020) [51] India	(1) To assess expansion of telemedicine service in the palliative unit in the department of oncology (2) To assess patient satisfaction	Patient Prospective N = 314 Adults	Hospital 25/03/–13/05/20	Primary data; Telephone calls	Telephone calls were recorded to collect data on: Reason for calling Barriers to care Patient satisfaction Desc. stats	53.18% used telephone calls and text messages 26.75% required video consultations. Reasons for calling: 50% symptom management. 27.39% needed to restock opioid medications 22.61% for information regarding their oncological treatments. Barriers to hospital services: Travel restrictions and lack of transport availability (124 patients) Terminal patients (88 patients) Fear of infection (71 patients). Patient satisfaction: 56 very satisfied 152 satisfied 59 partially satisfied 47 unsatisfied 42 patients believed that face-to-face consultations may be more useful for them
Brenes Sanchez et al. (2021) [39] Spain	To analyse the management of patients with breast cancer during the pandemic	Patients Retrospective observational N = 57 patients NA	Hospital Group A: 15/03/20–21/04/20 Group B: 22/04/20–06/05/20	Primary data; questionnaire Secondary data; hospital data	Telephone questionnaire using: Patient satisfaction (EORTC IN-PATSAT32) Desc. Stats; Mann–Whitney test	Telemedicine was used to evaluate side effects and to avoid unnecessary hospital visits >80%: Patient perspective of quality of care of doctor and nurses: Technical skills, interpersonal skills, information administration, and availability to patients. Perspective of care management: Hospital staff interpersonal skills (81.2), the exchange of information (77.6), waiting time (72.2), hospital access (71), and comfort (78.4).
Caravatta et al. (2020) [35] Italy	To report the experience and organisational planning of radiotherapy during the first two phases of the emergency, lockdown phase 1 and post-lockdown phase II	Retrospective N = 1 institution NA	Hospital Pre-COVID-19: 09/03–04/05/19 COVID-19 period: 09/03–04/05/20 Lockdown I: 09/03 –04/05/20 Lockdown II: 25–31/05/20	Secondary data; hospital records	Hospital data Desc. stats	Follow-up visits were uninterrupted in the first lockdown, replaced with telephone consultations. Laboratory and instrumental exams were viewed via telematics Multidisciplinary Tumour Board meetings were held via telematics platform. Clinic opened for in-person visits after the second lockdown.
Clark et al. (2021) [48] England	To assess the national impact of COVID-19 on the prescribing of systemic anti-cancer treatment	Retrospective NA NA	Hospital Pre-COVID-19: September, 2019, to February, 2020. COVID-19 period: April–June, 2020	Secondary data; electronic health registry system	Hospital data: NHS prior approval web database Desc. stats; chi-square	Uptake of teleconsultations at national level. Initially the number of registrations of new systemic anti-cancer treatments decreased but average monthly registrations had exceeded pre-pandemic levels by June, 2020, due to other risk-reducing measures such as telephone consultations, facemasks, and physical distancing.
De Marinis et al. (2020) [36] Italy	To prove that such proactive management allowed for the minimisation of contagion among patients with lung cancer through the maximisation of preventive measures	Patient and provider Prospective N = 1 institution N = 477 patients, 23–89 years old	Hospital 1 month; March 2020	Secondary data; hospital records	Hospital data Desc. stats	Adoption of telemedicine for follow-up visits (phone or email) Evaluation of CT scan imaging via telematics A total of 325 (100%) patients received triage phone call Follow-up visit cancellation was proposed to 8/16 patients (50%) upon telematics consultation for radiology exam
Earp et al. (2020) [40] USA	Examine the early effect of hospital and state-mandated restrictions on orthopaedic surgery department	Retrospective N = 1 institution NA	Hospital COVID-19 period: 16/03–12/04/20 Study period: 14/02/–15/03/20 Control period: 16/03–12/04/19	Secondary data; Billing database	Hospital data Desc. stats; t-test	Surgical department: Increased uptake of telemedicine (telephone encounter or video encounters) Clinic visits performed via telemedicine increased from 0.3% to 81.2%
Frey et al. (2020) [62] USA	(1) To evaluate the quality of life (QoL) of women with ovarian cancer during the pandemic (2) Evaluate the effects of the pandemic on cancer-related treatment.	Cross-sectional N = 555 20–85 years old	Web-based 30/03–13/04/20	Primary data; survey	Online survey using: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Cancer Worry Scale t-test; ANOVA; Mann–Whitney U test; Kruskal–Wallis test; linear regression analysis	Online services included: telemedicine, counselling, and survivor networks 25% used telemedicine for gynaecologic oncology care Adaption of telemedicine was associated with higher levels of cancer worry.
Goenka et al. (2021) [31] USA	Review implementation (1) Patient access to care (2) Billing implication	Provider Observational N = 1 institution 22–93 years old	Hospital 01/01–01/05/20	Secondary data; hospital data	Telemedicine platform Desc. stats; logistic regression	In-person visits decreased from 100% to 21% Telehealth appointments: 2-way audio-video (60%) or telephone (40%) Older patient age less likely to have 2-way audio-video encounters Inconsistent use of audio-video platform. Telehealth’s financial sustainability for all care questioned
Kamposioras et al. (2020) [59] England	(1) To investigate the perceptions of service changes imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. (2) To identify the determinant of anxiety in patients with colorectal cancer	Patient Cross-sectional N = 143 ≥18 years	Hospital 18/05–01/07/20	Primary data; survey	Survey using: Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) Desc. stats; chi-squared; Fisher exact test; logistic regression analysis	78% participants had telephone consultation (83% met needs) and 6% had video consultation (80% acceptance rate) 40% had radiologic scan results discussed over the phone (96% met needs). Preferred consultation method: face-to-face 40% and 38% wanted a choice
Kotsen et al. (2021) [42] USA	To examine the effect of rapid scaling to tobacco treatment telehealth for tobacco-dependent cancer patient	Patient and provider Retrospective N = 418 Adults	Hospital: 01/01–30/04/20	Secondary data; electronic medical records	Medical records: attendance rates for in-person counselling visits versus telehealth counselling visits. Desc. stats; chi-squared; logistic regression analysis	100% visits transferred to telehealth by March 2020 Increase in attendance: 75% attendance for telehealth visits compared to 60.3% in-person visits Telehealth visit had 2.30 times the odds of completion compared with those of an in-person visit. Older aged patients had more challenges with telehealth setup High patient acceptance with tobacco telehealth treatment User-friendly telehealth platform is critical
Kwek et al. (2021) [47] Singapore	To describe outpatient attendance and treatment caseloads during COVID-19 compared with the corresponding period pre-COVID-19.	Retrospective N = 1 institution NA	Hospital COVID-19 period 03/02–23/05/20 Pre-COVID-19 period 03/02–23/05/19	Secondary data; health records	Hospital data Desc. stats	Increase in teleconsultation for surveillance follow-ups and outpatient consultations accounting for a 30.7% decrease in total face-to-face clinic consultations. Pharmacy department provided tele-counselling and medication delivery. Teleconsultations for support services including genetic counselling and psychosocial support. Telecommunication used for communication between families and patients in the palliative setting and with respect to advance care planning.
Lonergan et al. (2020) [15] USA	To analyse the change in video visit volume	Provider Cross-sectional N = 17 departments NA	Hospital Pre-COVID period: 01/01–14/03/20 Post-COVID-19 period: 15/03– 05/04/20	Secondary data; electronic medical records	Medical records: number of telehealth visits between two periods. Desc. stats; p-values	Rapid expansion of telehealth (video consultations) from <20% to 72% Pre-COVID-19 period: 2284 video visits (average 208 ± 75 per week) Post-COVID-19 period: 12,946 video visits (average 1177 ± 120 per week) Video visits increased from 7–18% to 54–68%, between the pre- and post-COVID-19 periods. No disparity in uptake based on age, race/ethnicity, language, or payer.
Lopez et al. (2021) [49] Canada	To describe the adaptions made to implement virtual cancer rehabilitation at the onset of coronavirus disease 2019	Multi-method N = 12 patients, N = 12 providers Adults	Hospital 16/03–12/06/20	Primary data; interviews Secondary data; hospital data	Semi-structured interviews via telephone Changes in volume from hospital records Desc. stats; qualitative synthesis and thematic analysis	All in-person visits were rescheduled and converted to telephone visits through the Ontario Telemedicine Network (OTN), a secure 2-way videoconferencing telehealth platform: 1968 virtual patient visits 221 referrals: decrease of 153 relative to the previous 3 months. Number of referrals increased over first 90 days, from 37, 72, and 112. Video appointments increased after the first 30 days. Increase or maintenance in the number of completed visits by appointment type compared with in-person care. Attendance rates ranged from 80% to 93% across visit types Re: Access to care: increased access and attendance, patients receptive to telemedicine, increased programme capacity, communication barriers, challenges accessing a private space to discuss their health issues at home Re: Meeting support needs: sense of reassurance and felt supported, helped cope with worries, some felt isolated by telemedicine. Re: Confidence with assessment and care plan: lack of in-person examination, relying on self-report/assessment of patients, worried about accuracy of describing symptoms, agreed video better than telephone visits, both agreed preference for an initial in-person assessment
Maganty, et al. (2020) [30] USA	To evaluate differences in patient populations being evaluated for cancer before and during the COVID-19 pandemic	Retrospective N = 1 institution NA	Hospital Pre-COVID-19 period: 3–5 months prior to 17/03/20 COVID-19 period: 3 to 5 months after 17/03/20	Secondary data; electronic health records	Hospital data Linear and logistic regression analysis	Telehealth visits offered: Increase from pre-COVID-19 to during COVID-19 (1/585 versus 7/362) for screening and referrals. Cohorts were similar in terms of demographics and cancer sites.
Mahl et al. (2020) [63] Brazil	To evaluate delays in care for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) in post-treatment follow-up or palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic, i.e.: self-perception of anxiety or sadness, fear of COVID-19 infection, cancer-related complications during social isolation, self-medication, diagnosis of COVID-19, and death between patients with and without delayed cancer care	Cross-sectional N = 1 institution N = 31 patients Adults	Hospital 01/01/–30/07/20	Primary data; interview Secondary data; medical records	Telephone interviews Desc. stats; Mann–Whitney U test and Fishers exact test	No report of telemedicine use. Cost of telemedicine acted as a barrier to care as they could not afford teleconsultation technologies for palliative and follow-up services.
Merz et al. (2021) [43] Italy	To assess how breast cancer survivors perceived electronic medical record-assisted telephone follow-up	Prospective N = 137 34–89 years old	Hospital 09/03–02/06/20	Primary data; survey	Online survey Desc. stats; Pearson’s, Fisher’s exact; Mann–Whitney U and chi-squared tests	80.3% were satisfied with telephone follow-up compared to a standard follow-up visit. 89.8% were satisfied with the duration of the phone call 43.8% would like to have electronic medical record assisted telephone follow-up in the future. Of the latter, median age was 62 years, 10% had cancer previously, and majority had early-stage breast cancer (68.3%). No clinical indicators were associated with willingness to undergo future electronic medical record assisted telephone follow-up.
Mitra, et al. (2020) [64] India	To study the challenges faced by cancer patients in India during the COVID-19 pandemic	Cross-sectional N = 36 ≥18 years old	Hospital 01–15/05/20	Primary data; survey	Online questionnaire Self-grading anxiety levels % reason for their anxiety Desc. stats	41.7% reported problems with slot availability for teleconsultation, 33% had network issues.
Narayanan et al. (2021) [44] USA	To report the feasibility of conducting integrative oncology (IO) physician consultations via telehealth in 2020 compared to the same period of the previous year.	Retrospective N = 1352 ≥18 years old	Hospital Cohort 1 (in person): 21/04–21/10/19 Cohort 2 (telehealth): 21/04–21/10/20	Primary data; questionnaire Secondary data; electronic medical records	Questionnaires: Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) to assess symptom burden. Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW) Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-10) to assess QoL. Desc. stats; t-tests Chi-squared and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests	842 patients in-person visits from (April–October 2019) 509 patient telehealth consultations from April to October 2020 MYCaW response: a higher percentage of telehealth patients wanted to discuss diet and nutrition, exercise, herbs, and supplements. In-person cohort had a greater interest in discussing symptom management. In-person cohort had worse self-reported ESAS symptom scores. There was no significant difference in PROMIS-10 score for mental health between the two cohorts For PROMIS-10, in-person cohort reported worse physical health than the telehealth cohort
Parikh, et al. (2020) [61] USA	To evaluate the overall change in resource use associated with the transition to telemedicine in a radiation oncology department	Descriptive N = 1 patient NA	Hospital Using a patient undergoing 28-fraction treatment course, exact timeframe not specified.	Primary data; interviews and surveys of personnel	Process maps were created for traditional in-person and telemedicine-based workflow processes. Interviews with personnel to obtain time spent and resources. Costs from the department’s financial officer.	Telemedicine reduced provider costs USD 586 compared with traditional workflow. Patients saved USD 170 per treatment course Majority of consultations, follow- up visits, and on-treatment visits were converted to telemedicine
Patt et al. (2020a) [65] USA	To gain insight into the impact of COVID-19 on the US senior cancer population	Retrospective NA NA	Hospital Pre-COVID-19: March–July 2019 COVID-19 period: March–July 2020	Secondary data; database	Medical claims database Desc. stats; Wilcoxon rank-sum test	Telehealth visits introduced, not the same extent as other services owing to strain COVID-19 put on the hospital and resources, oncology team was small which limited its ability to adapt. Telehealth visits did not offset the total reduction in in-person evaluation and management services visits.
Patt, et al. (2020b) [54] USA	(1) To describe onboarding and utilisation of telemedicine across a large statewide community oncology practice (2) To evaluate trends, barriers, and opportunities in care delivery during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic	Cross-sectional N = 640 clinicians at 221 sites of service. N = 80 survey NA	Community setting February to April 2020 Survey: August 2020	Secondary data; telehealth platform Primary data; survey	HIPAA-compliant telehealth platform Survey: practice leaders Desc. stats	From April–October 2020, telemedicine grew: 15% to 20% of new patient visits and 20% to 25% of established patient visits 96% clinicians were using telemedicine. 59% conducted new patient visits with telemedicine. 64% reported the use of telemedicine helps expedite diagnosis and treatment more than seeing patients in person in the clinic. 55% of clinicians managed urgent issues by telemedicine. 80% believed that patients benefited from urgent assessment by telemedicine. 57% believed an emergency department visit or a hospital visit was avoided by telemedicine. 50% fewer no-shows versus face-to-face during COVID-19 Clinicians reported patient benefits: decreased exposure risk, decreased transportation. Barriers: broadband access in rural areas and technical difficulties (older patients) Virtual support groups (social workers provided) and tele-pharmacy
Patt et al. (2021) [53] USA	To assess the: (1) Implementation of multidisciplinary telemedicine in community oncology: (2) Level of satisfaction in providers and patients (3) Changes in clinic operations (4) Opportunities and barriers	Cross-sectional N = 640 clinicians at 221 sites of service N = 34 survey NA	Community setting March–September, 2020	Secondary data; telehealth platform Primary data; survey	HIPAA-compliant telehealth platform Survey: practice leaders Desc. stats	>50,000 telemedicine visits with patients by October. From March to September, telemedicine grew to serve 15–20% of new patients and 20–25% of established patients. 76% satisfied with telehealth platform Patients: Desire to maintain the telehealth option in the future. Grateful and happy to have the option to visit their clinicians on a telemedicine platform. Reported a 10.5% reduction in distress Challenges providers heard from patients: Older patient population technology hassle. 35% patients were frustrated with technology first-time use Broadband access in rural areas Technical difficulties
Rodler et al. (2020) [57] Germany	To determine patients’ perceptions on adoption of telehealth as a response to the pandemic and its sustainability in the future	Patient Cross-sectional N = 92 33–88 years old	Hospital 1 week	Primary data; survey	Survey via email, phone, in-person visits using: 10-item Likert scales. Desc. stats; Wilcoxon matched-pair signed-rank, Mann–Whitney U and chi- squared test	Adoption of telehealth Virtual multidisciplinary tumour boards via video conference 62.6% patients prefer to pursue in-person visits Majority of patients were not inclined to continue telehealth for staging results and treatment decisions Patients on immunotherapy are less willing to continue with telemedicine in the future
Romani et al. (2021) [32] Canada	(1) To examine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the operation of satellite radiation oncology facility run completely virtually from April to May 2020 (2) Patient satisfaction	Patient Retrospective observational N = 1 institution NA	Hospital Pre-COVID-19 period April–May 2019 COVID-19 period April–May 2020	Secondary data; health records Primary data; survey	Hospital data PROM’s using: Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) tool Patient satisfaction using: survey Desc. stats; chi-squared, Fisher’s exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests	Successful adoption of telemedicine, increased use from 20.7% in 2019 to 100% in 2020. Patient satisfaction with telemedicine remained high between the two periods. A remote viewing system allowed radiation oncologists and physicians to remotely view alignment of computed tomography scans.
Sawka, et al. (2021) [37] Canada	Describe the management of small low-risk papillary thyroid cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic	Prospective observational N = 181 >18 years old	Hospital 12/03–30/10/20	Secondary data; electronic medical records	Hospital data Desc. stats	Only 6.8% (9/133) patients had an in-person clinical or research visit during the pandemic (93.2% teleconsultations). 92.3% (167/181) consented to telephone communication 79.0% (143/181) consented to videoconferencing communication Advantages: reduced travel and waiting time and associated expenses for patients and caregivers; enables family members to attend; have “time and space” to make decisions in own environment. Challenges: communication issues with those who are hearing-impaired, languages barriers, privacy considerations.
Shannon, et al. (2020) [45] USA	To determine how visit and genetic testing volume was impacted by new telephone genetic counselling and home testing.	NA Observational N = 1 institution NA	Hospital 6 weeks	Secondary data; electronic medical records, log entries	Pre, post-COVID-19 data: department’s internal database and internal logs, free-text counsellor log entries Desc. stats; Pearson’s chi- squared test	Shifted to telephone genetic counselling Maintained 99% of total visit capacity (444 vs. 447) and decrease in no-shows 9.5% to 7.3% Fewer receiving telephone service consented to genetic testing compared to pre-COVID-19 period 96 of 303 samples were not sent to laboratories (32%) Reported obstacles were new sample required (missing sample, quality not sufficient, or mislabelled sample), non-enrolment in the online patient portal, and technological difficulties.
Smrke, et al. (2020) [55] UK	To evaluate the impact of telemedicine on patients, clinicians, care delivery	Patient and provider Cross-sectional N = 316 >18 years old	Hospital 23/03–24/04/20	Primary data; survey Secondary data; electronic medical records	Survey to patients Online survey to clinicians Desc. stats	75% of planned in-person appointments were converted to telemedicine. Face-to-face appointments remained for urgent patients Clinicians found telemedicine efficient and indicated lack of physical examination did not often affect care provision 83% clinicians indicated workload was the same as face-to-face. 83% clinicians indicated lack of video-based assessment was a barrier to care. High rate of patient satisfaction with telemedicine Reasons for telemedicine preference were reduced travel time, expenses, and convenience. 80% of patients desired some telemedicine as part of their future care 48% would not want to hear bad news using telemedicine; 20% would not want to hear any scan results on the telephone. Patient preference: mostly telemedicine = 39%; only telemedicine = 6%; mostly face-to-face 34%; only face-to-face = 20% Neither sex nor education level impacted choice of consultation methods, though patients who preferred face-to-face only were slightly older (median age, 69 years vs. 58 years) than those who preferred at least some telemedicine.
Somani et al. (2020) [58] UK	To assess outpatient and telemedicine (phone and video) volume during the pandemic.	NA Observational N = 1 institution NA	Hospital 13/03–07/05/20	Secondary data; hospital data	Hospital appointment records Desc. stats	2361 outpatient clinic slots were scheduled: 66.3% were virtual consultations; 20% face-to-face; 13.6% were cancelled 57% of face-to-face consultations were related to flexible cystoscopy. 90% of cancellations were diagnostic flexible cystoscopy which were electively triaged and deferred Patient and clinician benefits but longer implications on health outcomes are unknown.
Sonagli et al. (2021) [46] Brazil	To demonstrate how the use of telemedicine was an efficient tool to maintain outpatient appointments for breast cancer patients follow-up and surveillance	Patient Retrospective cohort N = 87 >18 years old	Hospital 05/06–10/10/20	Secondary data; hospital data	Telemedicine platform Desc. stats and Kruskal–Wallis test	49.4% decrease in outpatient appointments 77 patients (89%) had their appointment through telemedicine (video) 10 patients had connection issues (not influenced by age or socioeconomic factors).
Wai et al. (2020) [41] USA	To understand how the surgical care of head and neck cancer patients was affected, specifically assessing surgical case volume, time to care, safety of the patients, and clinical team	Retrospective N= 1 institution NA	Hospital Pre-COVID-19: 16/03–13/04/19 COVID-19 period: 16/03–16/04/20	Secondary data; medical notes and database	Hospital database Patient charts review Desc. stats; chi-squared and t-test	New patient referrals during COVID-19 decreased: 81 (45 via telemedicine) versus pre-COVID-19: 119 No statistical difference between time from referral placement and evaluation. Time from referral to first visit (pre-COVID-19: 22 days ±50) vs. (COVID-19 period: 9.7 days ±8.7).
Wu et al. (2020) [52] Taiwan	To assess smartphone-enabled telehealth model for palliative care family conferences	Patient and family members Pilot observational N = 14 (13 cancer patients, 1 stroke patient) >18 years old	Hospital February to April 2020	Primary data; Discussion	Discussion was summarised and uploaded onto the hospital electronic health record system Desc. stats; chi-squared test and logistic regression	5 families rated video conferencing as good or very good (36%) 9 families were neutral (64%). 10 families were willing to use video conference again. 7 families would prefer to communicate with medical teams face-to-face No statistically significant sociodemographic differences were evident between those neutral or satisfied with telehealth service.
Zuliani et al. (2020) [60] Italy	To analyse how organisational changes related to COVID-19 have impacted: (i) Volume of oncological activity (compared to same period of 2019) (ii) Hospital admissions of “active” oncological patients for SARS-CoV-2	Retrospective N = 1 institution N = 241 surveyed NA	Hospital Pre-COVID-19: 01/01–31/03/19 COVID-19 period: 01/01–31/03/20	Secondary data; health records Primary data; questionnaire	Hospital data: Medical charts Questionnaire of acceptance of protective measures Desc. stats and t-test	90% of follow-up consultations and 40% of specialist visits were conducted by telephone service Acceptance of phone-based follow-ups and restaging visits perceived as “not very adequate” (17%) or “not adequate at all” (18%).