Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Anatomic Pathology, Taipei Institute of Pathology, Taipei, Taiwan
  • 2 Department of Pathology, Kameda Medical Center, Kamogawa, Japan
  • 3 Department of Pathology, North Bengal Medical College, Darjeeling, India
  • 4 Department of Pathology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
  • 5 Department of Pathology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China
  • 6 Department of Pathology, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
  • 7 Department of Pathology, Perhimpunan Onkologi Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
  • 8 Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Putra Malaysia University, Serdang, Malaysia
  • 9 Division of Laboratory Medicine, Philippine Heart Center, Quezon City, Philippines
  • 10 Department of Pathology, Cho Ray Hospital, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
  • 11 Department of Anatomical Pathology, PathWest, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  • 12 Department of Hospital Pathology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea
  • 13 Department of Pathology and Thyroid Disease Center, Izumi City General Hospital, Izumi, Japan
  • 14 Department of Pathology, Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan
Cancer Cytopathol, 2020 Dec;128(12):895-904.
PMID: 32931161 DOI: 10.1002/cncy.22354

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the current study was to examine the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on various aspects of cytology practice in the Asia-Pacific region.

METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to cytopathology laboratories in 24 Asia-Pacific countries to explore the impact of restrictive measures on access to health care, use of general and personal protective equipment (PPE), and changes in cytology workflow and workload from February to April 2020.

RESULTS: A total of 167 cytopathology laboratories from 24 countries responded to the survey; the majority reported that restrictive measures that limited the accessibility of health care services had been implemented in their cities and/or countries (80.8%) and their hospitals (83.8%). The respondents noted that COVID-19 had an impact on the cytologic workflow as well as the workload. Approximately one-half of the participants reported the implementation of new biosafety protocols (54.5%) as well as improvements in laboratory facilities (47.3%). Rearrangement or redeployment of the workforce was reported in 53.3% and 34.1% of laboratories, respectively. The majority of the respondents reported a significant reduction (>10%) in caseload associated with both gynecological (82.0%) and nongynecological specimens (78.4%). Most laboratories reported no significant change in the malignancy rates of both gynecological (67.7%) and nongynecological specimens (58.7%) compared with the same period in 2019.

CONCLUSIONS: The results of the survey demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a significant reduction in the number of cytology specimens examined along with the need to implement new biosafety protocols. These findings underscore the need for the worldwide standardization of biosafety protocols and cytology practice.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.