ABSTRACT
Background: This study assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on acute upper limb referrals and operative case-mix at the beginning and ease of British lockdown. Methods: A longitudinal multicentre observational cohort study was conducted for both upper limb trauma referrals and operative case-mix over a 12-week period (6 weeks from the beginning and 6 weeks from the ease of the national lockdown). Statistical analysis included median (± median absolute deviation), risk and odds ratios, and Fisher's exact test to calculate the statistical significance, set at p ≤ 0.05. Results: There was a 158% (n = 456 vs. 177) increase in upper limb referrals and 133% (n = 91 vs. 39) increase in the operative trauma caseload at the ease of lockdown compared with its commencement. An increase in sporting injuries was demonstrated (p=0.02), specifically cycling (p=0.004, OR=2.58). A significant increase in COVID-19 testing was demonstrated during the ease of lockdown (p=0.0001) with more patients having their management changed during the beginning of the pandemic (9.6% vs. 0.7%, p=0.0001). Of these patients, 47% went on to have delayed surgery within 6 months. No patients who underwent surgery tested positive for COVID-19 infection within 14 days post-operatively and no mortalities were recorded at 30 days. Conclusion: The ease of lockdown has seen upper limb referrals and operations more than double compared to early lockdown. With no patients testing positive for COVID-19 within 14 days of the procedure, this demonstrates that having upper limb surgery during the current pandemic is safe.
ABSTRACT
The response to the COVID-19 pandemic has raised the profile and level of interest in the use, acceptability, safety, and effectiveness of virtual outpatient consultations and telemedicine. These models of care are not new but a number of challenges have so far hindered widespread take-up and endorsement of these ways of working. With the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, remote and virtual working and consultation have become the default. This paper explores our experience of and learning from virtual and remote consultation and questions how this experience can be retained and developed for the future. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):301-304.
ABSTRACT
AIM: Restarting elective services presents a challenge to restore and improve many of the planned patient care pathways which have been suspended during the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A significant backlog of planned elective work has built up representing a considerable volume of patient need. We aimed to investigate the health status, quality of life, and the impact of delay for patients whose referrals and treatment for symptomatic joint arthritis had been delayed as a result of the response to COVID-19. METHODS: We interviewed 111 patients referred to our elective outpatient service and whose first appointments had been cancelled as a result of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Patients reported significant impacts on their health status and quality of life. Overall, 79 (71.2%) patients reported a further deterioration in their condition while waiting, with seven (6.3%) evaluating their health status as 'worse than death'. CONCLUSIONS: Waiting lists are clearly not benign and how to prioritize patients, their level of need, and access to assessment and treatment must be more sophisticated than simply relying on the length of time a patient has been waiting. This paper supports the contention that patients awaiting elective joint arthroplasty report significant impacts on their quality of life and health status. This should be given appropriate weight when patients are prioritized for surgery as part of the recovery of services following the COVID-19 pandemic. Elective surgery should not be seen as optional surgery-patients do not see it in this way.