Social media growth of orthopaedic surgery residency programs in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In the Spring of 2020, residency programs across the country experienced rapid and drastic changes to their application process as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In response, residency programs shifted to virtual events and began harnessing social media to communicate with applicants. AIM: To analyze the changes in social media usage by orthopaedic surgery programs in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Based on the 2019 residency and fellowship electronic database, accredited US orthopaedic surgery programs were reviewed for social media presence on Instagram and Twitter. Approximately 47000 tweets from 2011-2021 were extracted through the Twitter application programming interface. We extracted: Total number of followers, accounts following, tweets, likes, date of account creation, hashtags, and mentions. Natural language processing was utilized for tweet sentiment analysis and classified as positive, neutral, or negative. Instagram data was collected and deemed current as of August 11, 2021. The account foundation date analysis was based on the date recognized as the start of the COVID-19 outbreak in the United States, before or after March 1, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 85 (42.3%) orthopaedic surgery residency program Twitter handles were identified. Thirty-five (41.2%) programs joined Twitter in the nine months after the 2020 covid outbreak. In 2020, there was a 126.6% increase in volume of tweets by orthopaedic surgery residency accounts as compared to 2019. The median number of followers was 474.5 (interquartile range 205.0-796.5). The account with the highest number of tweets was Hospital for Special Surgery (@HSpecialSurgery) with 13776 tweets followed by University of Virginia (@UVA_Ortho) with 5063 and Yale (@OrthoAtYale) with 899. Sentiment analysis before 2020 revealed 30.4% positive, 60.8% neutral, and 8.8% negative sentiments across tweets. Interestingly, the positive sentiment percentage increased in 2020 from 30.4% to 34.5%. Of the 201 ACGME-accredited orthopaedic residency programs on Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database, 115 (57.2%) participate on Instagram, with 101 (87.8%) identified as "resident"-managed vs 14 (12.2%) identified as "department"-managed. Over three quarters (77.4%) of Instagram accounts were created after March 1, 2020. The average number of followers per account was 1089.5 with an average of 58.9 total posts. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates a substantial growth of Instagram and Twitter presence by orthopaedic surgery residency programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. These data suggest that orthopaedic residency programs have utilized social media as a new way to communicate with applicants and showcase their programs in light of the challenges presented by the pandemic.

The acute phase response identifies cancer patients with adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection as quantified by the OnCovid Inflammatory Score

We sought to determine parameters of the acute phase response, a feature of innate immunity activated by infectious noxae and cancer, deranged by Covid-19 and establish oncological indices' prognostic potential for patients with concomitant cancer and Covid-19. Between 27/02 and 23/06/2020, OnCovid retrospectively accrued 1,318 consecutive referrals of patients with cancer and Covid-19 aged 18 from the U.K., Spain, Italy, Belgium, and Germany. Patients with myeloma, leukemia, or insufficient data were excluded. The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), prognostic nutritional index (PNI), modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS), and prognostic index (PI) were evaluated for their prognostic potential, with the NLR, PLR, and PNI risk stratifications dichotomized around median values and the pre-established risk categorizations from literature utilized for the mGPS and PI. 1,071 eligible patients were randomly assorted into a training set (TS, n=529) and validation set (VS, n=542) matched for age (67.9±13.3 TS, 68.5±13.5 VS), presence of 1 comorbidity (52.1% TS, 49.8% VS), development of 1 Covid-19 complication (27% TS, 25.9% VS), and active malignancy at Covid-19 diagnosis (66.7% TS, 61.6% VS). Among all 1,071 patients, deceased patients tended to categorize into poor risk groups for the NLR, PNI, mGPS, and PI (P<0.0001) with a return to pre-Covid-19 diagnosis NLR, PNI, and mGPS categorizations following recovery (P<0.01). In the TS, higher mortality rates were associated with NLR>6 (44.6% vs 28%, P<0.0001), PNI<40 (46.6% vs 20.9%, P<0.0001), mGPS (50.6% for mGPS2 vs 30.4% and 11.4% for mGPS1 and 0, P<0.0001), and PI (50% for PI2 vs 40% for PI1 and 9.1% for PI0, P<0.0001). Findings were confirmed in the VS (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Patients in poor risk categories had shorter median overall survival [OS], (NLR>6 30 days 95%CI 1-63, PNI<40 23 days 95%CI 10-35, mGPS2 20 days 95%CI 8-32, PI2 23 days 95%CI 1-56) compared to patients in good risk categories, for whom median OS was not reached (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The PLR was not associated with survival. Analyses of survival in the VS confirmed the NLR (P<0.0001), PNI (P<0.0001), PI (P<0.01), and mGPS (P<0.001) as predictors of survival. In a multivariable Cox regression model including all inflammatory indices and pre-established prognostic factors for severe Covid-19 including sex, age, comorbid burden, malignancy status, and receipt of anti-cancer therapy at Covid-19 diagnosis, the PNI was the only factor to emerge with a significant hazard ratio [HR] in both TS and VS analysis (TS HR 1.97, 95%CI 1.19-3.26, P=0.008;VS HR 2.48, 95%CI 1.47- 4.20, P=0.001). We conclude that systemic inflammation drives mortality from Covid-19 through hypoalbuminemia and lymphocytopenia as measured by the PNI and propose the PNI as the OnCovid Inflammatory Score (OIS) in this context.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence and safety of vaccines in cancer patients who recovered from COVID-19

Background: Little is known about natural anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence post COVID-19 and safety of vaccines in COVID-19 survivors with cancer. Methods: Among 2795 consecutive patients (pts) with COVID-19 and cancer registered to OnCovid between 01/2020 and 02/2021, we examined natural seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies (SC2Ab, IgM or IgG) in pts tested post-infection. We analysed prevalence and safety of SARS-Cov-2 vaccine administration in pts who underwent clinical re-assessment at participating institutions. Results: Out of 350 pts tested for SC2Ab, 318 (90.9%) had a positive SC2Ab titre post-convalescence. Neither baseline features (sex, age, comorbidities, smoking history, tumour stage/status, anticancer-therapy and primary tumour) nor COVID-19-specific features (complications, hospitalization, sequelae) were significantly associated SC2Ab status. Receipt of COVID-19 specific therapy was higher among SC2Ab+ pts (62.6% vs 40.6%, p=0.0156). Out of 593 pts with known vaccination status, 178 (30%) had received 1 dose, whilst 38 pts (6.4%) received 2 doses of mRNA based (70.2%) or viral vector vaccine (17.4%). Vaccinated pts were more likely aged ≥65 years (59% vs 48.3%, p=0.0172), with loco-regional tumour stage (56% vs 40.8%, p=0.0014), on anti-cancer therapy at COVID-19 (49.1% vs 38.2%, p=0.0168) and history of prior hospitalisation due to COVID-19 (61.8% vs 48.3%, p=0.0029). Vaccine-related adverse events were reported for 18/56 evaluable pts (32.1%) and included injection site reactions (50%), fever (44.4%), arthralgias (33.3%), fatigue (33.3%) and allergy (5.5%). No long-term vaccine-related morbidity was reported. Conclusions: We report high seroprevalence (>90%) of SC2Ab in convalescent cancer pts who survived COVID-19 irrespective of baseline demographics, oncological characteristics and COVID-19 severity. COVID-19 vaccines appear to be safe in cancer pts with history of prior infection. Clinical trial identification: NCT04393974. Legal entity responsible for the study: Imperial College London. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: D.J. Pinato: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: ViiV Healthcare;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Bayer;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Eisai;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Amgen;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: BMS;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Pfizer;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Nanostring tech. A. Cortellini: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: MSD;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: BMS;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Novartis;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: SunPharma;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Astellas. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Family Caregiver Needs and Preferences for Virtual Training to Manage Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia: Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are associated with increased stress, burden, and depression among family caregivers of people with dementia. STAR-Caregivers Virtual Training and Follow-up (STAR-VTF) is adapted from an evidence-based, in-person program that trains family caregivers to manage BPSD. We used a human-centered design approach to obtain feedback from family caregivers about STAR-VTF. The program will be evaluated using a pragmatic randomized trial. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to understand the needs of family caregivers for improving BPSD management and the extent to which caregivers perceived that STAR-VTF could address those needs. METHODS: Between July and September 2019, we conducted 15 semistructured interviews with family caregivers of people with dementia who receive care at Kaiser Permanente Washington in the Seattle metropolitan area. We identified participants from electronic health records, primarily based on a prescription for antipsychotic medication for the person with dementia (a proxy for caregivers dealing with BPSD). We showed caregivers low-fidelity prototypes of STAR-VTF online self-directed materials and verbally described potential design elements. We obtained caregiver feedback on these elements, focusing on their needs and preferences and perceived barriers to using STAR-VTF. We used a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and aggregated codes to develop themes. RESULTS: The idea of a virtual training program for learning to manage BPSD appealed to caregivers. They said health care providers did not provide adequate education in the early disease stages about the personality and behavior symptoms that can affect people with dementia. Caregivers found it unexpected and frustrating when the person with dementia began experiencing BPSD, symptoms they felt unprepared to manage. Accordingly, caregivers expressed a strong desire for the health care organization to offer programs such as STAR-VTF much sooner. Caregivers had already put considerable effort into problem solving challenging behaviors. They anticipated deriving less value from STAR-VTF at that point. Nonetheless, many were interested in the virtual aspect of the training due to the convenience of receiving help from home and the perception that help from a virtual program would be timelier than traditional service modalities (eg, face to face). Given caregivers' limited time, they suggested dividing the STAR-VTF content into chunks to review as time permitted. Caregivers were interested in having a STAR-VTF provider for additional support in managing challenging behaviors. Caregivers reported a preference for having the same coach for the program duration. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers we interviewed would likely accept a virtual training program such as STAR-VTF to obtain information about BPSD and receive help managing it. Family caregivers anticipated deriving more value if STAR-VTF was offered earlier in the disease course.

Practice Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

On March 14, 2020, the Surgeon General of the United States urged a widespread cessation of all elective surgery across the country. The suddenness of this mandate and the concomitant spread of the COVID-19 virus left many hospital systems, orthopaedic practices, and patients with notable anxiety and confusion as to the near, intermediate, and long-term future of our healthcare system. As with most businesses in the United States during this time, many orthopaedic practices have been emotionally and fiscally devastated because of this crisis. Furthermore, this pandemic is occurring at a time where small and midsized orthopaedic groups are already struggling to cover practice overhead and to maintain autonomy from larger health systems. It is anticipated that many groups will experience financial demise, leading to substantial global consolidation. Because the authors represent some of the larger musculoskeletal multispecialty groups in the country, we are uniquely positioned to provide a framework with recommendations to best weather the ensuing months. We think these recommendations will allow providers and their staff to return to an infrastructure that can adjust immediately to the pent-up healthcare demand that may occur after the COVID-19 pandemic. In this editorial, we address practice finances, staffing, telehealth, operational plans after the crisis, and ethical considerations.