Unequal Impact of COVID-19 on Private and Academic Neurosurgical Workforce: Results of an International Survey.

Background: Since the COVID-19 outbreak several manuscripts regarding neurosurgical practice during this pandemic have been published. Qualitative studies on how the pandemic affected neurosurgeons, with additional focus on their practice, are still scarce. This study's objective was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on various aspects of the professional and private life of a homogeneous group of international neurosurgeons affiliated to the European Association of Neurosurgical Societies (EANS). Methods: Neurosurgeons from Europe and abroad were invited to participate in an online survey endorsed by the Individual Membership Committee of the EANS. The survey captured a subjective snapshot of the impact of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on EANS members and was advertised through its Institutional website. In addition to departmental data, personal feeling of safety, financial security, local precautions, number of surgeries performed, changes in daily routine, and other practice-related information were inquired. Differences among practice types were closely reviewed. Results: The survey was distributed between April and May 2020: 204 neurosurgeons participated. Participants were typically active EANS members (73%), consultants (57.9%), from university hospitals (64.5%). Elective surgical practice was still ongoing only for 15% of responders, whereas 18.7% of them had already transitioned to COVID-19 and emergency medical services. While 65.7% of participants thought their institutions were adequately prepared, lack of testing for SARS-CoV-2, and scarcity of personal protective equipment were still a matter of concern for most of them. Overall surgical activity dropped by 68% (cranial by 54%, spine by 71%), and even emergencies decreased by 35%. COVID-19 prompted changes in communication in 74% of departments, 44% increased telemedicine by >50%. While most neurosurgeons had concerns about personal and families' health, financial outlook appeared to be gloomy only for private practitioners. Conclusion: The lockdown imposed in many countries by the COVID-19 outbreak called for immediate modification of working routine and resulted in a dramatic decrease of elective surgical procedures. Neurosurgeons share common concerns but were not equally exposed to the personal health and financial dangers of the ongoing pandemic.

A simple mathematical tool to forecast COVID-19 cumulative case numbers.

OBJECTIVE: Mathematical models are known to help determine potential intervention strategies by providing an approximate idea of the transmission dynamics of infectious diseases. To develop proper responses, not only are more accurate disease spread models needed, but also those that are easy to use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As of July 1, 2020, we selected the 20 countries with the highest numbers of COVID-19 cases in the world. Using the Verhulst-Pearl logistic function formula, we calculated estimates for the total number of cases for each country. We compared these estimates to the actual figures given by the WHO on the same dates. Finally, the formula was tested for longer-term reliability at t = 18 and t = 40 weeks. RESULTS: The Verhulst-Pearl logistic function formula estimated the actual numbers precisely, with only a 0.5% discrepancy on average for the first month. For all countries in the study and the world at large, the estimates for the 40th week were usually overestimated, although the estimates for some countries were still relatively close to the actual numbers in the forecasting long term. The estimated number for the world in general was about 8 times that actually observed for the long term. CONCLUSIONS: The Verhulst-Pearl equation has the advantage of being very straightforward and applicable in clinical use for predicting the demand on hospitals in the short term of 4-6 weeks, which is usually enough time to reschedule elective procedures and free beds for new waves of the pandemic patients.

COVID-legal study: neurosurgeon experience in Britain during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic - medico-legal considerations.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a significant number of changes to elective and emergency neurosurgical practice.Materials and Methods: This paper reports the results of an online survey of Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS) members undertaken between 10th and 24th of June 2020 regarding changes in consent practice in response to COVID-19, as well as the physical challenges experienced while operating under higher levels of personal protective equipment (PPE).Results: Despite the real and substantial risks associated with COVID-19, 23% of surgeons reported they were not made any changes to their usual consent process, and 54% of surgeons indicated that they made reference to COVID-19-associated risks in their written consent documentation. 93% of neurosurgeons reported physical difficulties operating using PPE; 62% reported visors/goggles fogging up, 55% experienced 'overheating', 62% reported fatigue, and 82% of surgeons reported difficulty communicating with the theatre staff.Conclusions: This survey highlights discrepancies in the consent practice between neurosurgeons which needs to be addressed at both local and national levels. The PPE being used in neurosurgical operations is not designed for use with specialist equipment (82% of respondents reported having to remove PPE to use the microscope) and the reported physical difficulties using PPE intraoperatively could significantly impact on both neurosurgeon performance and patient outcomes. This requires urgent attention by NHS procurement and management and should be urgently escalated to trust occupational health authorities as a workplace safety concern.