Blinded intraoperative skill evaluations avoid gender-based bias.

INTRODUCTION: Gender bias has been identified consistently in written performance evaluations. Qualitative tools may provide a standardized way to evaluate surgical skill and minimize gender bias. We hypothesized that there is no difference in operative time or GEARS scores in robotic hysterectomy for men vs women surgeons. METHODS: Patients undergoing robotic hysterectomies performed between June 2019 and March 2020 at 8 hospitals within the same hospital system were captured into a prospective database. GEARS scores were assigned by crowd-sourced evaluators by a third party blinded to any surgeon- or patient-identifying information. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the mean operative time and GEARS scores for each group, and significant variables were included in a one-way ANCOVA to control for confounders. Two-tailed p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Seventeen women and 13 men performed a total of 188 hysterectomies; women performed 34 (18%) and men performed 153 (81%). Women surgeons had a higher mean operative time (133 ± 58 vs 86.3 ± 46 min, p = 0.024); after adjustment, there were no significant differences in operative time (p = 0.607). There was no significant difference between the genders in total GEARS score (20.0 ± 0.77 vs 20.2 ± 0.70, p = 0.415) or GEARS subcomponent scores: bimanual dexterity (3.98 ± 0.03 vs 4.00 ± 0.03, p = 0.705); depth perception (4.04 ± 0.04 vs 4.05 ± 0.02, p = 0.799); efficiency (3.79 ± 0.02 vs 3.82 ± 0.02, p = 0.437); force sensitivity (4.01 ± 0.04 vs 4.05 ± 0.05, p = 0.533); or robotic control (4.16 ± 0.03 vs 4.26 ± 0.01, p = 0.079). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in GEARS score between men vs women surgeons performing robotic hysterectomies. Video-based blinded assessment of skills may minimize gender biases when evaluating surgical skill for competency evaluation and credentialing.

The Risk of Readmission after Early Postpartum Discharge during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether early postpartum discharge during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was associated with a change in the odds of maternal postpartum readmissions. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of uncomplicated postpartum low-risk women in seven obstetrical units within a large New York health system. We compared the rate of postpartum readmissions within 6 weeks of delivery between two groups: low-risk women who had early postpartum discharge as part of our protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic (April 1-June 15, 2020) and similar low-risk patients with routine postpartum discharge from the same study centers 1 year prior. Statistical analysis included the use of Wilcoxon's rank-sum and chi-squared tests, Nelson-Aalen cumulative hazard curves, and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 8,206 patients included, 4,038 (49.2%) were patients who had early postpartum discharge during the COVID-19 pandemic and 4,168 (50.8%) were patients with routine postpartum discharge prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The rates of postpartum readmissions after vaginal delivery (1.0 vs. 0.9%; adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-1.45) and cesarean delivery (1.5 vs. 1.9%; adjusted OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.29-1.45) were similar between the two groups. Demographic risk factors for postpartum readmission included Medicaid insurance and obesity. CONCLUSION: Early postpartum discharge during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with no change in the odds of maternal postpartum readmissions after low-risk vaginal or cesarean deliveries. Early postpartum discharge for low-risk patients to shorten hospital length of stay should be considered in the face of public health crises. KEY POINTS: · Early postpartum discharge was not associated with an increase in odds of hospital readmissions after vaginal delivery.. · Early postpartum discharge was not associated with an increase in odds of hospital readmissions after cesarean delivery.. · Early postpartum discharge for low-risk patients should be considered during a public health crisis..

Impact of Timing of Tocilizumab Use in Hospitalized Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) continues to be a global challenge due to the lack of definitive treatment strategies. We sought to determine the efficacy of early administration of anti-interleukin 6 therapy in reducing hospital mortality and progression to mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of 11,512 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 who were admitted to a New York health system from March to May 2020. Tocilizumab was administered to subjects at the nasal cannula level of oxygen support to maintain an oxygen saturation of >88%. The Charlson comorbidity index was used as an objective assessment of the burden of comorbidities to predict 10-year mortality. The primary outcome of interest was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were progression to mechanical ventilation; the prevalence of venous thromboembolism and renal failure; and the change in C-reactive protein, D-dimer, and ferritin levels after tocilizumab administration. Propensity score matching by using a 1:2 protocol was used to match the tocilizumab and non-tocilizumab groups to minimize selection bias. The groups were matched on baseline demographic characteristics, including age, sex, and body mass index; Charlson comorbidity index score; laboratory markers, including ferritin, D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, and C-reactive protein values; and the maximum oxygen requirement at the time of tocilizumab administration. Mortality outcomes were evaluated based on the level of oxygen requirement and the day of hospitalization at the time of tocilizumab administration. RESULTS: The overall hospital mortality was significantly reduced in the tocilizumab group when tocilizumab was administered at the nasal cannula level (10.4% vs 22.0%; P = .002). In subjects who received tocilizumab at the nasal cannula level, the progression to mechanical ventilation was reduced versus subjects who were initially on higher levels of oxygen support (6.3% vs 18.7%; P < .001). There was no improvement in mortality when tocilizumab was given at the time of requiring non-rebreather, high-flow nasal cannula, noninvasive ventilator, or invasive ventilator. CONCLUSIONS: Early use of anti-interleukin 6 therapy may be associated with improved hospital mortality and reduction in progression to more severe coronavirus disease 2019.

Increased Inpatient Mortality for Cardiovascular Patients During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Epidemic in New York.

Background The acuity and magnitude of the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic in New York mandated a drastic change in healthcare access and delivery of care. Methods and Results We retrospectively studied patients admitted with an acute cardiovascular syndrome as their principal diagnosis to 13 hospitals across Northwell Health during March 11 through May 26, 2020 (first COVID-19 epidemic wave) and the same period in 2019. Three thousand sixteen patients (242 COVID-19 positive) were admitted for an acute cardiovascular syndrome during the first COVID-19 wave compared with 9422 patients 1 year prior (decrease of 68.0%, P<0.001). During this time, patients with cardiovascular disease presented later to the hospital (360 versus 120 minutes for acute myocardial infarction), underwent fewer procedures (34.6% versus 45.6%, P<0.001), were less likely to be treated in an intensive care unit setting (8.7% versus 10.8%, P<0.001), and had a longer hospital stay (2.91 [1.71-6.05] versus 2.87 [1.82-4.95] days, P=0.033). Inpatient cardiovascular mortality during the first epidemic outbreak increased by 111.1% (3.8 versus 1.8, P<0.001) and was not related to COVID-19-related admissions, all cause in-hospital mortality, or incidence of out-of-hospital cardiac deaths in New York. Admission during the first COVID-19 surge along with age and positive COVID-19 test independently predicted mortality for cardiovascular admissions (odds ratios, 1.30, 1.05, and 5.09, respectively, P<0.0001). Conclusions A lower rate and later presentation of patients with cardiovascular pathology, coupled with deviation from common clinical practice mandated by the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, might have accounted for higher in-hospital cardiovascular mortality during that period.

Early postpartum discharge during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives To report our experience with early postpartum discharge to decrease hospital length of stay among low-risk puerperium patients in a large obstetrical service during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York. Methods Retrospective analysis of all uncomplicated postpartum women in seven obstetrical units within a large health system between December 8th, 2019 and June 20th, 2020. Women were stratified into two groups based on date of delivery in relation to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York (Mid-March 2020); those delivering before or during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compared hospital length of stay, defined as time interval from delivery to discharge in hours, between the two groups and correlated it with the number of COVID-19 admissions to our hospitals. Statistical analysis included use of Wilcoxon rank sum test and Chi-squared test with significance defined as p-value<0.05. Results Of the 11,770 patients included, 5,893 (50.1%) delivered prior to and 5,877 (49.9%) delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. We detected substantial shortening in postpartum hospital length of stay after vaginal delivery (34 vs. 48 h, p≤0.0001) and cesarean delivery (51 vs. 74 h, p≤0.0001) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions We report successful implementation of early postpartum discharge for low-risk patients resulting in a significantly shorter hospital stay during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York. The impact of this strategy on resource utilization, patient satisfaction and adverse outcomes requires further study.