ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide threatening human health. To reduce transmission, a 'lockdown' was introduced in Ireland between March and May 2020. The aim of this study is to capture the experiences of consultant psychiatrists during lockdown and their perception of it's impact on mental health services. METHODS: A questionnaire designed by the Royal College of Psychiatrists was adapted and circulated to consultant members of the College of Psychiatrists of Ireland following the easing of restrictions. The questionnaire assessed the perceived impact on referral rates, mental health act provision, availability of information technology (IT), consultant well-being and availability of personal protective equipment (PPE). Thematic analysis was employed to analyse free-text sections. RESULTS: Response rate was 32% (n = 197/623). Consultants reported an initial decrease/significant decrease in referrals in the first month of lockdown (68%, n = 95/140) followed by an increase/significant increase in the second month for both new (83%, n = 100/137) and previously attending patients (65%, n = 88/136). Social isolation and reduced face-to-face mental health supports were among the main reasons identified. The needs of children and older adults were highlighted. Most consultants (76%, n = 98/129) felt their working day was affected and their well-being reduced (52%, n = 61/119). The majority felt IT equipment availability was inadequate (67%, n = 88/132). Main themes identified from free-text sections were service management, relationship between patients and healthcare service and effects on consultants' lives. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed increased pressure on service provision and consultant wellness. This further supports the longstanding need to increase mental health service investment.
ABSTRACT
We convened a multidisciplinary Working Party on behalf of the Association of Anaesthetists to update the 2011 guidance on the peri-operative management of people with hip fracture. Importantly, these guidelines describe the core aims and principles of peri-operative management, recommending greater standardisation of anaesthetic practice as a component of multidisciplinary care. Although much of the 2011 guidance remains applicable to contemporary practice, new evidence and consensus inform the additional recommendations made in this document. Specific changes to the 2011 guidance relate to analgesia, medicolegal practice, risk assessment, bone cement implantation syndrome and regional review networks. Areas of controversy remain, and we discuss these in further detail, relating to the mode of anaesthesia, surgical delay, blood management and transfusion thresholds, echocardiography, anticoagulant and antiplatelet management and postoperative discharge destination. Finally, these guidelines provide links to supplemental online material that can be used at readers' institutions, key references and UK national guidance about the peri-operative care of people with hip and periprosthetic fractures during the COVID-19 pandemic.