Embracing virtual outpatient clinics in the era of COVID-19.

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.

The perception of patient safety in an alternate site of care for elective surgery during the first wave of the novel coronavirus pandemic in the United Kingdom: a survey of 158 patients.

BACKGROUND: We undertook a prospective qualitative survey to ascertain the perceptions and experience of National Health Service patients in the United Kingdom who underwent planned or elective procedures and surgery at alternate 'clean' hospital sites during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. These alternate 'clean' hospital sites were independent hospitals running active staff and patient testing programmes for COVID-19 and which did not admit or treat patients suffering with COVID-19. METHODS: A prospective survey was undertaken to include patients at least 30 days after a planned surgery or procedure conducted at a 'clean' alternate hospital site during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study was conducted using structured interviews undertaken by trained assessors. A 20% sample group of patients were randomly selected to participate in this study. Qualitative data related to confidence, safety and perceptions of safety were collected. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients (60%) reported that they had prior worries or concerns about undergoing an elective procedure during the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 47 patients (30%) had delayed their surgery at least once because of these concerns. A total of 150 patients (95%) felt that the precautions in place to protect their safety in the setting of an alternate 'clean' hospital site were well thought out and proportionate. Patients reported high levels of confidence in the measures undertaken. Separation of patient pathways using the independent sector and patient testing were identified by patients as having the greatest impact on their perception of safety. CONCLUSIONS: Patient confidence will be key to ensuring uptake of planned and elective procedures and surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Perceptions of safety will be key to this confidence and efforts to demonstrably enhance safety are well received by patients. In particular, patients felt that a dedicated programme of patient testing and separation of patient pathways provided the greatest levels of confidence in the safety of their treatment.

Tracheostomy during COVID-19 pandemic-Novel approach.

BACKGROUND: This study describes a novel approach in reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission during tracheostomy. METHODS: Five patients underwent tracheostomy between April 1, 2020 and April 17, 2020. A clear and sterile plastic drape was used as an additional physical barrier against droplets and aerosols. Operative diagnosis; droplet count and distribution on plastic sheet and face shields were documented. RESULTS: Tracheostomy was performed for patients with carcinoma of tonsil (n = 2) and nasopharynx (n = 1), and aspiration pneumonia (n = 2). Droplet contamination was noted on all plastic sheets (n = 5). Droplet contamination was most severe over the central surface at 91.5% (86.7%-100.0%) followed by the left and right lateral surfaces at 5.2% (6.7%-10.0%) and 3.3% (6.7%-10.0%), respectively. No droplet contamination was noted on all face shields. CONCLUSION: Plastic drapes can help reduce viral transmission to health care providers during tracheostomy. Face shields may be spared which in turn helps to conserve resources during the novel coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Conservation of personal protective equipment for head and neck cancer surgery during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has led to a global shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE). This study aims to stratify face shield needs when performing head and neck cancer surgery. METHODS: Fifteen patients underwent surgery between March 1, 2020 and April 9, 2020. Operative diagnosis and procedure; droplet count and distribution on face shields were documented. RESULTS: Forty-five surgical procedures were performed for neck nodal metastatic carcinoma of unknown origin (n = 3); carcinoma of tonsil (n = 2), tongue (n = 2), nasopharynx (n = 3), maxilla (n = 1), and laryngopharynx (n = 4). Droplet contamination was 57.8%, 59.5%, 8.0%, and 0% for operating, first and second assistant surgeons, and scrub nurse respectively. Droplet count was highest and most widespread during osteotomies. No droplet splash was noted for transoral robotic surgery. CONCLUSION: Face shield is not a mandatory adjunctive PPE for all head and neck surgical procedures and health care providers. Judicious use helps to conserve resources during such difficult times.