Management of Femur Fractures during COVID-19 Pandemic Period: The Influence of Vaccination and Nosocomial COVID-19 Infection.

The COVID-19 pandemic management has led to a significant change in orthopedic surgical activity. During the pandemic, femur fractures in patients over 65 years of age have maintained a constant incidence. Our study will focus on this fragile population, analyzing the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospital stays and the clinical and radiographic orthopedic outcomes. We also evaluated the va\riation of COVID-19 infection after health professionals' vaccinations, and the influence of inter-hospital transfers caused by logistical and organizational aspects of the pandemic. Material and Methods: This is a descriptive and prospective study from 13 October 2020 to 15 March 2021. Participants were patients over 65 years of age with diagnoses of proximal femoral fractures with r surgical treatments indicated. We compared the SARS-CoV-2 infected patients during the stay with non-infected cases. A second evaluation was carried out dividing the patients into those who underwent inter-hospital transfers and a group without transfers. We subdivided the study period into two, according to the percentage of healthcare workers vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The reported clinical variables included the Parker and Palmer Score, the Nottingham Hip Fracture Score, the Harris Hip Score, mortality, the Rush Score, and evaluation of reduction in radio-lucent lines in prosthetic implants. Results: Ninety-three patients were studied. The whole positive COVID cohort (11.83%) was hospitalized during the period when less than 80% of health workers were vaccinated (p = 0.02). The COVID cohort and the patients transferred before surgery had longer stays in the Emergency Room (p = 0.019; p = 0.00007) and longer lengths of stay compared to the other patients (p = 0.00001; p = 0.001). Mortality was higher both in the infected group and in the patients who underwent a transfer before the surgical procedure (18.18% vs. 1.22 %; p = 0.003. 25% vs. 6.85%; p = 0.02). In terms of orthopedic outcomes measured through the third month of follow-up, we found worse score results in functional and radiographic outcomes in the COVID positive cohort and in the transferred patients' cohort. Conclusions: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients treated for proximal femur fracture was statistically significant. Patients with Coronavirus during hospitalization obtained poor short-term radiographic and functional results and increased peri-operative mortality. The incidence of intra-hospital infection was high during the period in which health professionals were not yet covered by the anti-COVID vaccination cycle. Patients who were transferred between two hospitals due to pandemic-related management issues also achieved reduced outcomes compared to non-transferred cases, with increased mortality.

Should we operate on all patients with COVID-19 and proximal femoral fractures? An analysis of thirty, sixty, and ninety day mortality rates based on patients' clinical presentation and comorbidity: a multicentric study in Northern Italy.

PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate 30-60-90-day mortality of operated proximal femur fractures (PFFs) suffering from COVID-19 and correlation with patients' clinical presentation and comorbidities. METHODS: Between February 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, patients with COVID-19 infection and surgically treated PFF were included. Patients' demographic characteristics, oxygen (O2) therapy, comorbidities, and AO type fracture were collected. Chi-square test or Fisher test and hazard ratio were used to assessing the correlation between mortality rate, patient characteristics, and COVID-19 status. Kaplan-Meyer curve was used to analyze 30-60-90-day mortality. Level of significance was set as p < 0.05. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients (mean age of 82.7 ± 8.85 years) were included. Thirty-day mortality rate was 5%, which increased to 21% at 60 days and 90 days. Eleven patients died, eight due to AO type A-like and three due to AO type B-like fractures. No significant difference in mortality rate between patients with cardiopulmonary comorbidity or no cardiopulmonary comorbidity was found (p = 0.67); a significant difference in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or history of pulmonary embolism (PE) and patients without COPD was found (p = 0.0021). A significant difference between asymptomatic/mild symptomatic COVID-19 status and symptomatic COVID-19 status was found (p = 0.0415); a significant difference was found for O2 therapy with < 4 L/min and O2 therapy ≥ 4 L/min (p = 0.0049). CONCLUSION: Thirty-day mortality rate of COVID-19 infection and PFFs does not differ from mortality rate of non-COVID-19 PFFs. However, patients with pre-existing comorbidities and symptomatic COVID-19 infection requiring a high volume of O2 therapy have a higher incidence of 60-90-day mortality when surgically treated.

Is It the Surgeon, the Patient, or the Device? A Comprehensive Clinical and Radiological Evaluation of Factors Influencing Patient Satisfaction in 648 Total Knee Arthroplasties.

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a successful and safe surgical procedure for treating osteoarthritic knees, but despite the overall good results, some patients remain dissatisfied. The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of patient-related and surgery-related variables in a consecutive group of patients that underwent TKA. Individuals (n = 648) who had TKA performed between 01 January 2013 and 31 December 2017 were enrolled in the study. Postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Forgotten Joint score (FJS-12) were collected at a mean follow-up of 4.79 years. Patient satisfaction was assessed with a questionnaire. Determinants of satisfaction (age, sex, smoking, presence of diabetes or cardiovascular disease, pain in other joints, preoperative arthritic stage) and components of satisfaction (slope variation, mechanical axis variation, outlier final alignment, surgeon experience) were examined to identify which variables correlated with positive outcome. Correlations with septic and mechanicals failures were also evaluated. Thirteen percent of patients were unsatisfied, despite good results in KOOS, WOMAC and FJS-12 tests. Female gender, low Kellgren-Lawrence grade and the presence of back pain and pain in other joints were factors associated with poor clinical results. Poorer clinical results were also reported in younger patients. Infection rate was correlated with active smoking and mechanical failure with an outlier final alignment. Comorbidities, smoking habits and high expectations have a big influence on TKA results and on final satisfaction after surgery.

Do standards of care and early outcomes of periprosthetic fractures change during the COVID-19 pandemic? A multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) are a growing matter for orthopaedic surgeons, and patients with PPFs may represent a frail target in the case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether hospital reorganisations during the most severe phase of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic affected standards of care and early outcomes of patients treated for PPFs in Northern Italy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were retrieved from a multicentre retrospective orthopaedics and traumatology database, including 14 hospitals. The following parameters were studied: demographics, results of nasopharyngeal swabs, prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), comorbidities, general health status (EQ-5D-5L Score), frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale, CFS), pain (visual analogue scale, VAS), anaesthesiologic risk (American Society of Anaesthesiology Score, ASA Score), classification (unified classification system, UCS), type of operation and anaesthesia, in-hospital and early complications (Clavien-Dindo Classification, CDC), and length of stay (LOS). Data were analysed by means of descriptive statistics. Out of 1390 patients treated for any reason, 38 PPFs were included. RESULTS: Median age was 81 years (range 70-96 years). Twenty-three patients (60.5%) were swabbed on admission, and two of them (5.3%) tested positive; in three patients (7.9%), the diagnosis of COVID-19 was established on a clinical and radiological basis. Two more patients tested positive post-operatively, and one of them died due to COVID-19. Thirty-three patients (86.8%) presented a proximal femoral PPF. Median ASA Score was 3 (range, 1-4), median VAS score on admission was 3 (range, 0-6), median CFS was 4 (range, 1-8), median EQ-5D-5L Score was 3 in each one of the categories (range, 1-5). Twenty-three patients (60.5%) developed post-operative complications, and median CDC grade was 3 (range, 1-5). The median LOS was 12.8 days (range 2-36 days), and 21 patients (55.3%) were discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PPFs did not seem to change during the lockdown. Patients were mainly elderly with comorbidities, and complications were frequently recorded post-operatively. Despite the difficult period for the healthcare system, hospitals were able to provide effective conventional surgical treatments for PPFs, which were not negatively influenced by the reorganisation. Continued efforts are required to optimise the treatment of these frail patients in the period of the pandemic, minimising the risk of contamination, and to limit the incidence of PPFs in the future. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Clinical Activities, Contaminations of Surgeons and Cooperation with Health Authorities in 14 Orthopedic Departments in North Italy during the Most Acute Phase of Covid-19 Pandemic.

Background: From 10 March up until 3 May 2020 in Northern Italy, the SARS-CoV-2 spread was not contained; disaster triage was adopted. The aim of the present study is to assess the impact of the COVID-19-pandemic on the Orthopedic and Trauma departments, focusing on: hospital reorganization (flexibility, workload, prevalence of COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2, standards of care); effects on staff; subjective orthopedic perception of the pandemic. Material and Methods: Data regarding 1390 patients and 323 surgeons were retrieved from a retrospective multicentric database, involving 14 major hospitals. The subjective directors' viewpoints regarding the economic consequences, communication with the government, hospital administration and other departments were collected. Results: Surgical procedures dropped by 73%, compared to 2019, elective surgery was interrupted. Forty percent of patients were screened for SARS-CoV-2: 7% with positive results. Seven percent of the patients received medical therapy for COVID-19, and only 48% of these treated patients had positive swab tests. Eleven percent of surgeons developed COVID-19 and 6% were contaminated. Fourteen percent of the staff were redirected daily to COVID units. Communication with the Government was perceived as adequate, whilst communication with medical Authorities was considered barely sufficient. Conclusions: Activity reduction was mandatory; the screening of carriers did not seem to be reliable and urgent activities were performed with a shortage of workers and a slower workflow. A trauma network and dedicated in-hospital paths for COVID-19-patients were created. This experience provided evidence for coordinated responses in order to avoid the propagation of errors.

Early mortality in hip fracture patients admitted during first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Northern Italy: a multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of hip fractures during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unique challenges for the management of COVID-19-infected patients and the maintenance of standards of care. The primary endpoint of this study is to compare the mortality rate at 1 month after surgery in symptomatic COVID-positive patients with that of asymptomatic patients. A secondary endpoint of the study is to evaluate, in the two groups of patients, mortality at 1 month on the basis of type of fracture and type of surgical treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this retrospective multicentre study, we reviewed the medical records of patients hospitalised for proximal femur fracture at 14 hospitals in Northern Italy. Two groups were formed: COVID-19-positive patients (C+ group) presented symptoms, had a positive swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and received treatment for COVID-19; COVID-19-negative patients (C- group) were asymptomatic and tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. The two groups were compared for differences in time to surgery, survival rate and complications rate. The follow-up period was 1 month. RESULTS: Of the 1390 patients admitted for acute care for any reason, 477 had a proximal femur fracture; 53 were C+ but only 12/53 were diagnosed as such at admission. The mean age was > 80 years, and the mean American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score was 3 in both groups. There was no substantial difference in time to surgery (on average, 2.3 days for the C+ group and 2.8 for the C- group). As expected, a higher mortality rate was recorded for the C+ group but not associated with the type of hip fracture or treatment. No correlation was found between early treatment (< 48 h to surgery) and better outcome in the C+ group. CONCLUSIONS: Hip fracture in COVID-19-positive patients accounted for 11% of the total. On average, the time to surgery was > 48 h, which reflects the difficulty of maintaining normal workflow during a medical emergency such as the present pandemic and notwithstanding the suspension of non-urgent procedures. Hip fracture was associated with a higher 30-day mortality rate in COVID-19-positive patients than in COVID-19-negative patients. This fact should be considered when communicating with patients and/or their family. Our data suggest no substantial difference in hip fracture management between patients with or without COVID-19 infection. In this sample, the COVID-19-positive patients were generally asymptomatic at admission; therefore, routine screening is recommended. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level 4.

Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Changed the Daily Practices and Psychological State of Orthopaedic Residents?

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has been an unprecedented time for healthcare and has substantially changed resource availability in surgeons' work practices and routines. Many orthopaedic departments suspended elective surgery, and some re-deployed orthopaedic residents to stressful nonorthopaedic tasks; long hours were commonplace. Stress-reaction symptoms such as anxiety and depression have been reported in about 10% of healthcare workers during previous infectious-diseases outbreaks (including the Ebola virus), but little is known about the psychological needs of residents faced with this global disaster. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Have anxiety and depression symptoms among orthopaedic residents worsened from the period before to the period after the lockdown in Italy? (2) Are there differences in anxiety and depression symptoms between residents who worked in a COVID-19 department and those who did not? METHODS: The Italian Association of Orthopaedic and Traumatology Residents is comprised of 365 members who were recruited through the organization's mailing list; they were asked to respond to a survey about their health and well-being at the beginning and end of the first COVID-19 Italian lockdown (March 9, 2020 to May 3, 2020). For the survey's development, 10 orthopaedic surgery residents at the Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro were preliminarily asked to answer the surveys, and both face validity and content validity were tested. The test-retest reliability was 0.9. Impact on and future concerns about family life and daily work practice, as well as sleep disorders, were investigated. Anxiety and depression were assessed with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), which includes 14 questions (seven for anxiety, HADS-A; and seven for depression, HADS-D) on a Likert scale (0-3); thus, a patient can have a score between 0 and 21 for either the HADS-A or HADS-D, with higher scores indicating a greater likelihood of anxiety or depression. Previously reported minimum clinically important differences ranged from 1.5 to 1.7. For each scale, total scores of ≤ 7 , 8 to 10, and ≥ 11 were taken to represent normal, borderline, or abnormal level of anxiety or depression, respectively. Overall, 75% (272 of 365) of residents completed the survey at both the beginning and end of the lockdown; 72% (196 of 272) were men, the mean ± SD age was 30 ± 3 years, 72% (197 of 272) worked in a hospital setting with patients who were COVID-19-positive, 20% (55 of 272) served in a COVID-19 department, and 5% (7 of 139) tested positive for COVID-19 by nasal-pharyngeal swab. Overall, 9% (24 of 272) of residents had family members who contracted COVID-19, and 3% (8 of 272) had a relative who died. Because of the risk of possible COVID-19 exposure, 18% (48 of 272) of residents needed to temporarily change their household given that social distancing was considered the best way to slow the spread of COVID-19. RESULTS: At the end of the lockdown, orthopaedic residents exhibited signs of worsening anxiety and depression as measured by the overall HADS score (median 9 [IQR 5 to 14] versus median 11 [IQR 6 to 17.8], respectively; median difference -1 [95% CI -1.5 to -0.5]; effect size [r] = -0.24; p < 0.001) as well as in the depression subscale (median 4 [IQR 2 to 7] versus median 5.5 [IQR 3 to 8], respectively; median difference -1 [95% CI -1.5 to -0.5]; r = -0.36; p < 0.001). We found no difference in the development of anxiety or depression between residents who worked in a COVID-19 department and those who did not, as demonstrated by comparing the change in HADS scores between these groups (median 1 [IQR -3 to 4] versus median 1 [IQR -2 to 4] in HADS change score over time; median difference 0 [95% CI -1 to 2]; r = -0.03; p = 0.61). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the daily practice of orthopaedic residents and has had important, far-reaching consequences on their health and well-being, including social implications. Residents showed higher anxiety and depression symptoms at the end of the lockdown. No differences were found in changes of anxiety and depression, over time, for residents who worked in a COVID-19 department compared with those who did not. The evaluation of anxiety and depression through standardized questionnaires could help to identify residents at risk of higher psychological distress who could be referred to regular psychological counseling as a possible prevention strategy during stressful times. Future studies should confirm the long-term effects of these findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study.

Trauma workload during COVID19 lockdown: an analysis of incidence in 4 million people.

BACKGROUND: Aim of this study is to report the trauma workload during COVID19 lockdown in a region of four million people and to compare it with the same period in 2019. METHODS: The regional register for A&E admissions and hospitalizations has been reviewed in order to compare the number of A&D admission, the triage colour codes rates, aetiology of trauma, number of patients hospitalized for trauma, number of fractures that required surgery, type of fractures and injuries and mean patients' age. RESULTS: During lockdown 7314 patients were admitted in A&E, while 22,508 patients were admitted in 2019. In 2020 and 2019 triage codes were respectively distributed as follows: red code 0.1% vs 0.2%, yellow code 8.9% vs 6.3%, green code 84% vs 84.7% and white code 6% vs 8.8%. (p = 0.042). The number of hospitalized patients for trauma was 670 in 2020, while in 2019 was 1774 (p = 0.02). The most common fracture that required surgery was femur fracture (409 in 2020 vs 635 in 2019); fracture subtype distribution and mean age of the patients were significantly different in the two groups (respectively p < 0.01 and p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: One month of lockdown showed a 68% decrease in the number of A&E visits and a 74% decrease of fractures that required surgery. Femur fracture showed the lowest decrease moving from 635 to 409 units but increasing their incidence rate (42 to 61%).

The orthopaedic and traumatology scenario during Covid-19 outbreak in Italy: chronicles of a silent war.

BACKGROUND: From February 21, the day of hospitalisation in ICU of the first diagnosed case of Covid-19, the social situation and the hospitals' organisation throughout Italy dramatically changed. METHODS: The CIO (Club Italiano dell'Osteosintesi) is an Italian society devoted to the study of traumatology that counts members spread in public and private hospitals throughout the country. Fifteen members of the CIO, Chairmen of 15 Orthopaedic and Trauma Units of level 1 or 2 trauma centres in Italy, have been involved in the study. They were asked to record data about surgical, outpatients clinics and ER activity from the 23rd of February to the 4th of April 2020. The data collected were compared with the data of the same timeframe of the previous year (2019). RESULTS: Comparing with last year, overall outpatient activity reduced up to 75%, overall Emergency Room (ER) trauma consultations up to 71%, elective surgical activity reduced up to 100% within two weeks and trauma surgery excluding femoral neck fractures up to 50%. The surgical treatment of femoral neck fractures showed a stable reduction from 15 to 20% without a significant variation during the timeframe. CONCLUSIONS: Covid-19 outbreak showed a tremendous impact on all orthopaedic trauma activities throughout the country except for the surgical treatment of femoral neck fractures, which, although reduced, did not change in percentage within the analysed timeframe.