ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Health care professionals (HCPs) performing tracheostomies in patients with COVID-19 may be at increased risk of infection. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate factors underlying HCPs' COVID-19 infection and determine whether tracheostomy providers report increased rates of infection. METHODS: An anonymous international survey examining factors associated with COVID-19 infection was made available November 2020 through July 2021 to HCPs at a convenience sample of hospitals, universities, and professional organizations. Infections reported were compared between HCPs involved in tracheostomy on patients with COVID-19 and HCPs who were not involved. RESULTS: Of the 361 respondents (from 33 countries), 50% (n = 179) had performed tracheostomies on patients with COVID-19. Performing tracheostomies on patients with COVID-19 was not associated with increased infection in either univariable (P = .06) or multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.90-2.46; P = .13). Working in a low- or middle-income country (LMIC) was associated with increased infection in both univariable (P < .001) and multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 2.88; CI, 1.50-5.53; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Performing tracheostomy was not associated with COVID-19 infection, suggesting that tracheostomies can be safely performed in infected patients with appropriate precautions. However, HCPs in LMICs may face increased infection risk.
ABSTRACT
Timing of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 has attracted substantial attention. Initial guidelines recommended delaying or avoiding tracheostomy due to the potential for particle aerosolization and theoretical risk to providers. However, early tracheostomy could improve patient outcomes and alleviate resource shortages. This study compares outcomes in a diverse population of hospitalized COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheostomy either "early" (within 14 d of intubation) or "late" (more than 14 d after intubation). DESIGN: International multi-institute retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Thirteen hospitals in Bolivia, Brazil, Spain, and the United States. PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 undergoing early or late tracheostomy between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 549 patients from 13 hospitals in four countries were included in the final analysis. Multivariable regression analysis showed that early tracheostomy was associated with a 12-day decrease in time on mechanical ventilation (95% CI, -16 to -8; p < 0.001). Further, ICU and hospital lengths of stay in patients undergoing early tracheostomy were 15 days (95% CI, -23 to -9 d; p < 0.001) and 22 days (95% CI, -31 to -12 d) shorter, respectively. In contrast, early tracheostomy patients experienced lower risk-adjusted survival at 30-day post-admission (hazard ratio, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.8-5.2). Differences in 90-day post-admission survival were not identified. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy within 14 days of intubation have reduced ventilator dependence as well as reduced lengths of stay. However, early tracheostomy patients experienced lower 30-day survival. Future efforts should identify patients most likely to benefit from early tracheostomy while accounting for location-specific capacity.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Timing of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 has attracted substantial attention. Initial guidelines recommended delaying or avoiding tracheostomy due to the potential for particle aerosolization and theoretical risk to providers. However, early tracheostomy could improve patient outcomes and alleviate resource shortages. This study compares outcomes in a diverse population of hospitalized COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheostomy either “early” (within 14 d of intubation) or “late” (more than 14 d after intubation). DESIGN: International multi-institute retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Thirteen hospitals in Bolivia, Brazil, Spain, and the United States. PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 undergoing early or late tracheostomy between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 549 patients from 13 hospitals in four countries were included in the final analysis. Multivariable regression analysis showed that early tracheostomy was associated with a 12-day decrease in time on mechanical ventilation (95% CI, –16 to –8;p < 0.001). Further, ICU and hospital lengths of stay in patients undergoing early tracheostomy were 15 days (95% CI, –23 to –9 d;p < 0.001) and 22 days (95% CI, –31 to –12 d) shorter, respectively. In contrast, early tracheostomy patients experienced lower risk-adjusted survival at 30-day post-admission (hazard ratio, 3.0;95% CI, 1.8–5.2). Differences in 90-day post-admission survival were not identified. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy within 14 days of intubation have reduced ventilator dependence as well as reduced lengths of stay. However, early tracheostomy patients experienced lower 30-day survival. Future efforts should identify patients most likely to benefit from early tracheostomy while accounting for location-specific capacity.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: An international surgical team implemented a virtual basic laparoscopic surgery course for Bolivian general and pediatric surgeons and residents during the COVID-19 pandemic. This simulation course aimed to enhance training in a lower-resource environment despite the challenges of decreased operative volume and lack of in-person instruction. METHODS: The course was developed by surgeons from Bolivian and U.S.-based institutions and offered twice between July-December 2020. Didactic content and skill techniques were taught via weekly live videoconferences. Additional mentorship was provided through small group sessions. Participants were evaluated by pre- and post-course tests of didactic content as well as by video task review. RESULTS: Of the 24 enrolled participants, 13 were practicing surgeons and 10 were surgery residents (one unspecified). Fifty percent (n = 12) indicated "almost never" performing laparoscopic surgeries pre-course. Confidence significantly increased for five laparoscopic tasks. Test scores also increased significantly (68.2% ± 12.5%, n = 21; vs 76.6% ± 12.6%, n = 19; p = 0.040). While challenges impeded objective evaluation for the first course iteration, adjustments permitted video scoring in the second iteration. This group demonstrated significant improvements in precision cutting (11.6% ± 16.7%, n = 9; vs 62.5% ± 18.6%, n = 6; p < 0.001), intracorporeal knot tying (36.4% ± 38.1%, n = 9; vs 79.2% ± 17.2%, n = 7; p = 0.012), and combined skill (40.3% ± 17.7%; n = 8 vs 77.2% ± 13.6%, n = 4; p = 0.042). Collectively, combined skill scores improved by 66.3% ± 10.4%. CONCLUSION: Virtual international collaboration can improve confidence, knowledge, and basic laparoscopic skills, even in resource-limited settings during a global pandemic. Future efforts should focus on standardizing resources for participants and enhancing access to live feedback resources between classes.