To defer or not to defer? A German longitudinal multicentric assessment of clinical practice in urology during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: After the outbreak of COVID-19 unprecedented changes in the healthcare systems worldwide were necessary resulting in a reduction of urological capacities with postponements of consultations and surgeries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An email was sent to 66 urological hospitals with focus on robotic surgery (RS) including a link to a questionnaire (e.g. bed/staff capacity, surgical caseload, protection measures during RS) that covered three time points: a representative baseline week prior to COVID-19, the week of March 16th-22nd and April 20th-26th 2020. The results were evaluated using descriptive analyses. RESULTS: 27 out of 66 questionnaires were analyzed (response rate: 41%). We found a decrease of 11% in hospital beds and 25% in OR capacity with equal reductions for endourological, open and robotic procedures. Primary surgical treatment of urolithiasis and benign prostate syndrome (BPS) but also of testicular and penile cancer dropped by at least 50% while the decrease of surgeries for prostate, renal and urothelial cancer (TUR-B and cystectomies) ranged from 15 to 37%. The use of personal protection equipment (PPE), screening of staff and patients and protection during RS was unevenly distributed in the different centers-however, the number of COVID-19 patients and urologists did not reach double digits. CONCLUSION: The German urological landscape has changed since the outbreak of COVID-19 with a significant shift of high priority surgeries but also continuation of elective surgical treatments. While screening and staff protection is employed heterogeneously, the number of infected German urologists stays low.

COVID-19 model-based practice changes in managing a large prostate cancer practice: following the trends during a month-long ordeal.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) has been a life-changing experience for both individuals and institutions. We describe changes in our practice based on real-time assessment of various national and international trends of COVID-19 and its effectiveness in the management of our resources. Initial risk assessment and peak resource requirement using the COVID-19 Hospital Impact Model for Epidemics (CHIME) and McKinsey models. Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis of our practice's approach during the pandemic. Based on CHIME the community followed 60% social distancing, the number of expected new patients hospitalized at maximum surge would be 401, with 100 patients requiring ventilator support. In contrast, when the community followed 15% social distancing, the maximum surge of hospitalized new patients would be 1823 and 455 patients would require a ventilator. on April 15, the expected May requirement of ICU beds at peak would be 68, with 61 patients needing ventilators. The estimated surge numbers improved throughout April, and on April 22 the expected ICU bed peak in May would be 11.7, and those requiring ventilator would be 10.5. Simultaneously, within a month, our surgical waitlist grew from 585 to over 723 patients. Our SWOT analysis revealed our internal strengths and inherent weakness, relevant to the pandemic. A graded and a guarded response to this type of situation is crucial in managing patients in a large practice.