Impact of COVID-19 on the management of ureteric stones in the UK: the COVID Stones study

Introduction: In the COVIDStones study, we aimed to determine how management of ureteric stones changed during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. Materials and Methods: The COVID Stones study was a multi-centre retrospective study of consecutive adults diagnosed with CT-proven ureteric stone disease at 19 UK sites. We compared a pre-pandemic period (23/3/19 to 22/6/19) to a period during the pandemic (the 3-month period after the first SARS-CoV-2 case at individual sites). Results: 3755 patients were included (pre-pandemic = 1963 patients;pandemic = 1792 patients). Patients during the pandemic had significantly lower hospital admission rates (pre-pandemic = 54.2% vs pandemic = 46.6%, p<0.001), shorter length of stay (mean = 4.0 vs. 3.2 days, p=0.01), and higher rates of use of alpha-blockers (16.1% vs. 23.3%, p<0.001). In the cohort of patients who received interventional management (n=790 [44.1%] vs. n=686 [34.9%]), rates of ESWL (22.8% vs. 33.9%, p<0.001) were significantly higher;rates of ureteroscopy (56.7% vs. 47.7%, p<0.01) and stent insertion (67.9% vs. 54.5%, p>0.001) were lower;and there was no difference in rates of nephrostomy (p=0.76) during the pandemic. During the pandemic, there was no difference in success of primary treatment overall, including both non-interventional and interventional modalities (prepandemic= 73.8% vs. pandemic=76.2%, p=0.467), nor when stratified by treatment modality or stone size. Conclusions: Despite fewer invasive procedures performed during the pandemic, we demonstrated no difference in success of treatment, without an increase in adverse outcomes. This leads us to question whether the management of ureteric stones can be optimised further.

The challenges and opportunities for implementing group antenatal care ('Pregnancy Circles') as part of standard NHS maternity care: A co-designed qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the challenges and opportunities for rolling out a bespoke model of group antenatal care called Pregnancy Circles (PC) within the National Health Service: what kind of support and training is needed and what adaptations are appropriate, including during a pandemic when face-to-face interaction is limited. DESIGN: Exploratory qualitative study (online focus group). Study co-designed with midwives. Data analysed thematically using an ecological model to synthesise. SETTING: Five maternity services within the National Health Service. PARTICIPANTS: Seven midwives who facilitated PCs. Three senior midwives with implementation experience participated in the co-design process. FINDINGS: Three themes operating across the ecological model were identified: 'Implementing innovation', 'Philosophy of care' and 'Resource management'. Tensions were identified between group care's focus on relationships and professional autonomy, and concepts of efficiency within the NHS's market model of care. Midwives found protected time, training and ongoing support essential for developing the skills and confidence needed to deliver this innovative model of care. Integrating Pregnancy Circles with continuity of carer models was seen as the most promising opportunity for long-term implementation. Midwives perceived continuity and peer support as the most effective elements of the model and there was some evidence that the model may be robust enough to withstand adaptation to online delivery. KEY CONCLUSIONS: Midwives facilitating group care enjoyed the relationships, autonomy and professional development the model offered. Harnessing this personal (micro-level) satisfaction is key to wider implementation. Group care is well aligned with current maternity policy but the challenges midwives face (temporal, practical and cultural) must be anticipated and addressed at macro and meso level for wider implementation to be sustainable. The PC model may be flexible enough to adapt to online delivery and extend continuity of care but further research is needed in these areas. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Implementation of group care in the NHS requires senior leadership and expertise in change management, protected time for training and delivery of the model, and funding for equipment. Training and ongoing support, are vital for sustainability and quality control. There is potential for online delivery and integrating group care with continuity models.

Efficacy and safety of the EMS Swiss LithoClast® Trilogy for PCNL: results of the European multicentre prospective study on behalf of European Section of UroTechnology.

PURPOSE: PCNL requires a lithotrite to efficiently break stones, and some devices include active suction to remove the fragments. We set out to determine the efficacy and safety of the Swiss LithoClast® Trilogy, in a prospective European multicentre evaluation and compared it to published stone clearance rates for Trilogy based on surface area (68.9 mm2/min) and using the 3D calculated stone volume (526.7 mm3/min). METHODS: Ten European centres participated in this prospective non-randomized study of Trilogy for PCNL. Objective measures of stone clearance rate, device malfunction, complications and stone-free rates were assessed. Each surgeon subjectively evaluated ergonomic and device effectiveness, on a 1-10 scale (10 = extremely ergonomic/effective) and compared to their usual lithotrite on a 1-10 scale (10 = extremely effective). RESULTS: One hundred and fifty seven PCNLs using Trilogy were included (53% male, 47% female; mean age 55 years, range 13-84 years). Mean stone clearance rate was 65.55 mm2/min or 945 mm3/min based on calculated 3D volume. Stone-free rate on fluoroscopy screening at the end of the procedure was 83%. Feedback for suction effectiveness was 9.0 with 9.1 for combination and 9.0 for overall effectiveness compared to lithotrite used previously. Ergonomic score was 8.1, the least satisfactory element. Complications included 13 (8.2%) Clavien-Dindo Grade II and 2 (1.3%) Grade III. Probe breakage was seen in 9 (5.7%), none required using a different lithotrite. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that Trilogy is highly effective at stone removal. From a user perspective, the device was perceived by surgeons to be highly effective overall and compared to the most commonly used previous lithotrite, with an excellent safety profile.

The COVID stones collaborative: How has the management of ureteric stones changed during and after the COVID-19 pandemic? Rationale and study protocol

Background and objectives The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a significant impact on healthcare delivery. As a result, management of patients with ureteric stones has likely been affected. We report our study protocol for the investigation of ureteric stone management during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Material and methods The COVID Stones study is a multicenter national cohort study of the management and outcomes of patients with ureteric stones before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. The study will consist of three data collection periods, pre-pandemic (“pre-COVID”), pandemic (“COVID”), and postpandemic (“post-COVID”). This will allow quantification of what “normal” was, how this has changed, and to capture any persisting changes in management. The primary outcome evaluating the success rate of the initial treatment decision will be assessed following a 6-month follow-up from the time of first presentation and will be performed for each recruited patient from each of the three data collection periods. This will allow comparison between both management and outcomes before, during, and after the pandemic. Conclusions We anticipate that this study will lead to an increased understanding of the impact of the outcomes of emergency management of ureteric stones following changes in clinical practice due to the COVID-19 pandemic health provision restrictions.