The COVID-19 Pandemic: Effects on Pediatric Fracture Patterns in the Emergency Department and Subspecialty Follow-up Care.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic affected pediatric fracture injury patterns and volume. There is a paucity of research evaluating this trend throughout the pandemic and also follow-up to orthopaedic subspecialty care after emergency fracture management. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study reviewed patients 2 to 18 years of age presenting for fracture care to an urban pediatric emergency department. We assessed patient demographics, clinical care, and follow-up to surgical subspecialist. Time periods investigated included March 30 to September 4, 2020 (pandemic), March 30 to September 4, 2019, and March 30 to September 4, 2018 (prepandemic). Subanalysis within the pandemic was during the "stay-at-home order" verses the phased re-opening of the state. Descriptive statistical analysis, Pearson's χ 2 or Fisher exact tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests were performed. RESULTS: In this population, fractures overall declined by 40% (n=211) during the pandemic compared with 2019 (n=349) and 28% compared with 2018 (n=292). Lower extremity fractures accounted for a greater percentage of injuries during the pandemic compared with prepandemic. Time to surgical subspecialty follow-up was shortest during the 2020 pandemic peak at 9 days and was significantly longer during phased reopening (phase 1: 18 d, P =0.001; phase 2: 14 d, P =0.005). These patterns were also consistent for days to repeat imaging. CONCLUSIONS: We found differences in fracture prevalence, mechanisms, and follow-up care during the pandemic. Time to subspecialty follow-up care was longer during pandemic phased reopening despite overall fewer fractures. Plans to absorb postponed visits and efficiently engage redeployed staff may be necessary to address difficulties in follow-up orthopaedic management during public health crises. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Applying to Fellowship During a Pandemic: Lessons Learned From the 2020-2021 Orthopaedic Spine Fellowship Application Cycle.

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a transition to a virtual format for all medical residency and fellowship application processes. Previous studies have discussed the successful implementation of virtual interviews, but a deep analysis of how the application process has changed for orthopedic surgery fellowship programs during the pandemic is lacking. The purpose of this study was to assess how COVID-19 impacted the orthopedic spine fellowship application and selection process. Methods A web-based survey was administered to the program directors of all 75 U.S. orthopedic surgery spine fellowship programs, which often can accept both orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery trained graduates. Questions focused on the changes from the 2019-2020 application cycle to the 2020-2021 cycle. We collected data on connecting with potential applicants, the general application process, and interviews offered by programs. Univariate analyses were used to compare data from the 2020-2021 cycle with the prior 2019-2020 cycle. Results Twenty-five of the 75 contacted program directors responded to our survey (33% response rate). The percentage of programs that offered virtual open houses/meet-and-greets increased from 20% in 2019-2020 to 52% in 2020-2021 (p=0.018). Social media use was unchanged (0.0% vs. 4.0%, p>0.05). Compared to the prior year, the number of interviews offered by programs increased by 1.5 (32.7 vs. 21.9 interviews, p=0.024). There were no significant differences in the numbers of applications received by programs, interview dates available, or separate interviews each candidate completed during an interview day (p>0.05 for all). The in-person interview was the most important factor in 2019-2020 for selecting applicants, whereas the virtual interview, letters of recommendation (LOR), and research were equally ranked as the most important factors in 2020-2021. Regarding interviews, 50% of respondents would "likely" consider virtual interviews as an option in addition to in-person interviews in the future, but most (55%) answered that it was "unlikely" that virtual interviews would entirely replace in-person interviews. Conclusion Spine fellowship programs were more likely to use virtual social events to recruit potential applicants, send out more interview invitations, and equally consider LOR and research with interview performance during an entirely virtual application cycle. Half of the program directors would consider offering virtual interviews as an option for future application cycles, which may help reduce costs associated with the process.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Functionality of International Surgical Volunteer Organizations.

Background: Surgical volunteer organizations have been severely limited during the ongoing coronavirus disease pandemic. Our purpose was to identify obstacles to surgical volunteer organizations secondary to COVID-19 and their responses. Methods: Forty-one surgical volunteer organizations participated in a web-based survey (156 invited, 26% response rate). Respondents were separated into two groups: low donations surgical volunteer organizations (≤50% donations of previous year; n = 17) and high donations surgical volunteer organizations (≥75%; n = 24). Univariate analyses were used to compare the two cohorts. Results: Of responding surgical volunteer organizations, 34 (83%) were unable to maintain full functionality due to COVID-19; 27% of high donations vs. 0% of low donations surgical volunteer organizations (p = 0.02). The three leading obstacles were finances/donations (78%), fewer volunteers (38%), and inadequate personal protective equipment (30%). In response, 39% of surgical volunteer organizations developed novel E-volunteering opportunities. For support, 85% of surgical volunteer organizations suggested monetary donations, 78% promotion through social media platforms, and 54% donation of personal protective equipment. Conclusion: The majority of surgical volunteer organizations were unable to maintain full functionality due to stressors caused by COVID-19, including limitations on finances, volunteers, and personal protective equipment.

Patient understanding regarding opioid use in an orthopaedic trauma surgery population: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have assessed provider knowledge and factors associated with opioid misuse; similar studies evaluating patient knowledge are lacking. The purpose of this study was to assess the degree of understanding regarding opioid use in orthopaedic trauma patients. We also sought to determine the demographic factors and clinical and personal experiences associated with level of understanding. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-six adult orthopaedic trauma surgery patients across two clinical sites of an academic institution participated in an internet-based survey (2352 invited, 7.1% response rate). Demographic, clinical, and personal experience variables, as well as perceptions surrounding opioid use were collected. Relationships between patient characteristics and opioid perceptions were identified using univariate and multivariable logistic regressions. Alpha = 0.05. RESULTS: Excellent recognition (> 85% correct) of common opioids, side effects, withdrawal symptoms, and disposal methods was demonstrated by 29%, 10%, 30%, and 2.4% of patients; poor recognition (< 55%) by 11%, 56%, 33%, and 52% of patients, respectively. Compared with white patients, non-white patients had 7.8 times greater odds (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-31) of perceiving addiction discrepancy (p = 0.004). Employed patients with higher education levels were less likely to have excellent understanding of side effects (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.06, 95% CI 0.006-0.56; p = 0.01) and to understand that dependence can occur within 2 weeks (aOR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.86; p = 0.03) than unemployed patients. Patients in the second least disadvantaged ADI quartile were more knowledgeable about side effects (aOR 8.8, 95% CI 1.7-46) and withdrawal symptoms (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.0-7.2; p = 0.046) than those in the least disadvantaged quartile. Patients who knew someone who was dependent or overdosed on opioids were less likely to perceive addiction discrepancy (aOR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07-0.76; p = 0.02) as well as more likely to have excellent knowledge of withdrawal symptoms (aOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-6.5, p = 0.03) and to understand that dependence can develop within 2 weeks (aOR 3.8, 95% CI 1.5-9.8, p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Level of understanding regarding opioid use is low among orthopaedic trauma surgery patients. Clinical and personal experiences with opioids, in addition to demographics, should be emphasized in the clinical history.

Restarting Orthopaedic Care in a Pandemic: Ethical Framework and Case Examples.

The question about how to resume typical orthopaedic care during a pandemic, such as coronavirus disease 2019, should be framed not only as a logistic or safety question but also as an ethical question. The current published guidelines from surgical societies do not explicitly address ethical dilemmas, such as why public health ethics requires a cessation of nonemergency surgery or how to fairly allocate limited resources for delayed surgical care. We propose ethical guidance for the resumption of care on the basis of public health ethics with a focus on clinical equipoise, triage tiers, and flexibility. We then provide orthopaedic surgery examples to guide physicians in the ethical resumption of care.

Palliative Radiation Therapy for Oncologic Emergencies in the Setting of COVID-19: Approaches to Balancing Risks and Benefits.

Palliation of metastatic disease compromises a significant portion of radiation treatments in the United States. These patients present a unique challenge in resource-limited settings, as expeditious treatment is often required to prevent serious morbidity. In order to reduce the risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 and maximize the benefit to patients, we present evidence-based recommendations for radiation in patients with oncologic emergencies. Radiation oncologists with expertise in the treatment of metastatic disease at a high-volume comprehensive cancer center reviewed the available evidence and recommended best practices for the treatment of common oncologic emergencies, with attention to balancing the risk of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 and the potential morbidity of delaying treatment. Many prospective trials and national guidelines support the use of abbreviated courses of radiotherapy for patients with oncologic emergencies. As such, in the setting of the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the use of hypofractionated radiation therapy for patients requiring palliation for oncologic emergencies achieves desirable functional outcomes without compromising care.

Breast Radiation Therapy Under COVID-19 Pandemic Resource Constraints-Approaches to Defer or Shorten Treatment From a Comprehensive Cancer Center in the United States.

PURPOSE: Breast radiation therapy accounts for a significant proportion of patient volume in contemporary radiation oncology practice. In the setting of anticipated resource constraints and widespread community infection with SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic, measures for balancing both infectious and oncologic risk among patients and providers must be carefully considered. Here, we present evidence-based guidelines for omitting or abbreviating breast cancer radiation therapy, where appropriate, in an effort to mitigate risk to patients and optimize resource utilization. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Multidisciplinary breast cancer experts at a high-volume comprehensive cancer center convened contingency planning meetings over the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic to review the relevant literature and establish recommendations for the application of hypofractionated and abbreviated breast radiation regimens. RESULTS: Substantial evidence exists to support omitting radiation among certain favorable risk subgroups of patients with breast cancer and for abbreviating or accelerating regimens among others. For those who require either whole-breast or postmastectomy radiation, with or without coverage of the regional lymph nodes, a growing body of literature supports various hypofractionated approaches that appear safe and effective. CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of a public health emergency with the potential to strain critical healthcare resources and place patients at risk of infection, the parsimonious application of breast radiation therapy may alleviate a significant clinical burden without compromising long-term oncologic outcomes. The judicious and personalized use of immature study data may be warranted in the setting of a competing mortality risk from this widespread pandemic.