ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic posed several challenges for surgical training, including the suspension of many in-person teaching sessions in lieu of webinars. As restrictions have eased, both prepandemic and postpandemic training methods should be used. OBJECTIVE: This study investigates trainees' experiences of webinars during the COVID-19 pandemic to develop recommendations for their effective integration into surgical training going forward. METHODS: This project was led by the Association of Surgeons in Training and used an iterative process with mixed qualitative methods to consolidate arguments for and against webinars, and the drivers and barriers to their effective delivery, into recommendations. This involved 3 phases: (1) a web-based survey, (2) focus group interviews, and (3) a consensus session using a nominal group technique. RESULTS: Trainees (N=281) from across specialties and grades confirmed that the COVID-19 pandemic led to an increase in webinars for surgical training. While there were concerns, particularly around the utility for practical training (80.9%), the majority agreed that webinars had a role in training following the COVID-19 pandemic (90.2%). The cited benefits included improved access or flexibility and potential standardization of training. The majority of limitations were technical. These perspectives were refined through focus group interviews (n=18) into 25 recommendations, 23 of which were ratified at a consensus meeting, which was held at the Association of Surgeons in Training 2021 conference. CONCLUSIONS: Webinars have a role in surgical training following the COVID-19 pandemic. The 23 recommendations encompass indications and technical considerations but also discuss important knowledge gaps. They should serve as an initial framework for ensuring that webinars add value and continue to evolve as a tool for training. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2200055325; http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=142802.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: To evaluate safety outcomes and patient satisfaction of the re-introduction of elective orthopaedic surgery on 'green' (non-COVID-19) sites during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A strategy consisting of phased relaxation of clinical comorbidity criteria was developed. Patients from the orthopaedic waiting list were selected according to these criteria and observed recommended preoperative isolation protocols. Surgery was performed at green sites (two local private hospitals) under the COVID-19 NHS contract. The first 100 consecutive patients that met the Phase 1 criteria and underwent surgery were included. In hospital and postoperative complications with specific enquiry as to development of COVID-19 symptoms or need and outcome for COVID-19 testing at 14 days and six weeks was recorded. Patient satisfaction was surveyed at 14 days postoperatively. RESULTS: There were 54 females and 46 males (mean age 44 years, mean body mass index (BMI) 25.6 kg/m2). In all, 56 patients underwent major orthopaedic procedures. There were no exclusions. One patient had a postoperative positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test but had no typical symptoms of COVID-19 infection and no clinical sequelae. 99% of patients were satisfied with the process and 98% would recommend undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery in the study period. CONCLUSION: In an environment with appropriate infrastructure, patient selection, isolation, screening, and testing, elective orthopaedic surgery is safe during the COVID-19 pandemic, and associated with high patient satisfaction. Further follow-up is required to establish that safety is maintained as the clinical restrictions are eased with the phased approach described.Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-8:450-456.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: The aim of this study is to determine the effects of the UK lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic on the orthopaedic admissions, operations, training opportunities, and theatre efficiency in a large district general hospital. METHODS: The number of patients referred to the orthopaedic team between 1 April 2020 and 30 April 2020 were collected. Other data collected included patient demographics, number of admissions, number and type of operations performed, and seniority of primary surgeon. Theatre time was collected consisting of anaesthetic time, surgical time, time to leave theatre, and turnaround time. Data were compared to the same period in 2019. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in median age of admitted patients during lockdown (70.5 (interquartile range (IQR) 46.25 to 84) vs 57 (IQR 27 to 79.75); p = 0.017) with a 26% decrease in referrals from 303 to 224 patients and 37% decrease in admissions from 177 to 112 patients, with a significantly higher proportion of hip fracture admissions (33% (n = 37) vs 19% (n = 34); p = 0.011). Paediatric admissions decreased by 72% from 32 to nine patients making up 8% of admissions during lockdown compared to 18.1% the preceding year (p = 0.002) with 66.7% reduction in paediatric operations, from 18 to 6. There was a significant increase in median turnaround time (13 minutes (IQR 12 to 33) vs 60 minutes (IQR 41 to 71); p < 0.001) although there was no significant difference in the anaesthetic time or surgical time. There was a 38% (61 vs 38) decrease in trainee-led operations. DISCUSSION: The lockdown resulted in large decreases in referrals and admissions. Despite this, hip fracture admissions were unaffected and should remain a priority for trauma service planning in future lockdowns. As plans to resume normal elective and trauma services begin, hospitals should focus on minimising theatre turnaround time to maximize theatre efficiency while prioritizing training opportunities. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Lockdown has resulted in decreases in the trauma burden although hip fractures remain unaffected requiring priorityTheatre turnaround times and training opportunities are affected and should be optimised prior to the resumption of normal services.Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-8:494-499.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: The aim of this paper is to describe the impact of COVID-19 on spine surgery services in a district general hospital in England in order to understand the spinal service provisions that may be required during a pandemic. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was undertaken between 17 March 2020 and 30 April 2020 and compared with retrospective data from same time period in 2019. We compared the number of patients requiring acute hospital admission or orthopaedic referrals and indications of referrals from our admission sheets and obtained operative data from our theatre software. RESULTS: Between 17 March to 30 April 2020, there were 48 acute spine referrals as compared to 68 acute referrals during the same time period last year. In the 2019 period, 69% (47/68) of cases referred to the on-call team presented with back pain, radiculopathy or myelopathy compared to 43% (21/48) in the 2020 period. Almost 20% (14/68) of spine referrals consisted of spine trauma as compared to 35% (17/48) this year. There were no confirmed cases of cauda equine last year during this time. Overall, 150 spine cases were carried out during this time period last year, and 261 spine elective cases were cancelled since 17 March 2020. RECOMMENDATIONS: We recommend following steps can be helpful to deal with similar situations or new pandemics in future:24 hours on-call spine service during the pandemic.Clinical criteria in place to prioritize urgent spinal cases.Pre-screening spine patients before elective operating.Start of separate specialist trauma list for patients needing urgent surgeries. CONCLUSION: This paper highlights the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in a district general hospital of England. We demonstrate a decrease in hospital attendances of spine pathologies, despite an increase in emergency spine operations.Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:281-286.