Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
3.
Nucl Med Commun ; 42(2): 138-149, 2021 Feb 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1236282

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: COVID-19 brought about unprecedented challenges to healthcare, with nuclear medicine (NM) being no exception. The British Nuclear Medicine Society (BNMS) COVID-19 survey assessed the impact of the first wave of pandemic on NM services in the UK. With COVID-19 resurge compounded by seasonal winter pressures, we reflect and share lessons learnt from the first wave of pandemic to guide future strategy. METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of 34 questions was sent out to all BNMS members over 2 weeks in May 2020, to evaluate the impact of 'lockdown'. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-eight members (92 sites) from a multidisciplinary background responded. There was a 65% reduction across all services; 97.6% of respondents reported some reduction in diagnostic procedures and 71.3% reduction in therapies; 85% worked with a reduced workforce. The North East of England, Greater London and South East and Wessex were most affected by staff absences. The North East reported the highest number of COVID-19 positive staff; London reported the greatest lack of testing. The reported time required to clear the backlog was 1-12 months. Seventy-one percent of participants used BNMS COVID-19 guidance. CONCLUSION: The first wave caused a major disruption of NM service delivery and impacted on the workforce. The departmental strategies should tailor services to evolving local and regional differences in prevalence of COVID-19. A blanket shutdown of services with a 'one size fits all' strategy would likely have a severe impact on future delivery of NM and health services in general. Timely testing of staff and patients remains of paramount importance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Nuclear Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Workforce/statistics & numerical data
4.
J Med Ethics ; 2020 Nov 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-939905

ABSTRACT

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic there was widespread concern that healthcare systems would be overwhelmed, and specifically, that there would be insufficient critical care capacity in terms of beds, ventilators or staff to care for patients. In the UK, this was avoided by a threefold approach involving widespread, rapid expansion of critical care capacity, reduction of healthcare demand from non-COVID-19 sources by temporarily pausing much of normal healthcare delivery, and by governmental and societal responses that reduced demand through national lockdown. Despite high-level documents designed to help manage limited critical care capacity, none provided sufficient operational direction to enable use at the bedside in situations requiring triage. We present and describe the development of a structured process for fair allocation of critical care resources in the setting of insufficient capacity. The document combines a wide variety of factors known to impact on outcome from critical illness, integrated with broad-based clinical judgement to enable structured, explicit, transparent decision-making founded on robust ethical principles. It aims to improve communication and allocate resources fairly, while avoiding triage decisions based on a single disease, comorbidity, patient age or degree of frailty. It is designed to support and document decision-making. The document has not been needed to date, nor adopted as hospital policy. However, as the pandemic evolves, the resumption of necessary non-COVID-19 healthcare and economic activity mean capacity issues and the potential need for triage may yet return. The document is presented as a starting point for stakeholder feedback and discussion.

5.
BJR Case Rep ; 6(3): 20200091, 2020 Sep 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-760684

ABSTRACT

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes the infectious disease COVID-19, was declared a global pandemic in March 2020. As radiology departments recommence 18FDG-PET/CT imaging, it is likely that both asymptomatic and specific symptomatic patients with COVID-19 infection will be imaged, particularly if the disease becomes endemic in the UK. We review the clinical scenarios where 18FDG-PET/CT could be performed in COVID-19 positive patients. Our local protocol for safely scanning known COVID-19 positive patients is described, highlighting considerations for other departments. We present the findings from a series of known COVID-19 positive patients and two further asymptomatic cases evaluated with18FDG-PET/CT. Classic, indeterminate, normal and non-COVID-19 manifestations on both the 18FDG-PETand low dose CT component are described as an aid for radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians when reporting 18FDG PET/CT.

6.
Oral Oncol ; 106: 104767, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-155153

ABSTRACT

Surgical tracheostomies have a role in the weaning process of COVID-19 patients treated in intensive care units. A multidisciplinary team approach (MDT) is required for decision making. This process is augmented by specific standard operating practices implemented by senior clinicians. Here, we report on our early experience and outcomes with open tracheostomies in a cohort of COVID-19 patients. We outline the criteria that guide decision making and explore the challenges faced by our intensive care colleagues in the management of these patients. The cohort was 100% male with 90% of them having a raised Body Mass Index (BMI) and other comorbidities (hypertension and diabetes). 60% have been decannulated and have been stepped down the intensive care unit. We recorded no surgical complications or adverse events. The service to date has been shown to be effective, safe, largely reproducible and reflective.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/surgery , Patient Care Team , Pneumonia, Viral/surgery , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Body Mass Index , COVID-19 , Clinical Decision-Making , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Critical Care , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
7.
Nucl Med Commun ; 41(6): 499-504, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-73987

ABSTRACT

This guidance document is a brief consensus document covering the range and breadth of nuclear medicine practice in the UK, and identifies a few steps individual nuclear medicine practitioners and departments can take in the best interests of their patients. This guidance document should be used to inform local practice and does not replace local Trust policies or any relevant legislation. At all times, the best interests of the patients should be paramount. Please read this guidance in conjunction with previous editorial (COVID-19- Nuclear Medicine Departments, be prepared! by Huang HL, Allie R, Gnanasegaran G, Bomanji. J Nucl Med Commun 2020; 41:297-299). Although some aspects of this guidance are time-sensitive due to the nature of the global emergency, we believe that there is still sufficient information to provide some key guiding principles.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Nuclear Medicine , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Diagnostic Imaging , Hand Hygiene , Hospital Departments , Humans , National Health Programs , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Radiopharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , United Kingdom
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL