Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
Diagnostics ; 12(4):797, 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1809760

ABSTRACT

Background: Novel, non-invasive diagnostic biomarkers that facilitate early intervention in head and neck cancer are urgently needed. Polyamine metabolites have been observed to be elevated in numerous cancer types and correlated with poor prognosis. The aim of this study was to assess the concentration of polyamines in the saliva and urine from head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, compared to healthy controls. Methods: Targeted metabolomic analysis was performed on saliva and urine from 39 HNC patient samples and compared to 89 healthy controls using a quantitative, targeted liquid chromatography mass spectrometry approach. Results: The metabolites N1-acetylspermine (ASP), N8-acetylspermidine (ASD) and N1,N12-diacetylspermine (DAS) were detected at significantly different concentrations in the urine of HNC patients as compared to healthy controls. Only ASP was detected at elevated levels in HNC saliva as compared to healthy controls. Conclusion: These data suggest that assessment of polyamine-based metabolite biomarkers within the saliva and urine warrants further investigation as a potential diagnostic in HNC patients.

2.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-311213

ABSTRACT

Importance: The rapidly expanding 2019 novel coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus) has challenged the medical community to an unprecedented degree. Physicians and healthcare workers are at added risk of exposure and infection during the course of the patient care. Due to the rapid spread of this disease through respiratory droplets, healthcare providers such as otolaryngologists-head &neck surgeons who come in close contact with the upper aerodigestive tract during diagnostic and therapeutic procedures are particularly at risk. Here we present a set of safety recommendations based on our review of literature and communications with physicians with first-hand knowledge of safety procedures during the 2019 COVID-19 pandemic.Observations: A high number of healthcare providers were infected during the first phase of the pandemic in Wuhan province. Subsequently, by adopting strict safety precautions, other regions were able to achieve high levels of safety for healthcare providers without jeopardizing the care of patients. We reviewed the most common procedures related to the examination and treatment of upper aerodigestive tract diseases. Each category was reviewed based on the potential risk imposed to healthcare workers. Specific recommendations were made, based on the literature, when available, or consensus best practices. Specific safety recommendations were made for performing tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients. Conclusions and Relevance: Preserving highly skilled healthcare work force is a top priority for any community and healthcare system. Based on the experience of healthcare systems in Asia and Europe, by following strict safety guidelines, the risk of exposure and infection of healthcare providers could be significantly reduced, while providing high levels of care. The provided recommendations could be used as broad guidance for all healthcare workers who are involved with the care of COVID-19 patients.

3.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(2): e22197, 2021 02 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1573649

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To control the COVID-19 pandemic, people should adopt protective behaviors at home (self-isolation, social distancing, putting shopping and packages aside, wearing face coverings, cleaning and disinfecting, and handwashing). There is currently limited support to help individuals conduct these behaviors. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to report current household infection control behaviors in the United Kingdom and examine how they might be improved. METHODS: This was a pragmatic cross-sectional observational study of anonymous participant data from Germ Defence between May 6-24, 2020. Germ Defence is an open-access fully automated website providing behavioral advice for infection control within households. A total of 28,285 users sought advice from four website pathways based on household status (advice to protect themselves generally, to protect others if the user was showing symptoms, to protect themselves if household members were showing symptoms, and to protect a household member who is at high risk). Users reported current infection control behaviors within the home and intentions to change these behaviors. RESULTS: Current behaviors varied across all infection control measures but were between sometimes (face covering: mean 1.61, SD 1.19; social distancing: mean 2.40, SD 1.22; isolating: mean 2.78, SD 1.29; putting packages and shopping aside: mean 2.75, SD 1.55) and quite often (cleaning and disinfecting: mean 3.17, SD 1.18), except for handwashing (very often: mean 4.00, SD 1.03). Behaviors were similar regardless of the website pathway used. After using Germ Defence, users recorded intentions to improve infection control behavior across all website pathways and for all behaviors (overall average infection control score mean difference 0.30, 95% CI 0.29-0.31). CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported infection control behaviors other than handwashing are lower than is optimal for infection prevention, although handwashing is much higher. Advice using behavior change techniques in Germ Defence led to intentions to improve these behaviors. Promoting Germ Defence within national and local public health and primary care guidance could reduce COVID-19 transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Infection Control/methods , Internet-Based Intervention , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Family Characteristics , Health Behavior , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom/epidemiology
4.
Glob Heart ; 16(1): 66, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1497690

ABSTRACT

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a continuous and robust impact on world health. The resulting COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating physical, mental and fiscal impact on the millions of people living with noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). In addition to older age, people living with CVD, stroke, obesity, diabetes, kidney disease, and hypertension are at a particularly greater risk for severe forms of COVID-19 and its consequences. Meta-analysis indicates that hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and thrombotic complications have been observed as both the most prevalent and most dangerous co-morbidities in COVID-19 patients. And despite the nearly incalculable physical, mental, emotional, and economic toll of this pandemic, forthcoming public health figures continue to place cardiovascular disease as the number one cause of death across the globe in the year 2020. The world simply cannot wait for the next pandemic to invest in NCDs. Social determinants of health cannot be addressed only through the healthcare system, but a more holistic multisectoral approach with at its basis the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is needed to truly address social and economic inequalities and build more resilient systems. Yet there is reason for hope: the 2019 UN Political Declaration on UHC provides a strong framework for building more resilient health systems, with explicit calls for investment in NCDs and references to fiscal policies that put such investment firmly within reach. By further cementing the importance of addressing circulatory health in a future Framework Convention on Emergency Preparedness, WHO Member States can take concrete steps towards a pandemic-free future. As the chief representatives of the global circulatory health community and patients, the Global Coalition for Circulatory Health calls for increased support for the healthcare workforce, global vaccine equity, embracing new models of care and digital health solutions, as well as fiscal policies on unhealthy commodities to support these investments.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Noncommunicable Diseases , Aged , Global Health , Humans , Noncommunicable Diseases/epidemiology , Noncommunicable Diseases/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Lancet ; 398(10309): 1417-1426, 2021 10 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1432164

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic resistance is a global public health threat. Antibiotics are very commonly prescribed for children presenting with uncomplicated lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs), but there is little evidence from randomised controlled trials of the effectiveness of antibiotics, both overall or among key clinical subgroups. In ARTIC PC, we assessed whether amoxicillin reduces the duration of moderately bad symptoms in children presenting with uncomplicated (non-pneumonic) LRTI in primary care, overall and in key clinical subgroups. METHODS: ARTIC PC was a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 56 general practices in England. Eligible children were those aged 6 months to 12 years presenting in primary care with acute uncomplicated LRTI judged to be infective in origin, where pneumonia was not suspected clinically, with symptoms for less than 21 days. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive amoxicillin 50 mg/kg per day or placebo oral suspension, in three divided doses orally for 7 days. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was the duration of symptoms rated moderately bad or worse (measured using a validated diary) for up to 28 days or until symptoms resolved. The primary outcome and safety were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN79914298). FINDINGS: Between Nov 9, 2016, and March 17, 2020, 432 children (not including six who withdrew permission for use of their data after randomisation) were randomly assigned to the antibiotics group (n=221) or the placebo group (n=211). Complete data for symptom duration were available for 317 (73%) patients; missing data were imputed for the primary analysis. Median durations of moderately bad or worse symptoms were similar between the groups (5 days [IQR 4-11] in the antibiotics group vs 6 days [4-15] in the placebo group; hazard ratio [HR] 1·13 [95% CI 0·90-1·42]). No differences were seen for the primary outcome between the treatment groups in the five prespecified clinical subgroups (patients with chest signs, fever, physician rating of unwell, sputum or chest rattle, and short of breath). Estimates from complete-case analysis and a per-protocol analysis were similar to the imputed data analysis. INTERPRETATION: Amoxicillin for uncomplicated chest infections in children is unlikely to be clinically effective either overall or for key subgroups in whom antibiotics are commonly prescribed. Unless pneumonia is suspected, clinicians should provide safety-netting advice but not prescribe antibiotics for most children presenting with chest infections. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.


Subject(s)
Amoxicillin/therapeutic use , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Respiratory Tract Infections/drug therapy , Administration, Oral , Amoxicillin/administration & dosage , Anti-Bacterial Agents/administration & dosage , Child , Child, Preschool , Double-Blind Method , England , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Primary Health Care , Treatment Outcome
6.
OTO Open ; 5(3): 2473974X211047794, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1448101

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the concerns and needs of patients and survivors of head and neck cancer (HNC) in the COVID-19 era. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Contact lists of 5 North American HNC advocacy groups. METHODS: A 14-question survey was distributed to the contact lists of 5 HNC advocacy groups evaluating patient and survivor needs and concerns related to their cancer care and COVID-19. RESULTS: There were 171 respondents, with 75% in the posttreatment period. The most common concern was contraction of COVID-19 (49%). More patients in active treatment preferred in-person visits than those in the early (≤5 years) and late (>5) survivorship period (72% vs 61% vs 40%, P < .001). A higher percentage of late survivors preferred virtual visits (38% vs 28%, P = .001). In total, 91 (53.2%) respondents sought emotional support outside of immediate family and friends. This included cancer support groups (36.2%), the medical team (29.7%), and other sources outside of these (34.1%), including faith-based organizations and online communities. A higher proportion of women than men (62% vs 41%, P = .001) were seeking emotional support outside of immediate family and friends. CONCLUSIONS: During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with HNC who were actively undergoing treatment had increased need for support resources and preferred in-person provider visits. Alternatively, a higher percentage of patients >5 years from treatment preferred virtual visits. Emotional support outside of family and friends was sought out by a majority of respondents. Further research is needed to determine what support and educational resources are needed to best aid these various populations.

8.
Cureus ; 13(6): e15534, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1285545

ABSTRACT

Introduction Most medical school applicants use the internet as a source of information when applying for medical school. Previous analyses have evaluated residency and fellowship websites; however, an in-depth analysis of medical school websites is lacking. Methods We evaluated 192 United States (US) medical school websites for presence or absence of 39 items relevant to medical school applicants. Items fell into seven general categories: curriculum, research, demographics of incoming class, admissions information, faculty, financial aid, and social. Results Of the 192 websites evaluated (152 allopathic and 40 osteopathic schools), websites contained a mean of 23 items (59%) with a standard deviation of 4.2 items. Conclusion Our study examining US medical school websites revealed a lack of online information for medical school applicants. As medical school interviews transition to being online during the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of the medical school website to applicants becomes increasingly crucial. The information contained in our study could be used to improve the functionality and quality of information on medical school websites, which could help both applicants and the medical schools themselves.

9.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 1180, 2021 06 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1274543

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Digital interventions have potential to efficiently support improved hygiene practices to reduce transmission of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence for digital interventions to improve hygiene practices within the community. METHODS: We reviewed articles published between 01 January 2000 and 26 May 2019 that presented a controlled trial of a digital intervention to improve hygiene behaviours in the community. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), China National Knowledge Infrastructure and grey literature. Trials in hospitals were excluded, as were trials aiming at prevention of sexually transmitted infections; only target diseases with transmission mechanisms similar to COVID-19 (e.g. respiratory and gastrointestinal infections) were included. Trials had to evaluate a uniquely digital component of an intervention. Study designs were limited to randomised controlled trials, controlled before-and-after trials, and interrupted time series analyses. Outcomes could be either incidence of infections or change in hygiene behaviours. The Risk of Bias 2 tool was used to assess study quality. RESULTS: We found seven studies that met the inclusion criteria. Six studies reported successfully improving self-reported hygiene behaviour or health outcomes, but only one of these six trials, Germ Defence, confirmed improvements using objective measures (reduced consultations and antibiotic prescriptions). Settings included kindergartens, workplaces, and service station restrooms. Modes of delivery were diverse: WeChat, website, text messages, audio messages to mobiles, electronic billboards, and electronic personal care records. Four interventions targeted parents of young children with educational materials. Two targeted the general population; these also used behaviour change techniques or theory to inform the intervention. Only one trial had low risk of bias, Germ Defence; the most common concerns were lack of information about the randomisation, possible bias in reporting of behavioural outcomes, and lack of an analysis plan and possible selective reporting of results. CONCLUSION: There was only one trial that was judged to be at low risk of bias, Germ Defence, which reduced incidence and severity of illness, as confirmed by objective measures. Further evaluation is required to determine the effectiveness of the other interventions reviewed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020189919 .


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Parents , Adult , Child , China , Health Behavior , Health Education , Humans , Incidence , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Front Public Health ; 9: 668197, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1226995

ABSTRACT

Background: A rigorous approach is needed to inform rapid adaptation and optimisation of behavioral interventions in evolving public health contexts, such as the Covid-19 pandemic. This helps ensure that interventions are relevant, persuasive, and feasible while remaining evidence-based. This paper provides a set of iterative methods to rapidly adapt and optimize an intervention during implementation. These methods are demonstrated through the example of optimizing an effective online handwashing intervention called Germ Defense. Methods: Three revised versions of the intervention were rapidly optimized and launched within short timeframes of 1-2 months. Optimisations were informed by: regular stakeholder engagement; emerging scientific evidence, and changing government guidance; rapid qualitative research (telephone think-aloud interviews and open-text surveys), and analyses of usage data. All feedback was rapidly collated, using the Table of Changes method from the Person-Based Approach to prioritize potential optimisations in terms of their likely impact on behavior change. Written feedback from stakeholders on each new iteration of the intervention also informed specific optimisations of the content. Results: Working closely with clinical stakeholders ensured that the intervention was clinically accurate, for example, confirming that information about transmission and exposure was consistent with evidence. Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) contributors identified important clarifications to intervention content, such as whether Covid-19 can be transmitted via air as well as surfaces, and ensured that information about difficult behaviors (such as self-isolation) was supportive and feasible. Iterative updates were made in line with emerging evidence, including changes to the information about face-coverings and opening windows. Qualitative research provided insights into barriers to engaging with the intervention and target behaviors, with open-text surveys providing a useful supplement to detailed think-aloud interviews. Usage data helped identify common points of disengagement, which guided decisions about optimisations. The Table of Changes was modified to facilitate rapid collation and prioritization of multiple sources of feedback to inform optimisations. Engagement with PPI informed the optimisation process. Conclusions: Rapid optimisation methods of this kind may in future be used to help improve the speed and efficiency of adaptation, optimization, and implementation of interventions, in line with calls for more rapid, pragmatic health research methods.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Public Health , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Trials ; 22(1): 263, 2021 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1175339

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of randomising dissemination of the Germ Defence behaviour change website via GP practices across England UK. TRIAL DESIGN: A two-arm (1:1 ratio) cluster randomised controlled trial implementing Germ Defence via GP practices compared with usual care. PARTICIPANTS: Setting: All Primary care GP practices in England. PARTICIPANTS: All patients aged 16 years and over who were granted access by participating GP practices. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: We will ask staff at GP practices randomised to the intervention arm to share the weblink to Germ Defence with all adult patients registered at their practice during the 4-month trial implementation period and care will otherwise follow current standard management. Germ Defence is an interactive website ( http://GermDefence.org/ ) employing behaviour change techniques and practical advice on how to reduce the spread of infection in the home. The coronavirus version of Germ Defence helps people understand what measures to take and when to take them to avoid infection. This includes hand washing, avoiding sharing rooms and surfaces, dealing with deliveries and ventilating rooms. Using behaviour change techniques, it helps users think through and adopt better home hygiene habits and find ways to solve any barriers, providing personalised goal setting and tailored advice that fits users' personal circumstances and problem solving to overcome barriers. Comparator: Patients at GP practices randomised to the usual care arm will receive current standard management for the 4-month trial period after which we will ask staff to share the link to Germ Defence with all adult patients registered at their practice. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is the effects of implementing Germ Defence on prevalence of all respiratory tract infection diagnoses during the 4-month trial implementation period. The secondary outcomes are: 1) incidence of COVID-19 diagnoses 2) incidence of COVID-19 symptom presentation 3) incidence of gastrointestinal infections 4) number of primary care consultations 5) antibiotic usage 6) hospital admissions 7) uptake of GP practices disseminating Germ Defence to their patients 8) usage of the Germ Defence website by individuals who were granted access by their GP practice RANDOMISATION: GP practices will be randomised on a 1:1 basis by the independent Bristol Randomised Trials Collaboration (BRTC). Clinical Commission Groups (CCGs) in England will be divided into blocks according to region, and equal numbers in each block will be randomly allocated to intervention or usual care. The randomisation schedule will be generated in Stata statistical software by a statistician not otherwise involved in the enrolment of general practices into the study. BLINDING (MASKING): The principal investigators, the statistician and study collaborators will remain blinded from the identity of randomised practices until the end of the study. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): To detect planned effect size (based on PRIMIT trial, Little et al, 2015): 11.1 million respondents from 6822 active GP practices. Assuming 25% of these GP practices will engage, we will contact all GP practices in England spread across 135 Clinical Commissioning Groups. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 2.0, dated 13 January 2021. Implementation is ongoing. The implementation period started on 10 November 2020 and will end on 10 March 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in the ISRCTN registry ( isrctn.com/ ISRCTN14602359 ) on 12 August 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Health Behavior , Pandemics , Adult , England/epidemiology , General Practice , Humans , Internet , Primary Health Care , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
12.
BMJ Open ; 11(3): e045356, 2021 03 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1148168

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Identify predictors of clinical deterioration in a virtual hospital (VH) setting for COVID-19. DESIGN: Real-world prospective observational study. SETTING: VH remote assessment service in West Hertfordshire NHS Trust, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with suspected COVID-19 illness enrolled directly from the community (postaccident and emergency (A&E) or medical intake assessment) or postinpatient admission. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Death or (re-)admission to inpatient hospital care during VH follow-up and for 2 weeks post-VH discharge. RESULTS: 900 patients with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 (455 referred from A&E or medical intake and 445 postinpatient) were included in the analysis. 76 (8.4%) of these experienced clinical deterioration (15 deaths in admitted patients, 3 deaths in patients not admitted and 58 additional inpatient admissions). Predictors of clinical deterioration were increase in age (OR 1.04 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.06) per year of age), history of cancer (OR 2.87 (95% CI 1.41 to 5.82)), history of mental health problems (OR 1.76 (95% CI 1.02 to 3.04)), severely impaired renal function (OR for eGFR <30=9.09 (95% CI 2.01 to 41.09)) and having a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR result (OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.11 to 3.60)). CONCLUSIONS: These predictors may help direct intensity of monitoring for patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 who are being remotely monitored by primary or secondary care services. Further research is needed to confirm our findings and identify the reasons for increased risk of clinical deterioration associated with cancer and mental health problems.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Clinical Deterioration , Remote Consultation , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/pathology , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors
14.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(1)2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-884956

ABSTRACT

We describe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) among US food manufacturing and agriculture workers and provide updated information on meat and poultry processing workers. Among 742 food and agriculture workplaces in 30 states, 8,978 workers had confirmed COVID-19; 55 workers died. Racial and ethnic minority workers could be disproportionately affected by COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Agriculture , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Food Industry , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
15.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 164(1): 93-96, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-719525

ABSTRACT

To provide data on risk of respiratory droplets from common otolaryngologic procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic, a novel simulation of droplet exposure from flexible laryngoscopy was performed. After completion of a nasal symptom questionnaire, topical fluorescein spray was administered into the nasal and oropharynx of 10 healthy volunteers, who then underwent flexible laryngoscopy under 2 conditions: routine without provoked response and with prompted sneeze/cough. After each, droplets on the proceduralist and participant were counted under ultraviolet A light. Droplets were observed on 1 of 10 volunteers after routine laryngoscopy and 4 of 10 during laryngoscopy with sneeze/cough. A nasal symptom score based on congestion and rhinorrhea was significantly elevated among droplet producers after sneeze/cough (P = .0164). No droplets were observed on the provider. Overall, with adequate personal protective equipment, flexible laryngoscopy poses minimal droplet risk to providers. Nasal symptoms can identify patients more likely to produce droplets after sneeze/cough.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Laryngoscopy/adverse effects , Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases/diagnosis , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/transmission , Comorbidity , Humans , Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases/epidemiology , Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases/therapy
16.
Head Neck ; 42(7): 1526-1532, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-434497

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on many aspects of head and neck cancer (HNC) care. The uncertainty and stress resulting from these changes has led many patients and caregivers to turn to HNC advocacy groups for guidance and support. Here we outline some of the issues being faced by patients with HNC during the current crisis and provide examples of programs being developed by advocacy groups to address them. We also highlight the increased utilization of these organizations that has been observed as well as some of the challenges being faced by these not-for-profit groups as they work to serve the head and neck community.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Foundations , Head and Neck Neoplasms , Organizations, Nonprofit , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Congresses as Topic , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Advocacy , Patient Education as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Media , Telemedicine
17.
Head Neck ; 42(7): 1411-1417, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-209697

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted medical training. Here we assess its effect on head and neck surgical education. METHODS: Surveys were sent to current accredited program directors and trainees to assess the impact of COVID-19 on the fellow's experience and employment search. Current fellows' operative logs were compared with those of the 2018 to 2019 graduates. RESULTS: Despite reduction in operative volume, 82% of current American Head and Neck Society fellows have reached the number of major surgical operations to support certification. When surveyed, 86% of program directors deemed their fellow ready to enter practice. The majority of fellows felt prepared to practice ablative (96%), and microvascular surgery (73%), and 57% have secured employment to follow graduation. Five (10%) had a pending job position put on hold due to the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, current accredited trainees remain well-positioned to obtain proficiency and enter the work-force.


Subject(s)
Clinical Competence , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Curriculum , Fellowships and Scholarships/organization & administration , Otolaryngology/education , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Education, Medical, Graduate/organization & administration , Employment/statistics & numerical data , Female , Head and Neck Neoplasms/surgery , Humans , Male , Occupational Health/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Patient Safety/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment , United States
18.
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 146(6): 579-584, 2020 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20526

ABSTRACT

Importance: The rapidly expanding novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has challenged the medical community to an unprecedented degree. Physicians and health care workers are at added risk of exposure and infection during the course of patient care. Because of the rapid spread of this disease through respiratory droplets, health care workers who come in close contact with the upper aerodigestive tract during diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, such as otolaryngologists-head and neck surgeons, are particularly at risk. A set of safety recommendations was created based on a review of the literature and communications with physicians with firsthand knowledge of safety procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Observations: A high number of health care workers were infected during the first phase of the pandemic in the city of Wuhan, China. Subsequently, by adopting strict safety precautions, other regions were able to achieve high levels of safety for health care workers without jeopardizing the care of patients. The most common procedures related to the examination and treatment of upper aerodigestive tract diseases were reviewed. Each category was reviewed based on the potential risk imposed to health care workers. Specific recommendations were made based on the literature, when available, or consensus best practices. Specific safety recommendations were made for performing tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance: Preserving a highly skilled health care workforce is a top priority for any community and health care system. Based on the experience of health care systems in Asia and Europe, by following strict safety guidelines, the risk of exposure and infection of health care workers could be greatly reduced while providing high levels of care. The provided recommendations, which may evolve over time, could be used as broad guidance for all health care workers who are involved in the care of patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Consensus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Otolaryngology/standards , Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases/surgery , Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures/standards , Patient Care/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Humans , Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL