Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
25th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (IEEE EDOC) ; : 1-8, 2021.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1666253

ABSTRACT

Context: The outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic of the new COVID-19 disease (COVID-19 for short) demands empowering existing medical, economic, and social emergency backend systems with data analytics capabilities. An impediment in taking advantages of data analytics in these systems is the lack of a unified framework or reference model. Ontologies are highlighted as a promising solution to bridge this gap by providing a formal representation of COVID-19 concepts such as symptoms, infections rate, contact tracing, and drug modelling. Ontology-based solutions enable the integration of diverse data sources that leads to a better understanding of pandemic data, management of smart lockdowns by identifying pandemic hotspots, and knowledge-driven inference, reasoning, and recommendations to tackle surrounding issues. Objective: This study aims to investigate COVID-19 related challenges that can benefit from ontology-based solutions, analyse available tool support, and identify emerging challenges that impact research and development of ontologies for COVID-19. Moreover, reference architecture models are presented to facilitate the design and development of innovative solutions that rely on ontology-based solutions and relevant tool support to address a multitude of challenges related to COVID-19. Method: We followed the formal guidelines of systematic mapping studies and systematic reviews to identify a total of 56 solutions - published research on ontology models for COVID-19 - and qualitatively selected 10 of them for the review. Results: Thematic analysis of the investigated solutions pinpoints five research themes including telehealth, health monitoring, disease modelling, data intelligence, and drug modelling. Each theme is supported by tool(s) enabling automation and user-decision support. Furthermore, we present four reference architectures that can address recurring challenges towards the development of the next generation of ontology-based solutions for COVID-19 analytics.

2.
Anaesthesia ; 76(9): 1167-1175, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1232296

ABSTRACT

Between October 2020 and January 2021, we conducted three national surveys to track anaesthetic, surgical and critical care activity during the second COVID-19 pandemic wave in the UK. We surveyed all NHS hospitals where surgery is undertaken. Response rates, by round, were 64%, 56% and 51%. Despite important regional variations, the surveys showed increasing systemic pressure on anaesthetic and peri-operative services due to the need to support critical care pandemic demands. During Rounds 1 and 2, approximately one in eight anaesthetic staff were not available for anaesthetic work. Approximately one in five operating theatres were closed and activity fell in those that were open. Some mitigation was achieved by relocation of surgical activity to other locations. Approximately one-quarter of all surgical activity was lost, with paediatric and non-cancer surgery most impacted. During January 2021, the system was largely overwhelmed. Almost one-third of anaesthesia staff were unavailable, 42% of operating theatres were closed, national surgical activity reduced to less than half, including reduced cancer and emergency surgery. Redeployed anaesthesia staff increased the critical care workforce by 125%. Three-quarters of critical care units were so expanded that planned surgery could not be safely resumed. At all times, the greatest resource limitation was staff. Due to lower response rates from the most pressed regions and hospitals, these results may underestimate the true impact. These findings have important implications for understanding what has happened during the COVID-19 pandemic, planning recovery and building a system that will better respond to future waves or new epidemics.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia/methods , COVID-19 , Critical Care/methods , Health Care Surveys/methods , Anesthesia/statistics & numerical data , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Health Care Surveys/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom
5.
Resuscitation ; 153: 45-55, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-548156

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a substantial impact on the incidence of cardiac arrest and survival. The challenge is to find the correct balance between the risk to the rescuer when undertaking cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on a person with possible COVID-19 and the risk to that person if CPR is delayed. These guidelines focus specifically on patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. The guidelines include the delivery of basic and advanced life support in adults and children and recommendations for delivering training during the pandemic. Where uncertainty exists treatment should be informed by a dynamic risk assessment which may consider current COVID-19 prevalence, the person's presentation (e.g. history of COVID-19 contact, COVID-19 symptoms), likelihood that treatment will be effective, availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) and personal risks for those providing treatment. These guidelines will be subject to evolving knowledge and experience of COVID-19. As countries are at different stages of the pandemic, there may some international variation in practice.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/complications , Heart Arrest/etiology , Heart Arrest/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/standards , Europe , Humans , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2 , Societies, Medical
6.
Resuscitation ; 151: 145-147, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-154701

ABSTRACT

Consensus on Science and Treatment recommendations aim to balance the benefits of early resuscitation with the potential for harm to care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Chest compressions and cardiopulmonary resuscitation have the potential to generate aerosols. During the current COVID-19 pandemic lay rescuers should consider compressions and public-access defibrillation. Lay rescuers who are willing, trained and able to do so, should consider providing rescue breaths to infants and children in addition to chest compressions. Healthcare professionals should use personal protective equipment for aerosol generating procedures during resuscitation and may consider defibrillation before donning personal protective equipment for aerosol generating procedures.


Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/standards , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Heart Arrest/therapy , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Advisory Committees , COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/trends , Consensus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Defibrillators/statistics & numerical data , Female , Global Health , Humans , Internationality , Male , Needs Assessment , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Survival Analysis
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL