ABSTRACT
AIMS: With resumption of elective spine surgery services in the UK following the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a multicentre British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) collaborative study to examine the complications and deaths due to COVID-19 at the recovery phase of the pandemic. The aim was to analyze the safety of elective spinal surgery during the pandemic. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted from eight spinal centres for the first month of operating following restoration of elective spine surgery in each individual unit. Primary outcome measure was the 30-day postoperative COVID-19 infection rate. Secondary outcomes analyzed were the 30-day mortality rate, surgical adverse events, medical complications, and length of inpatient stay. RESULTS: In all, 257 patients (128 males) with a median age of 54 years (2 to 88) formed the study cohort. The mean number of procedures performed from each unit was 32 (16 to 101), with 118 procedures (46%) done as category three prioritization level. The majority of patients (87%) were low-medium "risk stratification" category and the mean length of hospital stay was 5.2 days. None of the patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection, nor was there any mortality related to COVID-19 during the 30-day follow-up period, with 25 patients (10%) having been tested for symptoms. Overall, 32 patients (12%) developed a total of 34 complications, with the majority (19/34) being grade 1 to 2 Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications. No patient required postoperative care in an intensive care setting for any unexpected complication. CONCLUSION: This study shows that safe and effective planned spinal surgical services can be restored avoiding viral transmission, with diligent adherence to national guidelines and COVID-19-secure pathways tailored according to the resources of the individual spinal units. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1096-1101.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The cutaneous manifestations of COVID-19 may be useful disease markers and prognostic indicators. Recently, postinfectious telogen effluvium and trichodynia have also been reported. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the presence of trichodynia and telogen effluvium in patients with COVID-19 and describe their characteristics in relation to the other signs and symptoms of the disease. METHODS: Patients with a history of COVID-19 presenting to the clinics of a group of hair experts because of telogen effluvium and/or scalp symptoms were questioned about their hair signs and symptoms in relation to the severity of COVID-19 and associated symptoms. RESULTS: Data from 128 patients were collected. Telogen effluvium was observed in 66.3% of the patients and trichodynia in 58.4%. Trichodynia was associated with telogen effluvium in 42.4% of the cases and anosmia and ageusia in 66.1% and 44.1% of the cases, respectively. In majority (62.5%) of the patients, the hair signs and symptoms started within the first month after COVID-19 diagnosis, and in 47.8% of the patients, these started after 12 weeks or more. LIMITATIONS: The recruitment of patients in specialized hair clinics, lack of a control group, and lack of recording of patient comorbidities. CONCLUSION: The severity of postviral telogen effluvium observed in patients with a history of COVID-19 infection may be influenced by COVID-19 severity. We identified early-onset (<4 weeks) and late-onset (>12 weeks) telogen effluvium.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIM: Despite the large amount of clinical data available of Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19), not many studies have been conducted about the psychological toll on Health Care Workers (HCWs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicentric descriptive study, surveys were distributed among 4 different Breast Cancer Centers (BCC). BCCs were distinguished according to COVID-19 tertiary care hospital (COVID/No-COVID) and district prevalence (DP) (High vs. Low). DASS-21 score, PSS score and demographic data (age, sex, work) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 51 HCWs were analyzed in the study. Age, work and sex did not demonstrate statistically significant values. Statistically significant distribution was found between DASS-21-stress score and COVID/No-COVID (p=0.043). No difference was found in the remaining DASS-21 and PSS scores, dividing the HCWs according to COVID-19-hospital and DP. CONCLUSION: Working in a COVID-19-hospital represents a factor that negatively affects psychosocial well-being. However, DP seems not to affect the psychosocial well-being of BCC HCWs. During the outbreak, psychological support for low risk HCWs should be provided regardless DP.