Gastrointestinal endoscopic practice during COVID-19 pandemic: a multi-institutional survey.

Introduction. An on-going coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a challenge all over the world. Since an endoscopy unit and its staff are at potentially high risk for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, we conducted a survey for the management of the gastrointestinal endoscopic practice, personal protective equipment (PPE), and risk assessment for COVID-19 during the pandemic at multiple facilities.Methods. The 11-item survey questionnaire was sent to representative respondent of Department of Gastroenterology, Osaka City University Hospital, and its 19 related facilities.Results. A total of 18 facilities submitted valid responses and a total of 373 health care professionals (HCPs) participated. All facilities (18/18: 100%) were screening patients at risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection before endoscopy. During the pandemic, we found that the total volume of endoscopic procedures decreased by 44%. Eleven facilities (11/18: 61%) followed recommendations of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society (JGES); consequently, about 35%-50% of esophagogastroduodenoscopy and colonoscopy were canceled. Mask (surgical mask or N95 mask), face shield/goggle, gloves (one or two sets), and gown (with long or short sleeves) were being used by endoscopists, nurses, endoscopy technicians, and endoscope cleaning staff in all the facilities (18/18: 100%). SARS-CoV-2 infection risk assessment of HCPs was conducted daily in all the facilities (18/18: 100%), resulting in no subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCPs.Conclusion. COVID-19 has had a dramatic impact on the gastrointestinal endoscopic practice. The recommendations of the JGES were appropriate as preventive measures for the SARSCoV-2 infection in the endoscopy unit and its staff.

Pivoting Dental Practice Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic-A Systematic Review.

Background and Objectives: The aims of this systematic review were to identify additional infection control measures implemented in dental practice globally to prevent cross-infection and evaluate the psychological impacts of the pandemic among dental professionals. Materials and Methods: A sequential systematic literature search was conducted from December 2019 to 30 April 2020 through PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Google Scholar, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The search yielded the following results: "COVID-19" (n = 12,137), "Novel corona virus" (n = 63), "COVID-19 and dentistry" (n = 46), "COVID-19 and oral health" (n = 41), "Novel Corona virus and Dentistry" (n = 0), "dental health and Novel Coronavirus" (n = 26), and "dental practice and Novel Coronavirus" (n = 6). Results: After a careful review and eliminating articles based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, the final review included 13 articles. Management of infection control is discussed extensively in the literature and remains the main theme of many Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) articles on dentistry. Telephone triage using a questionnaire, hand hygiene, personal protective equipment (PPE) for clinical and nonclinical staff, a preprocedural mouth rinse, and aerosol management have been discussed and implemented in few countries. Three studies recommended that elective treatments for patients with a temperature of >100.4 F or 38 °C should be postponed or performed in an airborne infection isolation room (AIIR) or negative-pressure room. Limiting the number of patients in the waiting area, the removal of shared objects, proper ventilation, and physical distancing were highly recommended. Psychological distress among dental professionals in relation to existing medical conditions and self-efficacy has been discussed. Conclusions: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on the dental profession worldwide, our review highlights many practice management approaches to adopt the new norm. More research highlighting evidence-based safety practices and multisectoral collaboration is required to help dental professionals make informed decisions and make the profession safe, both for the patient and dental professionals.

Effect of COVID-19 pandemic decisions on tertiary-level surgical services in Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the implementation of restrictive policies on theatre procedures, with profound impacts on service delivery and theatre output. OBJECTIVES: To quantify these effects at a tertiary hospital in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa. METHODS: A retrospective review of morbidity and mortality data was conducted. The effects on emergency and elective caseload, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions from theatre, theatre cancellations and regional techniques were noted. RESULTS: Theatre caseload decreased by 30% from January to April 2020 (p=0.02), ICU admissions remained constant, and theatre cancellations were proportionally reduced, as were the absolute number of regional techniques. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting theatre case deficit was 1 260 cases. It will take 315 days to clear this deficit if four additional surgeries are performed per day.

Impact of labor and delivery unit policy modifications on maternal and neonatal outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Background: In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, hospitals nationwide have implemented modifications to labor and delivery unit practices designed to protect delivering patients and healthcare providers from infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Beginning in March 2020, our hospital instituted labor, and delivery unit modifications targeting visitor policy, use of personal protective equipment, designation of rooms for triage and delivery of persons suspected or infected with coronavirus disease 2019, delivery management, and newborn care. Little is known about the ramifications of these modifications in terms of maternal and neonatal outcomes. Objective: The objective of this study was to determine whether labor and delivery unit policy modifications we made during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic were associated with differences in outcomes for mothers and newborns. Study Design: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all deliveries occurring in our hospital between January 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020. Patients who delivered in January and February 2020 before labor and delivery unit modifications were instituted were designated as the preimplementation group, and those who delivered in March and April 2020 were designated as the postimplementation group. Maternal and neonatal outcomes between the pre- and postimplementation groups were compared. Differences between the 2 groups were then compared with the same time period in 2019 and 2018 to assess whether any apparent differences were unique to the pandemic year. We hypothesized that maternal and newborn lengths of stay would be shorter in the postimplementation group. Statistical analysis methods included Student's t-tests and Wilcoxon tests for continuous variables and chi-square or Fisher exact tests for categorical variables. Results: Postpartum length of stay was significantly shorter after implementation of labor unit changes related to coronavirus disease 2019. A postpartum stay of 1 night after vaginal delivery occurred in 48.5% of patients in the postimplementation group compared with 24.9% of the preimplementation group (P<.0001). Postoperative length of stay after cesarean delivery of ≤2 nights occurred in 40.9% of patients in the postimplementation group compared with 11.8% in the preimplementation group (P<.0001). Similarly, after vaginal delivery, 49.0% of newborns were discharged home after 1 night in the postimplementation group compared with 24.9% in the preimplementation group (P<.0001). After cesarean delivery, 42.5% of newborns were discharged after ≤2 nights in the postimplementation group compared with 12.5% in the preimplementation group (P<.0001). Slight differences in the proportions of earlier discharge between mothers and newborns were due to multiple gestations. There were no differences in cesarean delivery rate, induction of labor, or adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Labor and delivery unit policy modifications to protect pregnant patients and healthcare providers from coronavirus disease 2019 indicate that maternal and newborn length of stay in the hospital were significantly shorter after delivery without increases in the rate of adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes. In the absence of long-term adverse outcomes occurring after discharge that are tied to earlier release, our study results may support a review of our discharge protocols once the pandemic subsides to move toward safely shortening maternal and newborn lengths of stay.

Safe performance of diagnostic bronchoscopy/EBUS during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is unprecedented in our professional lives and much effort and resources will be devoted to care of patients (and HCW) affected by this illness. We must also continue to aim for the same standard of care for our non-COVID respiratory patients, while minimizing risks of infection transmission to our colleagues. This commentary addresses the key paired issues of minimizing performance of diagnostic/staging bronchoscopy in patients with suspected/known lung cancer while maximizing the safety of the procedure with respect to HCW transmission of COVID-19.