Urologists and the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): a Urologist's Perspective from China.

No need for letter to the editor.

Being a Urologist on COVID-19 Pandemic Days.

...

Cross-continental comparison of safety and protection measures amongst urologists during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the well-being of urologists worldwide during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and whether they have adequate personal protective equipment knowledge and supplies appropriate to their clinical setting. METHODS: Urologists worldwide completed a Société Internationale d'Urologie online survey from 16 April 2020 until 1 May 2020. Analysis was carried out to evaluate their knowledge about protecting themselves and others in the workplace, including their confidence in their ability to remain safe at work, and any regional differences. RESULTS: There were 3488 respondents from 109 countries. Urologists who stated they were moderately comfortable that their work environment offers good protection against coronavirus disease 2019 showed a total mean satisfaction level of 5.99 (on a "0 = not at all" to "10 = very" scale). A large majority (86.33%) were confident about protecting themselves from coronavirus disease 2019 at work. However, only about one-third reported their institution provided the required personal protective equipment (35.78%), and nearly half indicated their hospital has or had limited personal protective equipment availability (48.08%). Worldwide, a large majority of respondents answered affirmatively for testing the healthcare team (83.09%). Approximately half of the respondents (52.85%) across all regions indicated that all surgical team members face an equal risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (52.85%). Nearly one-third of respondents reported that they had experienced social avoidance (28.97%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that urologists lack up-to-date knowledge of preferred protocols for personal protective equipment selection and use, social distancing, and coronavirus disease 2019 testing. These data can provide insights into functional domains from which other specialties could also benefit.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Urologist's clinical practice in Brazil: a management guideline proposal for low- and middle-income countries during the crisis period.

This letter to the Editor aims to provide suggestions and recommendations for the management of urological conditions in times of COVID-19 crisis in Brazil and other low- and middle-income countries. It is important to highlight that one of the main characteristics of this pandemic is the oversaturation of the health system capacity, mostly due to a high demand for personal protective equipment (PPE), Hospital/ICU beds, as well as ventilators. In places with limited resources and where the health care systems are already saturated, such consideration is even more worrisome. Therefore, most worldwide authorities are recommending to avoid, as much as possible, patient's elective visits to hospitals, as well as a judicious use of the operating room in order to mitigate the strain put on the health system. While efforts should be directed to the care of COVID-19 patients, other conditions (especially urgencies and oncological cases) must continue to be assisted. Thus, through a panel of experts, we have prepared a practical guide for Thus, through a panel of experts, we have prepared a practical guide for urologists based on the recommendations from the main Urologic Associations, as well as data from the literature to support the suggested management. We will try to follow the standard guideline recommendations from the American Urological Association (AUA) and European Association of Urology (EAU), with the aim of pursuing the best outcomes possible. However, some recommendations were based on the consensus of the panel, taking into consideration the reality of developing countries and the unprecedented situation caused by the COVID-19 crisis. Most importantly, all recommendations on this manuscript are based on the expectancy of a maximum 3-month duration of the crisis. If this period shall extended, these recommendations will be revised and updated.