Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
Muscle Nerve ; 64(3): 361-364, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1363719

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: The initial surge of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in early 2020 led to widespread cancellation of elective medical procedures in the United States, including nonurgent outpatient and inpatient electrodiagnostic (EDx) studies. As certain regions later showed a downtrend in daily new cases, EDx laboratories have reopened under the guidance of the American Association of Neuromuscular & Electrodiagnostic Medicine (AANEM). In our reopening experience guided by the AANEM, we measured relevant outcomes to determine further workflow adaptations. We aimed to detail our experience and share the lessons learned. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical volumes, billing data, diagnosis distributions, and rates of COVID-19 exposure and transmission among patients and staff in our EDx laboratory during the first 6 months of reopening, starting on June 1, 2020. For context, we detailed the recent AANEM guidelines we adopted at our laboratory, supplemented by other consensus statements. RESULTS: We completed 816 outpatient studies from June 1 to December 1, 2020, reaching 97% of the total volume and 97% of total billing compared with the same time period in 2019. The average relative value units per study were similar. There were no major shifts in diagnosis distributions. We completed 10 of 12 requested inpatient studies during this period. There were no known COVID-19 transmissions between patients and staff. DISCUSSION: Our experience suggests that it is possible to safely operate an EDx laboratory under the guidance of the AANEM and other experts, with clinical volume and billing rates comparable to pre-pandemic baselines.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/standards , COVID-19/prevention & control , Electrodiagnosis/standards , Neural Conduction/physiology , Workflow , Academic Medical Centers/methods , Academic Medical Centers/trends , COVID-19/epidemiology , Electrodiagnosis/methods , Electrodiagnosis/trends , Humans , Time Factors
2.
Am J Health Syst Pharm ; 77(19): 1598-1605, 2020 09 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317904

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To describe our medical center's pharmacy services preparedness process and offer guidance to assist other institutions in preparing for surges of critically ill patients such as those experienced during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. SUMMARY: The leadership of a department of pharmacy at an urban medical center in the US epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic proactively created a pharmacy action plan in anticipation of a surge in admissions of critically ill patients with COVID-19. It was essential to create guidance documents outlining workflow, provide comprehensive staff education, and repurpose non-intensive care unit (ICU)-trained clinical pharmacotherapy specialists to work in ICUs. Teamwork was crucial to ensure staff safety, develop complete scheduling, maintain adequate drug inventory and sterile compounding, optimize the electronic health record and automated dispensing cabinets to help ensure appropriate prescribing and effective management of medication supplies, and streamline the pharmacy workflow to ensure that all patients received pharmacotherapeutic regimens in a timely fashion. CONCLUSION: Each hospital should view the COVID-19 crisis as an opportunity to internally review and enhance workflow processes, initiatives that can continue even after the resolution of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Medication Therapy Management/organization & administration , Pharmacy Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals, Urban/organization & administration , Hospitals, Urban/standards , Humans , Leadership , New York/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/organization & administration , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/standards , Pharmacists/organization & administration , Pharmacy Service, Hospital/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Workflow , Workforce/organization & administration , Workforce/standards
3.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 148(1): 133e-139e, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1284960

ABSTRACT

SUMMARY: The coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic became a global threat in a matter of weeks, with its future implications yet to be defined. New York City was swiftly declared the epicenter of the pandemic in the United States as case numbers grew exponentially in a matter of days, quickly threatening to overwhelm the capacity of the health care system. This burgeoning crisis led practitioners across specialties to adapt and mobilize rapidly. Plastic surgeons and trainees within the New York University Langone Health system faced uncertainty in terms of future practice, in addition to immediate and long-term effects on undergraduate and graduate medical education. The administration remained vigilant and adaptive, enacting departmental policies prioritizing safety and productivity, with early deployment of faculty for clinical support at the front lines. The authors anticipate that this pandemic will have far-reaching effects on the future of plastic surgery education, trends in the pursuit of elective surgical procedures, and considerable consequences for certain research endeavors. Undoubtedly, there will be substantial impact on the physical and mental well-being of health care practitioners across specialties. Coordinated efforts and clear lines of communication between the Department of Plastic Surgery and its faculty and trainees allowed a concerted effort toward the immediate challenge of tempering the spread of coronavirus disease of 2019 and preserving structure and throughput for education and research. Adaptation and creativity have ultimately allowed for early rebooting of in-person clinical and surgical practice. The authors present their coordinated efforts and lessons gleaned from their experience to inform their community's preparedness as this formidable challenge evolves.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Surgery, Plastic/trends , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Academic Medical Centers/trends , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Education, Medical, Graduate/organization & administration , Education, Medical, Graduate/standards , Education, Medical, Graduate/trends , Elective Surgical Procedures/education , Elective Surgical Procedures/standards , Elective Surgical Procedures/trends , Faculty/organization & administration , Faculty/psychology , Faculty/statistics & numerical data , Forecasting , Humans , Internship and Residency/statistics & numerical data , New York City/epidemiology , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/organization & administration , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/trends , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/education , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/standards , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/trends , Surgeons/organization & administration , Surgeons/psychology , Surgeons/statistics & numerical data , Surgery, Plastic/education , Surgery, Plastic/organization & administration , Surgery, Plastic/standards , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Uncertainty , Universities/standards , Universities/statistics & numerical data , Universities/trends
4.
Psychiatry Res ; 298: 113776, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1062564

ABSTRACT

Inpatient psychiatric facilities can face significant challenges in containing infectious outbreaks during the COVID-19 pandemic. The main objective of this study was to characterize the epidemiology, testing data, and containment protocols of COVID-19 in a large academic medical center during the height of the COVID-19 outbreak. A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on hospitalized individuals on five inpatient psychiatric units from March 1st to July 8th, 2020. Demographic data collected include age, race, gender, ethnicity, diagnosis, and admission status (one or multiple admissions). In addition, a Gantt chart was used to assess outbreak data and timelines for one unit. Testing data was collected for patients admitted to inpatient psychiatric units, emergency room visits, and employees. 964 individuals were hospitalized psychiatrically. The study population included ethnically diverse patients with various mental illnesses. We also describe infection prevention strategies, screening, and triage protocols utilized to safely continue patient flow during and beyond the study period with a low patient and employee infection rate. In summary, our study suggests that early implementation of triage, screening, extensive testing, and unit-specific interventions can help prevent and contain the spread of COVID-19 in inpatient psychiatric units and help facilitate safe delivery of care during a pandemic.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers , COVID-19 , Mental Disorders , Psychiatric Department, Hospital , Triage , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Inpatients , Male , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Disorders/therapy , Middle Aged , Psychiatric Department, Hospital/standards , Psychiatric Department, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Triage/standards , Triage/statistics & numerical data
5.
Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol ; 35(3): 425-435, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1023482

ABSTRACT

The novel SARS-CoV-2 pandemic starting in 2019 profoundly changed the world, and thousands of residents of New York City were affected, leading to one of the most acute surges in regional hospital capacity. As the largest academic medical center in the Bronx, Montefiore Medical Center was immediately impacted, and the entire hospital was mobilized to address the needs of its community. In this article, we describe our experiences as a large academic anesthesiology department during this pandemic. Our goals were to maximize our staff's expertise, maintain our commitment to wellness and safety, and preserve the quality of patient care. Lessons learned include the importance of critical care training presence and leadership, the challenges of converting an ambulatory surgery center to an intensive care unit (ICU), and the management of effective communication. Lastly, we provide suggestions for institutions facing an acute surge, or subsequent waves of COVID-19, based on a single center's experiences.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/trends , Anesthesiology/trends , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Care/trends , Hospital Restructuring/trends , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/trends , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Anesthesiology/standards , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/standards , Health Personnel/standards , Health Personnel/trends , Hospital Restructuring/standards , Humans , New York City , Pandemics , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/standards
6.
Neurosurg Focus ; 49(6): E8, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-953541

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The recent COVID-19 outbreak has forced notable adjustments to surgical procedure preparation, including neurosurgical services. However, due to the uniqueness of the recent situation, neurosurgical centers, especially those located in low-resource settings, are facing several challenges such as a lack of coordination, poor equipment, and shortage of medical personnel. Therefore, several guidelines from local authorities and international neurosurgical bodies have been published to help clinicians manage their patients. In addition, the academic health system (AHS), which is an integrated system containing a medical institution, universities, and a teaching hospital, may play some role in the management of patients during COVID-19. The objective of this study was to describe how each hospital in the authors' network adjusted their neurosurgical practice and how the AHS of the Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) played its role in the adaptation process during the pandemic. METHODS: The authors gathered both local and national data about the number of COVID-19 infections from the government's database. To assess the contribution of the AHS to the efforts of each hospital to address the pandemic, questionnaires were given to 6 neurosurgeons, 1 resident, and 2 general surgeons about the management of neurosurgical cases during the pandemic in their hospitals. RESULTS: The data illustrate various strategies to manage neurosurgical cases by hospitals within the authors' networks. The hospitals were grouped into three categories based on the transmission risk in each region. Most of these hospitals stated that UGM AHS had a positive impact on the changes in their strategies. In the early phase of the outbreak, some hospitals faced a lack of coordination between hospitals and related stakeholders, inadequate amount of personal protective equipment (PPE), and unclear regulations. As the nation enters a new phase, almost all hospitals had performed routine screening tests, had a sufficient amount of PPE for the medical personnel, and followed both national and international guidelines in caring for their neurosurgical patients. CONCLUSIONS: The management of neurosurgical procedures during the outbreak has been a challenging task and a role of the AHS in improving patient care has been experienced by most hospitals in the authors' network. In the future, the authors expect to develop a better collaboration for the next possible pandemic.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/standards , Advisory Committees/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals, General/standards , Neurosurgeons/standards , Neurosurgical Procedures/standards , Academic Medical Centers/trends , Advisory Committees/trends , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Hospitals, General/trends , Humans , Indonesia/epidemiology , Neurosurgeons/trends , Neurosurgical Procedures/trends , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Personal Protective Equipment/trends
7.
Neurosurg Focus ; 49(6): E5, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-953187

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Global outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has forced healthcare systems worldwide to reshape their facilities and protocols. Although not considered the frontline specialty in managing COVID-19 patients, neurosurgical service and training were also significantly affected. This article focuses on the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak at a low- and/or middle-income country (LMIC) academic tertiary referral hospital, the university and hospital policies and actions for the neurosurgical service and training program during the outbreak, and the contingency plan for future reference on preparedness for service and education. METHODS: The authors collected data from several official databases, including the Indonesian Ministry of Health database, East Java provincial government database, hospital database, and neurosurgery operative case log. Policies and regulations information was obtained from stakeholders, including the Indonesian Society of Neurological Surgeons, the hospital board of directors, and the dean's office. RESULTS: The curve of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Indonesia had not flattened by the 2nd week of June 2020. Surabaya, the second-largest city in Indonesia, became the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak in Indonesia. The neurosurgical service experienced a significant drop in cases (50% of cases from normal days) along all lines (outpatient clinic, emergency room, and surgical ward). Despite a strict preadmission screening, postoperative COVID-19 infection cases were detected during the treatment course of neurosurgical patients, and those with a positive COVID-19 infection had a high mortality rate. The reduction in the overall number of cases treated in the neurosurgical service had an impact on the educational and training program. The digital environment found popularity in the educational term; however, digital resources could not replace direct exposure to real patients. The education stakeholders adjusted the undergraduate students' clinical postings and residents' working schemes for safety reasons. CONCLUSIONS: The neurosurgery service at an academic tertiary referral hospital in an LMIC experienced a significant reduction in cases. The university and program directors had to adapt to an off-campus and off-hospital policy for neurosurgical residents and undergraduate students. The hospital instituted a reorganization of residents for service. The digital environment found popularity during the outbreak to support the educational process.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/trends , COVID-19/epidemiology , Internship and Residency/trends , Neurosurgical Procedures/education , Neurosurgical Procedures/trends , Tertiary Care Centers/trends , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Indonesia/epidemiology , Internship and Residency/standards , Male , Middle Aged , Neurosurgical Procedures/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/standards
8.
Laryngoscope ; 131(3): E746-E754, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-893245

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To compare personal protective equipment (PPE) guidelines, specifically respirator use, among international public health agencies, academic hospitals, and otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) departments in the United States for the care of coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) patients. STUDY DESIGN: Cross sectional survey. METHODS: Review of publicly available public health and academic hospitals guidelines along with review of communication among otolaryngology departments. RESULTS: Among 114 academic institutions affiliated with OHNS residencies, 20 (17.5%) institutions provided public access to some form of guidance on PPE and 73 (64%) provided information on screening or diagnostic testing. PPE guidelines were uniquely described based on several variables: location of care, COVID-19 status, involvement of aerosol generating or high-risk procedures, and physical distance from the patient. Six hospital guidelines were highlighted. Across these six institutions, there was agreement that N95 respirators were needed for high-risk patients undergoing high-risk procedures. Variations existed among institutions for scenarios with low-risk patients. Definitions of the low-risk patient and high-risk procedures were inconsistent among institutions. Three of the highlighted institutions had OHNS departments recommending higher level of airway protection than the institution. CONCLUSIONS: OHNS departments typically had more stringent PPE guidance than their institution. Discrepancies in communicating PPE use were frequent and provide inconsistent information on how healthcare workers should protect themselves in the COVID-19 pandemic. Identification of these inconsistencies serves as an opportunity to standardize communication and develop evidence-based guidelines. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V Laryngoscope, 131:E746-E754, 2021.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Otolaryngology/standards , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Academic Medical Centers/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Testing/standards , Evidence-Based Medicine/standards , Health Personnel/standards , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Surgery Department, Hospital/standards , United States/epidemiology
9.
Urology ; 147: 43-49, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-884792

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To quantify and characterize the burden of urological patients admitted to emergency department (ED) in Lombardy during Italian COVID-19 outbreak, comparing it to a reference population from 2019. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed all consecutive admissions to ED from 1 January to 9 April in both 2019 and 2020. According to the ED discharge ICD-9-CM code, patients were grouped in urological and respiratory patients. We evaluated the type of access (self-presented/ambulance), discharge priority code, ED discharge (hospitalization, home), need for urological consultation or urgent surgery. RESULTS: The number of urological diagnoses in ED was inversely associated to COVID-19 diagnoses (95% confidence interval -0.41/-0.19; Beta = -0.8; P < .0001). The average access per day was significantly lower after 10 March 2020 (1.5 ± 1.1 vs 6.5 ± 2.6; P < .0001), compared to reference period. From 11 March 2020, the inappropriate admissions to ED were reduced (10/45 vs 96/195; P = .001). Consequently, the patients admitted were generally more demanding, requiring a higher rate of urgent surgeries (4/45 vs 4/195; P = .02). This reflected in an increase of the hospitalization rate from 12.7% to 17.8% (Beta = 0.88; P < .0001) during 2020. CONCLUSION: Urological admissions to ED during lockdown differed from the same period of 2019 both qualitatively and quantitatively. The spectrum of patients seems to be relatively more critical, often requiring an urgent management. These patients may represent a challenge due to the difficult circumstances caused by the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Emergency Treatment/trends , Pandemics/prevention & control , Urologic Diseases/therapy , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Academic Medical Centers/trends , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Communicable Disease Control/trends , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Service, Hospital/trends , Emergency Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Admission/standards , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Patient Admission/trends , Patient Discharge/standards , Patient Discharge/statistics & numerical data , Patient Discharge/trends , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Referral and Consultation/trends , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , Tertiary Care Centers/trends , Urologic Diseases/diagnosis , Urologic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Urologic Surgical Procedures/trends
11.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 146(2): 447-454, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-691847

ABSTRACT

Plastic surgeons have the unique perspective of working with all types of patients and care teams from almost all specialties in surgery and medicine, which creates unique challenges in times of distress. As the initial epicenter of coronavirus disease 2019 cases in the United States, the University of Washington program was required to rapidly develop strategies to deal with the escalating crisis. All aspects of the program were affected, including the need to triage the urgency of plastic surgery care, safe staffing of plastic surgery teams, and the role of plastic surgery in the greater hospital community. In addition, as a residency training program, limiting the impact of resident education and maintaining a sense of community and connection among members of the program developed into important considerations. The authors hope that the narrative of their experience will provide insight into the decisions made in the University of Washington health care system but also remind others that they are not alone in dealing with the challenges of this pandemic.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Infection Control/standards , Internship and Residency/organization & administration , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Surgery, Plastic/education , Universities/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Humans , Internship and Residency/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/education , SARS-CoV-2 , Surgeons/education , Surgeons/organization & administration , Universities/standards , Washington , Workforce/organization & administration , Workforce/standards
12.
Arch Pathol Lab Med ; 144(11): 1321-1324, 2020 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-639712

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT.­: Declining reimbursement shifts hospital laboratories from system assets to cost centers. This has resulted in increased outsourcing of laboratory services, which can jeopardize a hospital systems' ability to respond to a health care crisis. OBJECTIVES.­: To demonstrate that investment in a core laboratory serving an academic medical center equipped a regional health system to respond to the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. DESIGN.­: COVID-19 diagnostic testing data were analyzed. Volumes were evaluated by result date (March 16, 2020-May 6, 2020), and the average of received-to-verified turnaround time was calculated and compared for in-house and send-out testing, and different in-house testing methodologies. RESULTS.­: Daily viral diagnostic testing capacity increased by greater than 3000% (from 21 tests per day to 658 tests per day). Total viral diagnostic testing reported by the core laboratory increased by 128 times during 22 days of test method validation and 826 times during the analysis period, while average turnaround time per day for send-out testing increased from 3.7 days to 21 days. Decreased overall average turnaround time was observed at the core laboratory (0.45 days) versus send-out testing (7.63 days) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS.­: Investment in a core laboratory provided the health system with the necessary expertise and resources to mount a robust response to the pandemic. Local access to testing allowed rapid triage of patients and conservation of scarce personal protective equipment (PPE). In addition, the core laboratory was able to support regional health departments and several hospitals outside of the system.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Laboratories, Hospital , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Betacoronavirus/physiology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Clinical Laboratory Services/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Anesth Analg ; 131(3): 669-676, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-596839

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Protecting first-line health care providers against work-related coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection at the onset of the pandemic has been a crucial challenge in the United States. Anesthesiologists in particular are considered at risk, since aerosol-generating procedures, such as intubation and extubation, have been shown to significantly increase the odds for respiratory infections during severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreaks. This study assessed the incidence of COVID-19-like symptoms and the presence of COVID-19 antibodies after work-related COVID-19 exposures, among physicians working in a large academic hospital in New York City (NYC). METHODS: An e-mail survey was addressed to anesthesiologists and affiliated intensive care providers at Columbia University Irving Medical Center on April 15, 2020. The survey assessed 4 domains: (1) demographics and medical history, (2) community exposure to COVID-19 (eg, use of NYC subway), (3) work-related exposure to COVID-19, and (4) development of COVID-19-like symptoms after work exposure. The first 100 survey responders were invited to undergo a blood test to assess antibody status (presence of immunoglobulin M [IgM]/immunoglobulin G [IgG] specific to COVID-19). Work-related exposure was defined as any episode where the provider was not wearing adequate personal protective equipment (airborne or droplet/contact protection depending on the exposure type). Based on the clinical scenario, work exposure was categorized as high risk (eg, exposure during intubation) or low risk (eg, exposure during doffing). RESULTS: Two hundred and five health care providers were contacted and 105 completed the survey (51%); 91 completed the serological test. Sixty-one of the respondents (58%) reported at least 1 work-related exposure and 54% of the exposures were high risk. Among respondents reporting a work-related exposure, 16 (26.2%) reported postexposure COVID-19-like symptoms. The most frequent symptoms were myalgia (9 cases), diarrhea (8 cases), fever (7 cases), and sore throat (7 cases). COVID-19 antibodies were detected in 11 of the 91 tested respondents (12.1%), with no difference between respondents with (11.8%) or without (12.5%) a work-related exposure, including high-risk exposure. Compared with antibody-negative respondents, antibody-positive respondents were more likely to use NYC subway to commute to work and report COVID-19-like symptoms in the past 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: In the epicenter of the United States' pandemic and within 6-8 weeks of the COVID-19 outbreak, a small proportion of anesthesiologists and affiliated intensive care providers reported COVID-19-like symptoms after a work-related exposure and even fewer had detectable COVID-19 antibodies. The presence of COVID-19 antibodies appeared to be associated with community/environmental transmission rather than secondary to work-related exposures involving high-risk procedures.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/standards , Anesthesiologists/standards , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Intensive Care Units/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Adult , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , New York City/epidemiology , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
14.
World Neurosurg ; 139: e872-e876, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-343016

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Neurosurgical services have been affected by the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, and several departments have reported their experiences and responses to the COVID-19 crisis in an attempt to provide insights from which other impacted departments can benefit. The goals of this study were to report the load and variety of emergent/urgent neurosurgical cases after implementing the "Battle Plan" at an academic tertiary referral center during the COVID-19 pandemic and to compare these variables with previous practice at the same institution. METHODS: The clinical data of all patients who underwent a neurosurgical intervention between March 23, 2020, and April 20, 2020, were obtained from a prospectively maintained database. Data of the control group were retrospectively collected from the medical records to compare the types of surgeries/interventions performed by the same neurosurgical service before the COVID-19 pandemic started. RESULTS: Over a 4-week period during the COVID-19 pandemic, 91 patients underwent emergent, urgent, and essential neurosurgical interventions. Patient screening at teleclinics identified 11 urgent surgical cases. The implementation of the Battle Plan led to a significant decrease in the caseload, and the variation of cases by subspecialty was evident when compared with a control group comprising 214 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of optimal care and safe practice and education at an academic neurosurgical department can be well maintained with proper execution of crisis protocols. Teleclinics proved to be efficient in screening patients for urgent neurosurgical conditions, but in-person clinic visits may still be necessary for some cases in the immediate postoperative period.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/trends , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/surgery , Neurosurgical Procedures/trends , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/surgery , Tertiary Care Centers/trends , Academic Medical Centers/standards , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Child , Child, Preschool , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/trends , Male , Middle Aged , Neurosurgical Procedures/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Young Adult
16.
Dtsch Med Wochenschr ; 145(10): 657-664, 2020 05.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-149796

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The new pandemic coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 causing coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) poses immense challenges to health care systems worldwide. In the current manuscript we summarize the strategies, organisational approaches and actions of the Task-force Coronavirus at the University Medical Center Freiburg. We also report on experiences with implementation of these approaches and treatment outcomes in the first 115 COVID patients. METHODS: Retrospective, narrative process description and analysis of the time period between end of January and beginning of April 2020, performed by representatives of the involved departments and institutes. Additionally a retrospective observational cohort study with descriptive analysis of epidemiological and clinical data of COVID patients admitted until March 31st was performed. RESULTS: A multidisciplinary Task-force Coronavirus initiated measures concerning outpatient testing and counseling, reorganisation and separation of patient flow processes alongside with substantial escalation of inpatient capacities on regular wards and intensive care units. Within the framework of the resulting dynamic care model, 115 patients suffering from COVID could be treated without shortages in staff or bed capacities. DICUSSION: In the upcoming pandemic, adequate COVID management and care could be secured by a collaborative approach with inclusion of administrative departments, clinical disciplines and theoretical institutes of the University Medical Center Freiburg.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Patient Care Management , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/standards , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Germany , Health Resources , Hospitals , Humans , Intensive Care Units/supply & distribution , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , SARS-CoV-2
17.
J Vasc Surg ; 72(2): 396-402, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-141599

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Ever since the first positive test was identified on January 21, 2020, Washington State has been on the frontlines of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Using information obtained from Italian surgeons in Milan and given the concerns regarding the increasing case numbers in Washington State, we implemented new vascular surgery guidelines, which canceled all nonemergent surgical procedures and involved significant changes to our inpatient and outpatient workflow. The consequences of these decisions are not yet understood. METHODS: The vascular surgery division at Harborview Medical Center immediately instituted new vascular surgery COVID-19 practice guidelines on March 17, 2020. Subsequent clinic, operative, and consultation volume data were collected for the next 4 weeks and compared with the historical averages. The Washington State case and death numbers and University of Washington Medical Center (UW Medicine) hospital case volumes were collected from publicly available sources. RESULTS: Since March 10, 2020, the number of confirmed positive COVID-19 cases within the UW Medicine system has increased 1867%, with floor and intensive care unit bed usage increasing by 120% and 215%, respectively. After instituting our new COVID-19 guidelines, our average weekly clinical volume decreased by 96.5% (from 43.1 patients to 1.5 patients per week), our average weekly surgical volume decreased by 71.7% (from 15 cases to 4.25 cases per week), and our inpatient consultation volume decreased to 1.81 consultations daily; 60% of the consultations were completed as telemedicine "e-consults" in which the patient was never evaluated in-person. The trainee surgical volume has also decreased by 86.4% for the vascular surgery fellow and 84.8% for the integrated resident. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has changed every aspect of "normal" vascular surgical practice in a large academic institution. New practice guidelines effectively reduced operating room usage and decreased staff and trainee exposure to potential infection, with the changes to clinic volume not resulting in an immediate increase in emergency department or inpatient consultations or acute surgical emergencies. These changes, although preserving resources, have also reduced trainee exposure and operative volume significantly, which requires new modes of education delivery. The lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic, if analyzed, will help us prepare for the next crisis.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/standards , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Vascular Surgical Procedures/standards , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Emergency Service, Hospital/standards , Humans , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infection Control/standards , Operating Rooms/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/organization & administration , Referral and Consultation/organization & administration , Referral and Consultation/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Telemedicine/standards , Universities/standards , Vascular Surgical Procedures/organization & administration , Washington/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL