Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 27
Filter
1.
Arch Dis Child ; 107(2): 189-191, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1435023

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Rapid implementation of home sleep studies during the first UK COVID-19 'lockdown'-completion rates, family feedback and factors that predict success. DESIGN: We included all patients who had a sleep study conducted at home instead of as inpatient from 30 March 2020 to 30 June 2020. Studies with less than 4 hours of data for analysis were defined 'unsuccessful'. RESULTS: 137 patients were included. 96 underwent home respiratory polygraphy (HRP), median age 5.5 years. 41 had oxycapnography (O2/CO2), median age 5 years. 56% HRP and 83% O2/CO2 were successful. A diagnosis of autism predicted a lower success rate (29%) as did age under 5 years. CONCLUSION: Switching studies rapidly from an inpatient to a home environment is possible, but there are several challenges that include a higher failure rate in younger children and those with neurodevelopmental disorders.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Parents/psychology , Polysomnography/methods , Self-Testing , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/diagnosis , Adolescent , Age Factors , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Child , Child, Preschool , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Infant , Male , Perception , Polysomnography/psychology , Polysomnography/standards , Quarantine/standards , Retrospective Studies , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/etiology , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , United Kingdom/epidemiology
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.
J Cancer Res Ther ; 17(2): 551-555, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1268377

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19) is a zoonotic viral infection that originated in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. It was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization shortly thereafter. This pandemic is going to have a lasting impact on the functioning of pathology laboratories due to the frequent handling of potentially infectious samples by the laboratory personnel. To deal with this unprecedented situation, various national and international guidelines have been put forward outlining the precautions to be taken during sample processing from a potentially infectious patient. PURPOSE: Most of these guidelines are centered around laboratories that are a part of designated COVID 19 hospitals. However, proper protocols need to be in place in all laboratories, irrespective of whether they are a part of COVID 19 hospital or not as this would greatly reduce the risk of exposure of laboratory/hospital personnel. As part of a laboratory associated with a rural cancer hospital which is not a dedicated COVID 19 hospital, we aim to present our institute's experience in handling pathology specimens during the COVID 19 era. CONCLUSION: We hope this will address the concerns of small to medium sized laboratories and help them build an effective strategy required for protecting the laboratory personnel from risk of exposure and also ensure smooth and optimum functioning of the laboratory services.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Clinical Laboratory Services/organization & administration , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Cancer Care Facilities/organization & administration , Cancer Care Facilities/standards , Clinical Laboratory Services/standards , Decontamination/methods , Decontamination/standards , Developing Countries , Disinfection/methods , Disinfection/organization & administration , Disinfection/standards , Hospitals, Rural/organization & administration , Hospitals, Rural/standards , Humans , India/epidemiology , Infection Control/standards , Medical Laboratory Personnel/organization & administration , Medical Laboratory Personnel/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Specimen Handling/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Workforce/organization & administration , Workforce/standards
4.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 148(1): 168e-169e, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1263729

Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Infection Control/organization & administration , Pandemics/prevention & control , Surgery Department, Hospital/organization & administration , Surgery, Plastic/organization & administration , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Testing/standards , COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Testing/trends , Egypt/epidemiology , Elective Surgical Procedures/standards , Elective Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Elective Surgical Procedures/trends , Health Policy , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control/trends , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/standards , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/trends , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Surgery Department, Hospital/standards , Surgery Department, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Surgery Department, Hospital/trends , Surgery, Plastic/standards , Surgery, Plastic/statistics & numerical data , Surgery, Plastic/trends , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Telemedicine/standards , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , Tertiary Care Centers/trends , Triage/organization & administration , Triage/standards , Triage/statistics & numerical data , Triage/trends
5.
Turk J Gastroenterol ; 32(2): 113-115, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1219172

ABSTRACT

In the midst of Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, endoscopic procedures have been separated for only urgent and semi-urgent cases for the last few months to prevent transmission in endoscopy units. This approach will perhaps resolve the burden of elective procedures in the months ahead of us. As we observe a downtrend in new cases of COVID-19 in Turkey, a strategy for reopening endoscopy units is required. We are stepping into a time period where we should not only re-provide the essential services to our patients but also maintain the safety of healthcare workers and preserve the valuable personal protective equipment as well. Herein, we aim to share the available knowledge in performing endoscopy during the pandemic and the set-up plan of a tertiary center in Istanbul for reopening the endoscopy unit in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Endoscopy/standards , Infection Control/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Health Personnel/standards , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , SARS-CoV-2 , Turkey
6.
Gynecol Oncol ; 162(1): 12-17, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1213578

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare gynecologic oncology surgical treatment modifications and delays during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between a publicly funded Canadian versus a privately funded American cancer center. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of all planned gynecologic oncology surgeries at University Health Network (UHN) in Toronto, Canada and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) in Boston, USA, between March 22,020 and July 302,020. Surgical treatment delays and modifications at both centers were compared to standard recommendations. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 450 surgical gynecologic oncology patients were included; 215 at UHN and 235 at BWH. There was a significant difference in median time from decision-to-treat to treatment (23 vs 15 days, p < 0.01) between UHN and BWH and a significant difference in treatment delays (32.56% vs 18.29%; p < 0.01) and modifications (8.37% vs 0.85%; p < 0.01), respectively. On multivariable analysis adjusting for age, race, treatment site and surgical priority status, treatment at UHN was an independent predictor of treatment modification (OR = 9.43,95% CI 1.81-49.05, p < 0.01). Treatment delays were higher at UHN (OR = 1.96,95% CI 1.14-3.36 p = 0.03) and for uterine disease (OR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.11-5.33, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: During the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic, gynecologic oncology patients treated at a publicly funded Canadian center were 9.43 times more likely to have a surgical treatment modification and 1.96 times more likely to have a surgical delay compared to an equal volume privately funded center in the United States.


Subject(s)
Elective Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Genital Neoplasms, Female/surgery , Hospitals, Private/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Public/statistics & numerical data , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Canada/epidemiology , Cancer Care Facilities/organization & administration , Cancer Care Facilities/standards , Cancer Care Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Female , Genital Neoplasms, Female/diagnosis , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Gynecology/economics , Gynecology/organization & administration , Gynecology/standards , Gynecology/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Private/economics , Hospitals, Private/organization & administration , Hospitals, Private/standards , Hospitals, Public/economics , Hospitals, Public/organization & administration , Hospitals, Public/standards , Humans , Medical Oncology/economics , Medical Oncology/organization & administration , Medical Oncology/standards , Medical Oncology/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Tertiary Care Centers/economics , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , Time Factors , Triage/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
7.
Oncol Res Treat ; 44(6): 354-359, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1211630

ABSTRACT

Treatment of cancer patients has become challenging when large parts of hospital services need to be shut down as a consequence of a local COVID-19 outbreak that requires rapid containment measures, in conjunction with the shifting of priorities to vital services. Reports providing conceptual frameworks and first experiences on how to maintain a clinical hematology/oncology service during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic are scarce. Here, we report our first 8 weeks of experience after implementing a procedural plan at a hematology/oncology unit with its associated cancer center at a large academic teaching hospital in Germany. By strictly separating team workflows and implementing vigorous testing for SARS-CoV-2 infections for all patients and staff members irrespective of clinical symptoms, we were successful in maintaining a comprehensive hematology/oncology service to allow for the continuation of treatment for our patients. Notably, this was achieved without introducing or further transmitting SARS-CoV-2 infections within the unit and the entire center. Although challenging, our approach appears safe and feasible and may help others to set up or optimize their procedures for cancer treatment or for other exceedingly vulnerable patient cohorts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Hematology/standards , Medical Oncology/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Adult , Germany , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
8.
J Healthc Risk Manag ; 40(4): 38-44, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1047184

ABSTRACT

The provision of health care in the perioperative setting has undergone significant changes due to severe respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Hospital facilities have been tasked with developing and implementing personal protective equipment (PPE) protocols to protect both medical providers and patients. Texas Children's Hospital has created a set of protocols for donning and doffing PPE while managing surgical pediatric patients. These requirements have undergone numerous modifications as a result of our internal infrastructural recommendations and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance, which has led to more lenient regulations. While these perioperative PPE protocols were less stringent compared to the original guidelines, we were able to create a safe surgical environment without further exposing patients and health care providers to SARS-CoV-2. In this article, we detail the design, distribution, implementation, and modification of our institutional surgical PPE protocols.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel/standards , Hospitals, Pediatric/standards , Infection Control/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Pediatric/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , Texas
9.
Neurosurg Focus ; 49(6): E4, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-954549

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has forced the modification of surgical practice worldwide. Medical centers have been adapted to provide an efficient arrangement of their economic and human resources. Although neurosurgeons are not in the first line of management and treatment of COVID-19 patients, they take care of patients with neurological pathology and potential severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Here, the authors describe their institutional actions against the pandemic and compare these actions with those in peer-reviewed publications. METHODS: The authors conducted a search using the MEDLINE, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases from the beginning of the pandemic until July 11, 2020, using the following terms: "Neurosurgery," "COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2," "reconversion/modification," "practice," "academy," and "teaching." Then, they created operational guidelines tailored for their institution to maximize resource efficiency and minimize risk for the healthcare personnel. RESULTS: According to the reviewed literature, the authors defined the following three changes that have had the greatest impact in neurosurgical practice during the COVID-19 pandemic: 1) changes in clinical practices; 2) changes in the medical care setting, including modifications of perioperative care; and 3) changes in the academic teaching methodology. CONCLUSIONS: The Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía "Manuel Velasco Suárez" is one of the major referral centers for treating highly complex neurosurgical pathologies in Mexico. Its clinical and neurosurgical practices have been modified with the implementation of specific interventions against the spread of COVID-19. These practical and simple actions are remarkably relevant in the context of the pandemic and can be adopted and suited by other healthcare centers according to their available resources to better prepare for the next event.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Neurosurgical Procedures/standards , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Mexico/epidemiology , Neurosurgeons/standards , Neurosurgeons/trends , Neurosurgical Procedures/trends , Perioperative Care/standards , Perioperative Care/trends , Personal Protective Equipment/trends , Tertiary Care Centers/trends
10.
Neurosurg Focus ; 49(6): E3, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-953512

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted healthcare systems globally. The need of the hour is the development of effective strategies for protecting the lives of healthcare providers (HCPs) and judicious triage for optimal utilization of human and hospital resources. During this pandemic, neurosurgery, like other specialties, must transform, innovate, and adopt new guidelines and safety protocols for reducing the risk of cross-infection of HCPs without compromising patient care. In this article, the authors discuss the current neurosurgical practice guidelines at a high-volume tertiary care referral hospital in India and compare them with international guidelines and global consensus for neurosurgery practice in the COVID-19 era. Additionally, the authors highlight some of the modifications incorporated into their clinical practice, including those for stratification of neurosurgical cases, patient triaging based on COVID-19 testing, optimal manpower management, infrastructure reorganization, evolving modules for resident training, and innovations in operating guidelines. The authors recommend the use of their blueprint for stratification of neurosurgical cases, including their protocol for algorithmic patient triage and management and their template for manpower allocation to COVID-19 duty, as a replicable model for efficient healthcare delivery.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , Health Workforce/standards , Neurosurgical Procedures/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , COVID-19/surgery , COVID-19 Testing/trends , Checklist/standards , Checklist/trends , Health Workforce/trends , Humans , India/epidemiology , Neurosurgical Procedures/trends , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Personal Protective Equipment/trends , Telemedicine/standards , Telemedicine/trends , Tertiary Care Centers/trends
11.
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
12.
J Healthc Qual Res ; 35(6): 339-347, 2020.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-894031

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: During the first wave of the epidemic caused by SARS-CoV-2, hospitals have come under significant pressure. This scenario of uncertainty, low scientific evidence, and insufficient resources, has generated significant variability in practice between different health organisations. In this context, it is proposed to develop a standards-based model for the evaluation of the preparedness and response system against COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study, carried out at the University Hospital of Vall d'Hebron in Barcelona (Spain), was designed in two phases: 1) development of the standards-based model, by means of a narrative review of the literature, analysis of plans and protocols implemented in the hospital, a review process by expert professionals from the centre, and plan of action, and 2) validation of usability and usefulness of the model through self-assessment and hospital audit. RESULTS: The model contains 208 standards distributed into nine criteria: leadership and strategy; prevention and infection control; management of professionals and skills; public areas; healthcare areas; areas of support for diagnosis and treatment; logistics, technology and works; communication and patient care; and information and research systems. The evaluation achieved 85.2% compliance, with 42 areas for improvement and 96 good practices identified. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a standards-based model is a useful tool to identify areas for improvement and good practices in COVID-19 preparedness and response plans in a hospital. In the current context, it is recommended to repeat this methodology in other non-hospital and public health settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Plan Implementation , Management Audit , Models, Organizational , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communication , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Delphi Technique , Health Plan Implementation/standards , Humans , Leadership , Public Health , Spain/epidemiology , Standard of Care , Tertiary Care Centers/standards
13.
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
14.
Urology ; 147: 14-20, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-880619

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of a telemedicine service for ureteric colic patients in reducing the number of unnecessary face-to-face consultations and shortening waiting time for appointments. METHODS: A telemedicine workflow was implemented as a quality improvement study using the Plan-Do-Study-Act method. All patients presenting with ureteric colic without high-risk features of fever, severe pain, and hydronephrosis, were recruited, and face-to-face appointments to review scan results were replaced with phone consultations. Data were prospectively collected over 3 years (January 2017 to December 2019). Patient outcomes including the reduction in face-to-face review visits, time to review, reattendance and intervention rates, were tracked in an interrupted time-series analysis, and qualitative feedback was obtained from patients and clinicians. RESULTS: Around 53.2% of patients presenting with ureteric colic were recruited into the telemedicine workflow. A total of 465 patients (46.2%) had normal scan results and 250 patients (24.9%) did not attend their scan appointments, hence reducing the number of face-to-face consultations by 71.1%. A total of 230 patients (22.9%) required subsequent follow-up with urology, while 61 patients (6.1%) were referred to other specialties. Mean (SD) time to review was 30.0 (6.2) days, 6-month intervention rate was 3.4% (n = 34) and unplanned reattendance rate was 3.2% (n = 32). Around 93.1% of patients reported satisfaction with the service. CONCLUSION: The ureteric colic telemedicine service successfully and sustainably reduced the number of face-to-face consultations and time to review without compromising on patient safety. The availability of this telemedicine service has become even more important in helping us provide care to patients with ureteric colic in the current COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Quality Improvement , Remote Consultation/organization & administration , Renal Colic/diagnosis , Ureteral Calculi/diagnosis , Urology/organization & administration , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Health Plan Implementation/organization & administration , Humans , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infection Control/standards , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Safety/standards , Patient Satisfaction , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , Qualitative Research , Remote Consultation/standards , Renal Colic/etiology , Renal Colic/therapy , Singapore/epidemiology , Telephone , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Ureter/diagnostic imaging , Ureteral Calculi/complications , Ureteral Calculi/therapy , Urology/methods , Urology/standards
15.
J Cosmet Dermatol ; 19(12): 3189-3198, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-796059

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Doctors and healthcare workers (HCW) are at frontline in control of the pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19). The virus is transmitted by contact, droplet, and airborne transmission; hence, hand hygiene, social distancing, environmental disinfection, and use of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) form important components to protect HCWs from cross-infection. Appropriate use of PPE is of paramount importance not only to reduce the risk of transmission but also to maintain adequate stock for those who are dealing directly with COVID-19 patients. AIMS: In this article, we aim to provide the rationale for appropriate use of PPE in the dermatology setting in the current scenario. We have also discussed the scientific evidence for use of each component of protection and the practical problems faced in our COVID referral tertiary hospital. METHODS: Our review was based on articles that have studied or analyzed the efficacy of various protective measures being utilized by health workers against spread of COVID-19. This was done by carrying out a PUBMED search with terms "coronavirus, COVID-19, personal protective equipment (PPE), transmission, mask, face shields, goggles, gloves." We also scrutinized the various pragmatic issues being faced by doctors in our setup while using PPE. RESULTS: In order to maximize the appropriate use of PPE, the rationale for use needs to be understood and problems encountered in daily practice need to be addressed. CONCLUSION: Adherence to protective measures and use of PPE is of utmost importance for HCWs to prevent cross-infection in this pandemic. The use of PPE can limit transmission to a great extent, but appropriate use and avoiding misuse is equally important in the dermatology setting in order to avoid depletion of stock. It is also essential to consider various practical issues with use of PPE and device measures to avoid them so that breach in protocols can be prevented and spread of infection minimized.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Dermatologic Surgical Procedures , Infection Control/methods , Personal Protective Equipment , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Asymptomatic Diseases , Dermatologic Surgical Procedures/standards , Humans , Medical Staff, Hospital , Referral and Consultation , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers/standards
16.
Rev Esp Enferm Dig ; 112(10): 748-755, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-782543

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic forced the closure of endoscopy units. Before resuming endoscopic activity, we designed a protocol to evaluate gastroscopies and colonoscopies cancelled during the pandemic, denying inappropriate requests and prioritizing appropriate ones. METHODS: two types of inappropriate request were established: a) COVID-19 context, people aged ≤ 50 years without alarm symptoms and a low probability of relevant endoscopic findings; and b) inappropriate context, requests not in line with clinical guidelines or protocols. Denials were filed in the medical record. Appropriate requests were classified into priority, conventional and follow-up. Requests denied by specialty were compared and the findings of priority requests were evaluated. RESULTS: between March 16th and June 30th 2020, 1,658 requests (44 % gastroscopies and 56 % colonoscopies) were evaluated, of which 1,164 (70 %) were considered as appropriate (priority 8.5 %, conventional 48 %, follow-up 43 % and non-evaluable 0.5 %) and 494 (30 %) as inappropriate (20 % COVID-19 context, 80 % inappropriate context). The reasons for denial of gastroscopy were follow-up of lesions (33 %), insufficiently studied symptoms (20 %) and relapsing symptoms after a previous gastroscopy (18 %). The reasons for denial of colonoscopies were post-polypectomy surveillance (25 %), colorectal cancer after surgery (21 %) and a family history of cancer (13 %). There were significant differences in denied requests according to specialty: General Surgery (52 %), Hematology (37 %) and Primary Care (29 %); 31 % of priority cases showed relevant findings. CONCLUSIONS: according to our study, 24 % of endoscopies were discordant with scientific recommendations. Therefore, their denial and the prioritization of appropriate ones optimize the use of resources.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Colonoscopy/standards , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Gastroscopy/standards , Health Care Rationing/standards , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Clinical Protocols , Colonoscopy/trends , Female , Gastroscopy/trends , Health Care Rationing/trends , Health Services Accessibility/trends , Hospitals, Public/standards , Hospitals, Public/trends , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Infection Control/trends , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/trends , Young Adult
17.
Intern Emerg Med ; 15(8): 1457-1465, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-778050

ABSTRACT

The correlation between myocardial injury and clinical outcome in COVID-19 patients is gaining attention in the literature. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the role of cardiac involvement and of respiratory failure in a cohort of COVID-19 patients hospitalized in an academic hospital in Lombardy, one of the most affected Italian (and worldwide) regions by the epidemic. The study included 405 consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to a medical ward from February 25th to March 31st, 2020. Follow-up of surviving patients ended either at hospital discharge or by July 30th, 2020. Myocardial injury was defined on the basis of the presence of blood levels of hs-TnI above the 99th percentile upper reference limit. Respiratory function was assessed as PaO2/FiO2 (P/F) ratio. The primary end-point was death for any cause. During hospitalization, 124 patients died. Death rate increased from 7.9% in patients with normal hs-TnI plasma levels and no cardiac comorbidity to 61.5% in patients with elevated hs-TnI and cardiac involvement (p < 0.001). At multivariable analysis, older age, P/F ratio < 200 (both p < 0.001) and hs-TnI plasma levels were independent predictors of death. However, it must be emphasized that the median values of hs-TnI were within normal range in non-survivors. Cardiac involvement at presentation was associated with poor prognosis in COVID-19 patients, but, even in a population of COVID-19 patients who did not require invasive ventilation at hospital admission, mortality was mainly driven by older age and respiratory failure.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Tertiary Care Centers/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Biomarkers/analysis , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19 , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Electrocardiography/methods , Electrocardiography/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Troponin I/analysis , Troponin I/blood
18.
J Laryngol Otol ; 134(8): 717-720, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-729969

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection in patients presenting with epistaxis to a tertiary otolaryngology unit. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted of 40 consecutive patients presenting with epistaxis referred to our tertiary otolaryngology unit. A group of 40 age-matched controls were also included. All patients underwent real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2. Symptoms of fever, cough and anosmia were noted in the study group. RESULTS: The mean age was 66.5 ± 22.4 years in the study group. There were 22 males (55 per cent) and 18 females (45 per cent). The mean age in the control group was 66.3 ± 22.4 years (p = 0.935). There were six positive cases for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (15 per cent) in the epistaxis group and one case (2.5 per cent) in the control group. The difference was statistically significant (p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Epistaxis may represent a presenting symptom of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection. This may serve as a useful additional criterion for screening patients.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/genetics , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Epistaxis/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Case-Control Studies , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Cough/diagnosis , Cough/virology , Epistaxis/epidemiology , Epistaxis/virology , Female , Fever/diagnosis , Fever/virology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Olfaction Disorders/diagnosis , Olfaction Disorders/virology , Otolaryngology/standards , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Prevalence , Prospective Studies , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , United Kingdom/epidemiology
20.
Med Oncol ; 37(9): 83, 2020 Aug 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-706674

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has deeply impacted the activity of interventional oncology in cancer centers. Since the first COVID case was diagnosed in Italy on February 21st, our Hospital, located in Milan downtown, has been at the frontline to manage this emergency and to try to ensure essential services. In the present article, we discuss the changes that need to be done for the organization, safety, and patient management in interventional oncology.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Medical Oncology/standards , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Health Personnel/standards , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Medical Oncology/methods , Neoplasms/therapy , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Workflow
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL