Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 16 de 16
Filter
1.
Headache ; 61(5): 734-739, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1238428

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate the patient experience of telemedicine for headache care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. BACKGROUND: The use of telemedicine has rapidly expanded and evolved since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Telemedicine eliminates the physical and geographic barriers to health care, preserves personal protective equipment, and prevents the spread of COVID-19 by allowing encounters to happen in a socially distanced way. However, few studies have assessed the patient perspective of telemedicine for headache care. METHODS: The American Migraine Foundation (AMF) designed a standardized electronic questionnaire to assess the patient experience of telemedicine for headache care between March and September 2020 to help inform future quality improvement as part of its patient advocacy initiative. The date parameters were identified as the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 disease and the declaration of a national emergency in the United States. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to more than 100,000 members of the AMF community through social media platforms and the AMF email database. RESULTS: A total of 1172 patients responded to our electronic questionnaire, with 1098 complete responses. The majority, 1081/1153 (93.8%) patients, had a previous headache diagnosis prior to the telemedicine encounter. A total of 648/1127 (57.5%) patients reported that they had used telemedicine for headache care during the study period. Among those who participated in telehealth visits, 553/647 (85.5%) patients used it for follow-up visits; 94/647 (14.5%) patients used it for new patient visits. During the telemedicine encounters, 282/645 (43.7%) patients were evaluated by headache specialists, 222/645 (34.4%) patients by general neurologists, 198/645 (30.7%) patients by primary care providers, 73/645 (11.3%) patients by headache nurse practitioners, and 21/645 (3.2%) patients by headache nurses. Only 47/633 (7.4%) patients received a new headache diagnosis from telemedicine evaluation, whereas the other 586/633 (92.6%) patients did not have a change in their diagnoses. During these visits, a new treatment was prescribed for 358/636 (52.3%) patients, whereas 278/636 (43.7%) patients did not have changes made to their treatment plan. The number (%) of patients who rated the telemedicine headache care experience as "very good," "good," "fair," "poor," and "other" were 396/638 (62.1%), 132/638 (20.7%), 67/638 (10.5%), 23/638 (3.6%), and 20/638 (3.1%), respectively. Detailed reasons for "other" are listed in the manuscript. Most patients, 573/638 (89.8%), indicated that they would prefer to continue to use telemedicine for their headache care, 45/638 (7.1%) patients would not, and 20/638 (3.1%) patients were unsure. CONCLUSIONS: Our study evaluating the patient perspective demonstrated that telemedicine facilitated headache care for many patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in high patient satisfaction rates, and a desire to continue to use telemedicine for future headache care among those who completed the online survey.


Subject(s)
Aftercare/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Headache Disorders/therapy , Patient Satisfaction/statistics & numerical data , Process Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Foundations , Headache Disorders/diagnosis , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult
2.
Anaesthesia ; 75(8): 1014-1021, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1223461

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to the manufacturing of novel devices to protect clinicians from the risk of transmission, including the aerosol box for use during tracheal intubation. We evaluated the impact of two aerosol boxes (an early-generation box and a latest-generation box) on intubations in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 with an in-situ simulation crossover study. The simulated process complied with the Safe Airway Society coronavirus disease 2019 airway management guidelines. The primary outcome was intubation time; secondary outcomes included first-pass success and breaches to personal protective equipment. All intubations were performed by specialist (consultant) anaesthetists and video recorded. Twelve anaesthetists performed 36 intubations. Intubation time with no aerosol box was significantly shorter than with the early-generation box (median (IQR [range]) 42.9 (32.9-46.9 [30.9-57.6])s vs. 82.1 (45.1-98.3 [30.8-180.0])s p = 0.002) and the latest-generation box (52.4 (43.1-70.3 [35.7-169.2])s, p = 0.008). No intubations without a box took more than 1 min, whereas 14 (58%) intubations with a box took over 1 min and 4 (17%) took over 2 min (including one failure). Without an aerosol box, all anaesthetists obtained first-pass success. With the early-generation and latest-generation boxes, 9 (75%) and 10 (83%) participants obtained first-pass success, respectively. One breach of personal protective equipment occurred using the early-generation box and seven breaches occurred using the latest-generation box. Aerosol boxes may increase intubation times and therefore expose patients to the risk of hypoxia. They may cause damage to conventional personal protective equipment and therefore place clinicians at risk of infection. Further research is required before these devices can be considered safe for clinical use.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Intubation, Intratracheal/instrumentation , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Adult , Aerosols , Anesthesiologists , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Critical Care/methods , Cross-Over Studies , Equipment Design , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Simulation , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2
3.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251523, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1219018

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This paper aimed to describe the airway practices of intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia and New Zealand specific to patients presenting with COVID-19 and to inform whether consistent clinical practice was achieved. Specific clinical airway guidelines were endorsed in March 2020 by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) and College of Intensive Care Medicine (CICM). METHODS AND FINDINGS: Prospective, structured questionnaire for all ICU directors in Australia and New Zealand was completed by 69 ICU directors after email invitation from ANZICS. The online questionnaire was accessible for three weeks during September 2020 and analysed by cloud-based software. Basic ICU demographics (private or public, metropolitan or rural) and location, purchasing, airway management practices, guideline uptake, checklist and cognitive aid use and staff training relevant to airway management during the COVID-19 pandemic were the main outcome measures. The 69 ICU directors reported significant simulation-based inter-professional airway training of staff (97%), and use of video laryngoscopy (94%), intubation checklists (94%), cognitive aids (83%) and PPE "spotters" (89%) during the airway management of patients with COVID-19. Tracheal intubation was almost always performed by a Specialist (97% of ICUs), who was more likely to be an intensivist than an anaesthetist (61% vs 36%). There was a more frequent adoption of specific airway guidelines for the management of COVID-19 patients in public ICUs (94% vs 71%) and reliance on specialist intensivists to perform intubations in private ICUs (92% vs 53%). CONCLUSION: There was a high uptake of a standardised approach to airway management in COVID-19 patients in ICUs in Australia and New Zealand, likely due to endorsement of national guidelines.


Subject(s)
Airway Management , COVID-19/epidemiology , Airway Management/statistics & numerical data , Australia/epidemiology , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/virology , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Intensive Care Units , New Zealand/epidemiology , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Physician Executives/psychology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Surveys and Questionnaires
4.
Br J Ophthalmol ; 2021 Apr 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1208983

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of the study was to examine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on glaucoma surgical practices within the UK. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed to all consultant glaucoma specialists who are on the UK and Eire Glaucoma Society contact list. Participants were asked specific questions regarding preferences in glaucoma surgical practices and whether these had changed subsequent to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Trabeculectomy was the procedure of choice for 61 (87%) glaucoma specialists. A total of 51 (73%) respondents reported performing minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) procedures before the COVID-19 pandemic. The most commonly performed MIGS procedure was the iStent inject (51%), followed by XEN 45 (36%) and Preserflo (17%). Forty-three (61%) respondents reported modifying their glaucoma surgery practice subsequent to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the glaucoma specialists who modified their surgical practices, 21 (43%) specifically reduced the number of trabeculectomies performed. In combination, diode laser (both micropulse and conventional trans-scleral cyclodiode) was the most common alternative procedure. Glaucoma drainage devices, deep sclerectomy and Preserflo were also commonly chosen alternatives. CONCLUSION: Although trabeculectomy remains the most commonly performed established glaucoma surgery, it is being performed with reduced frequency during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the number of postoperative visits and procedures required. Alternatives such as conventional and micropulse diode laser, glaucoma drainage devices, deep sclerectomy and Preserflo appear to be the favoured alternative procedures.

5.
Reg Anesth Pain Med ; 46(6): 478-481, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1148173

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The role of telemedicine in the evaluation and treatment of patients with spinal disorders is rapidly expanding, brought on largely by the COVID-19 pandemic. Within this context, the ability of pain specialists to accurately diagnose and plan appropriate interventional spine procedures based entirely on telemedicine visits, without an in-person evaluation, remains to be established. In this study, our primary objective was to assess the relevance of telemedicine to interventional spine procedure planning by determining whether procedure plans established solely from virtual visits changed following in-person evaluation. METHODS: We reviewed virtual and in-person clinical encounters from our academic health system's 10 interventional spine specialists. We included patients who were seen exclusively via telemedicine encounters and indicated for an interventional procedure with documented procedural plans. Virtual plans were then compared with the actual procedures performed following in-person evaluation. Demographic data as well as the type and extent of physical examination performed by the interventional spine specialist were also recorded. RESULTS: Of the 87 new patients included, the mean age was 60 years (SE 1.4 years) and the preprocedural plan established by telemedicine, primarily videoconferencing, did not change for 76 individuals (87%; 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94) following in-person evaluation. Based on the size of our sample, interventional procedures indicated solely during telemedicine encounters may be accurate in 79%-94% of cases in the broader population. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that telemedicine evaluations are a generally accurate means of preprocedural assessment and development of interventional spine procedure plans. These findings clearly demonstrate the capabilities of telemedicine for evaluating spine patients and planning interventional spine procedures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Preoperative Care/methods , Spinal Diseases/surgery , Spine/surgery , Telemedicine , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Clin Ophthalmol ; 15: 307-313, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1110159

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Concerns had been raised for the potential hazard of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions via aerosols and fluid droplets during cataract surgeries amid the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to evaluate the rate of visible aerosol generation and fluid spillage from surgical wounds during phacoemulsification in human subjects. METHODS: This is a prospective consecutive interventional case series. High-resolution video captures of 30 consecutive uncomplicated phacoemulsification surgeries, performed by 3 board-certified specialists in ophthalmology, were assessed by 2 independent and masked investigators for intraoperative aerosolization and fluid spillage. Water-contact indicator tape was mounted on the base of the operating microscope, around the objective lens, to detect any fluid contact. RESULTS: No visible intraoperative aerosolization was detected in any of the cases, irrespective of different surgical practices among the surgeons with regard to wound size and position, lens fragmentation technique, power settings and means of ocular lubrication, or the different densities of cataract encountered. Large droplets spillage was noted from the paracentesis wounds in 70% of the cases. For all cases where fluid spill was detected on video, there was no fluid contact detected on the water-contact indicator tape. CONCLUSION: Visible aerosolization was not detected during phacoemulsification in our case series. Although the rate of fluid spillage was high, the lack of detectable contact with the indicator tape suggested that these large droplets posed no significant infectious risks to members of the surgical team.

7.
Ther Apher Dial ; 25(6): 970-978, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1105175

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been declared a pandemic. Peritoneal dialysis (PD), being a home therapy, allows for physical distancing measures and movement restrictions. In order to prevent COVID-19 contagioun among the Dominican Republic National Health System PD program patients, a follow-up virtual protocol for this group was developed. The aim of this study is to outline the protocol established by the PD program's healthcare team using telemedicine in order to avoid COVID-19 transmission and to report initial results and outcomes of this initiative. This is an observational prospective longitudinal study with 946 patients being treated in seven centers distributed throughout the country between April 1 and June 30. The protocol was implemented focusing on the patient follow-up; risk mitigation data were registered and collected from electronic records. During the follow-up period, 95 catheters were implanted, 64 patients initiated PD, and the remaining were in training. A total of 9532 consultations were given by the different team specialists, with 8720 (91%) virtual and 812 (9%) face-to-face consultations. The transfer rate to hemodialysis was 0.29%, whereas the peritonitis rate was 0.11 episode per patient/year. Eighteen adults tested positive for COVID-19. The implementation of the protocol and telemedicine utilization have ensured follow-up and monitoring, preserved therapy, controlled complications, and PD lives protected.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Clinical Protocols , Continuity of Patient Care/statistics & numerical data , Peritoneal Dialysis/methods , Telemedicine/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Dominican Republic , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Peritoneal Dialysis/adverse effects , Peritonitis/etiology , Peritonitis/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
8.
J Forensic Sci ; 65(6): 2194-2197, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1024180

ABSTRACT

Various infectious diseases, including COVID-19, MERS, and tuberculosis, are global public health issues. Tuberculosis, which is caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB), is highly contagious and can be transmitted through inhalation of the bacteria. However, it has been assumed that the infectiousness of bacteria and viruses in dead bodies weakens as the time from death increases. In particular, there is little awareness of infection control measures concerning decomposed bodies or even the need for such measures. The deceased, in whom we discovered MTB 3 months following her death, was a woman in her 80s who died at home. We performed judicial autopsy, because police suspected homicide when her husband hanged himself. Obtained organs were used for microscopic examination by hematoxylin-eosin staining and Ziehl-Neelsen staining. In addition, real-time PCR and mycobacterial culture testing using Ogawa's medium were performed for the detection of MTB. We found that the MTB in the decomposed body remained viable and potentially infectious. To identify the bacterial strain further, we performed DNA-DNA hybridization and identified the strain as MTB complex. Potentially infectious live MTB survived in the dead body far longer than had been previously reported. Pathologists should consider microbial culture tests for all autopsied cases in which the decedent's medical history or macro-examination suggests possible infection, even when a long duration of time has passed since death. Pathologists and specialists who perform autopsies should recognize that all dead bodies are potentially infectious, including those in which long periods have elapsed since death.


Subject(s)
Lung/microbiology , Lung/pathology , Microbial Viability , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/isolation & purification , Postmortem Changes , Aged, 80 and over , Autopsy , Female , Humans , Time Factors , Tuberculosis, Pulmonary/diagnosis
9.
Respir Med ; 177: 106287, 2020 Dec 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-989180

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether asthma and asthma medications increase or decrease the risk of severe COVID-19, and this is particularly true for patients with severe asthma receiving biologics. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess incidence and disease course of COVID-19 in patients with severe asthma on biologic therapy (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab, dupilumab), as compared with COVID-19 data from the general Dutch population. METHODS: COVID-19 cases were identified through a prospective ongoing survey between March 17 and April 30, 2020 among all severe asthma specialists from 15 hospitals of the Dutch Severe Asthma Registry RAPSODI. From these cases, data was collected on patient characteristics, including co-morbidities, COVID-19 disease progression and asthma exacerbations. Findings were then compared with COVID-19 data from the general Dutch population. RESULTS: Of 634 severe asthma patients who received biologic therapy in RAPSODI, 9 (1.4%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. Seven patients (1.1%) required hospitalization for oxygen therapy, of which 5 were admitted to the intensive care for intubation and mechanical ventilation. One patient died (0.16%). All intubated patients had ≥1 co-morbidities. Odds (95%CI) for COVID-19 related hospitalization and intubations were 14 (6.6-29.5) and 41 (16.9-98.5) times higher, respectively, compared to the Dutch population. One patient presented with an asthma exacerbation. CONCLUSION: Patients with severe asthma using biologic therapy showed to have a more severe course of COVID-19 compared to the general population. This may be due to co-morbidities, the severity of asthmatic airway inflammation, the use of biologics, or a combination of these.

10.
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs ; 47(5): 450-455, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-791983

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Managing patients during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and the associated severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in particular, required the nimble responsiveness for which WOC nurses are known. Problem-solving skills were needed to continue the level of WOC nursing services expected by patients, families, and professional colleagues, while reducing the hours we were physically present at our clinical facility. In order to respond to these demands, our team realized it must create an innovative approach to provide efficient, cost-effective consultations during this global crisis. This Challenges in Practice article summarizes our experience with use of telemedicine technologies to perform remote consultations within the acute care setting. CASES: Case 1 was a 52-year-old woman with a history of paraplegia. She had several pressure injuries but had not received topical care for these wounds prior to admission. A consultation for the WOC nurse was requested and performed via telehealth services on a day our team was working off-site. This case illustrates the process our team used to perform a virtual consultation and demonstrates how the use of images placed in the electronic medical record aided in developing an effective plan of care. Case 2 was a 48-year-old man who tested positive for COVID-19. He developed bilateral unstageable pressure injuries on his cheeks after being placed in the prone position for a prolonged period while critically ill. This case describes multiple technologic platforms used for telemedicine consults in a patient with COVID-19 requiring isolation. CONCLUSIONS: Remote consultation by WOC nurses was possible in our healthcare system because of previous experience using telemedicine technology and well-established collaborative relationships with providers and bedside nurses. By expanding our use of telemedicine technology, we were able to provide ongoing care to a patient without COVID-19 who had WOC consultation needs, and a patient with strict isolation demands due to COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pressure Ulcer/therapy , Remote Consultation/organization & administration , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pressure Ulcer/etiology , Pressure Ulcer/pathology , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Epilepsy Behav ; 111: 107262, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-633799

ABSTRACT

Access to quality healthcare remains a challenge that is complicated by mounting pressures to control costs, and now, as we witness, the unprecedented strain placed on our healthcare delivery systems due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Challenges in healthcare access have driven a need for innovative approaches ensuring connectivity to health providers. Telehealth services and virtual clinics offer accessible disease management pathways for patients living in health resource limited areas or, as in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic, where there may be potential barriers to existing healthcare resources. Those suffering with serious chronic disorders often cannot be seen by a healthcare specialist due to their limited availability, or the lack of a specialist within a reasonable proximity. Epilepsy represents such a disorder where most of the world's population lacks the availability of necessary specialists. Virtual clinics allow for specialist care and an ability to perform necessary ambulatory electroencephalogram (EEG) monitoring by placing the technologies directly in patients' homes or at local clinics near the patients' homes. By moving the diagnostic process out of the hospital or epilepsy center, it becomes possible to overcome growing gaps in neurology services. Virtual clinics have the potential to expand access to high-quality, cost-effective care for the patient. The virtual clinic remotely connects those in need of medical support with specialists anywhere in the world, at any time of the day.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections , Epilepsy/therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , COVID-19 , Electroencephalography , Epilepsy/epidemiology , Epilepsy/physiopathology , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Monitoring, Ambulatory , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine
12.
Intern Med J ; 50(8): 924-930, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-705231

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Infectious diseases (ID) physicians perform a pivotal role in directing the response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). AIM: To assess the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on workload and the perceptions of ID physicians regarding the national response in Australia and New Zealand in the pre-pandemic. METHODS: A survey of ID physicians in Australia and New Zealand was undertaken from 3 to 10 March 2020. Respondents were asked to estimate time spent on SARS-CoV-2-related activities in February and report their agreement with statements on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 'strongly agree' to 'strongly disagree'. We also asked about the intended use of investigational agents. RESULTS: There were 214 respondents (36% of 600 eligible participants). The median workload due to SARS-CoV-2-related activities was 34% of one full-time equivalent (interquartile range 18-68%). Less than a quarter (50, 23%) of respondents had experience managing cases, while 33% (70) had experience preparing during similar pandemics. Nevertheless, 88% (188/213) believed they were well informed when giving testing and management advice, and 45% (95/212) believed their national response was well coordinated. Additionally, 41% (88/214) were worried about becoming infected through occupational exposure. Over half (116, 54%) the respondents intended to use lopinavir/ritonavir in confirmed cases of COVID-19 with severe disease. CONCLUSIONS: ID physicians spent a large proportion of time on SARS-CoV-2-related activities. Increased staffing is required to avoid burnout. Importantly, ID physicians feel well informed when giving advice. A national body should be established to co-ordinate response. Treatment efficacy trials are needed to clarify the utility of unproven treatments.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Physicians , Pneumonia, Viral , Australia/epidemiology , Betacoronavirus , Burnout, Professional/prevention & control , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Humans , Infections/epidemiology , New Zealand/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Physician's Role , Physicians/psychology , Physicians/supply & distribution , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Psychology , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Workload
13.
Harm Reduct J ; 17(1): 49, 2020 07 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-653240

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health services globally are struggling to manage the impact of COVID-19. The existing global disease burden related to opioid use is significant. Particularly challenging groups include older drug users who are more vulnerable to the effects of COVID-19. Increasing access to safe and effective opioid agonist treatment (OAT) and other harm reduction services during this pandemic is critical to reduce risk. In response to COVID-19, healthcare is increasingly being delivered by telephone and video consultation, and this report describes the development of a national model of remote care to eliminate waiting lists and increase access to OAT in Ireland. PURPOSE AND FINDINGS: The purpose of this initiative is to provide easy access to OAT by developing a model of remote assessment and ongoing care and eliminate existing national waiting lists. The Irish College of General Practitioners in conjunction with the National Health Service Executive office for Social Inclusion agreed a set of protocols to enable a system of remote consultation but still delivering OAT locally to people who use drugs. This model was targeted at OAT services with existing waiting lists due to a shortage of specialist medical staff. The model involves an initial telephone assessment with COVID-risk triage, a single-patient visit to local services to provide a point of care drug screen and complete necessary documentation and remote video assessment and ongoing management by a GP addiction specialist. A secure national electronic health link system allows for the safe and timely delivery of scripts to a designated local community pharmacy. CONCLUSION: The development of a remote model of healthcare delivery allows for the reduction in transmission risks associated with COVID-19, increases access to OAT, reduces waiting times and minimises barriers to services. An evaluation of this model is ongoing and will be reported once completed. Fast adaptation of OAT delivery is critical to ensure access to and continuity of service delivery and minimise risk to our staff, patients and community. Innovative models of remote healthcare delivery adapted during the COVID-19 crisis may inform and have important benefits to our health system into the future.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Health Services Accessibility , Opiate Substitution Treatment/methods , Opioid-Related Disorders/drug therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Telemedicine/methods , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Humans , Ireland , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Clin Colorectal Cancer ; 19(3): 178-190.e1, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-549002

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus that emerged in December 2019 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to the sudden national reorganization of health care systems and changes in the delivery of health care globally. The purpose of our study was to use a survey to assess the global effects of COVID-19 on colorectal practice and surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A panel of International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ISUCRS) selected 22 questions, which were included in the questionnaire. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to ISUCRS fellows and other surgeons included in the ISUCRS database and was advertised on social media sites. The questionnaire remained open from April 16 to 28, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 287 surgeons completed the survey. Of the 287 respondents, 90% were colorectal specialists or general surgeons with an interest in colorectal disease. COVID-19 had affected the practice of 96% of the surgeons, and 52% were now using telemedicine. Also, 66% reported that elective colorectal cancer surgery could proceed but with perioperative precautions. Of the 287 respondents, 19.5% reported that the use of personal protective equipment was the most important perioperative precaution. However, personal protective equipment was only provided by 9.1% of hospitals. In addition, 64% of surgeons were offering minimally invasive surgery. However, 44% reported that enough information was not available regarding the safety of the loss of intra-abdominal carbon dioxide gas during the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, 61% of the surgeons were prepared to defer elective colorectal cancer surgery, with 29% willing to defer for ≤ 8 weeks. CONCLUSION: The results from our survey have demonstrated that, globally, COVID-19 has affected the ability of colorectal surgeons to offer care to their patients. We have also discussed suggestions for various practical adaptation strategies for use during the recovery period.


Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Surgeons/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Colorectal Surgery/statistics & numerical data , Digestive System Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Global Health , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data
15.
Clin Nucl Med ; 45(7): 531-533, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-543334

ABSTRACT

Some patients undergoing routine SPECT/CT and PET/CT examinations during the COVID-19 pandemic may incidentally reveal findings of COVID-19-associated pneumonia (C-19AP) on localizing CT. It is critical for nuclear medicine physicians to develop diagnostic skills for timely recognition of typical findings of C-19AP on a localizing CT. Furthermore, it is our responsibility to know the optimal practices for safely isolating and managing such patients while protecting the staff, other patients at the facility, family and/or friend accompanying the patients, and the public in general from risky exposure to COVID-19 sources. We offer several steps following an encounter suspicious of C-19AP.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnostic imaging , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia/diagnostic imaging , Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography/methods , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Diagnosis, Differential , Disease Management , Humans , Incidental Findings , Pandemics , Pneumonia/etiology , Pneumonia/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography/standards , Spine/diagnostic imaging
16.
Surg Infect (Larchmt) ; 21(4): 350-356, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-51186

ABSTRACT

Background: The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. This study aims to evaluate the knowledge of anesthesiology specialists and residents in Turkey about COVID-19 and their attitudes toward the strategies and application methods to be used for a suspected/confirmed COVID-19 case that needs to be operated on or followed up in an intensive care unit, as well as to raise awareness about this issue. Methods: This descriptive study comprised anesthesiology specialists and residents working in various health institutions in Turkey. The data used in this study were obtained online between March 13, 2020 and March 25, 2020 through the website SurveyMonkey (SurveyMonkey, San Mateo, CA) by using a survey form. We contacted members of the Turkish Anaesthesiology and Reanimation Society through the social media platforms Twitter, LinkedIn, and WhatsApp, as well as through their e-mail addresses and invited them to participate in the study. Those who agreed to participate responded to the aforementioned survey. We used SPSS 22.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY) to analyze the survey data statistically. Results: A total of 346 anesthesiology specialists and residents participated in the study. Although the majority of the participants exhibited the correct attitudes toward airway management, research assistants with little professional experience were observed to be undecided or had the tendency to make incorrect decisions. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic is spreading rapidly worldwide. The incidence of COVID-19 cases is increasing daily, and this disease can cause patient death. Anesthesiology specialists and residents who perform emergency operations on these patients in settings other than intensive care units should follow simple and easy-to-understand algorithms to ensure safety. The provision of theoretical and practical training to healthcare providers before they meet patients will help ensure patient-healthcare provider safety and prevent panic, which can cause distress among healthcare providers.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/standards , Anesthesiology/standards , Attitude of Health Personnel , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Adult , Airway Management/psychology , Algorithms , Anesthesiologists/psychology , Anesthesiologists/standards , Anesthesiology/education , COVID-19 , Clinical Competence , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Critical Care/psychology , Critical Care/standards , Female , Health Care Surveys , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/standards , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Internship and Residency/standards , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Stress/etiology , Occupational Stress/prevention & control , Occupational Stress/psychology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Panic , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Social Media , Specialization , Surgical Procedures, Operative/psychology , Surgical Procedures, Operative/standards , Turkey , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL