How can we better evaluate paediatric progression of myopia and associated risk factors? Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, home-based and remote learning-particularly using electronic devices-was rapidly pushed out. Increased near-work, screen time exposure and lack of outdoor time are risk factors that contribute to childhood myopia, but it is difficult to adopt recommendations from prior publications as a consistent limitation in the literature is the heterogeneity of research methodology. This review seeks to systematically evaluate how observational studies published during the pandemic have quantified and measured risk factors and myopia in school-going children and adolescents. METHODS: Three scientific databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus) were systematically searched from March 2020 to April 2022. Findings from relevant studies were descriptively summarised in relation to the PICOS-based objective of the review. RESULTS: The final sample of 13 studies included research from six countries and comprised 1 411 908 children and adolescents. The majority of studies (N = 10; 76.9%) used spherical equivalent refraction (SER) of -0.5 dioptres or lower as a common definition of myopia. Most studies (77.8%) measuring screen time exposure found it higher during COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID, but only one study used objective measurement of screen time. The average critical appraisal score of the sample was only 66.1%, with a considerable number of studies failing to identify and adjust for potential confounders. CONCLUSION: Future studies should consider emergent objective and validated measures of risk factors, account for potential a priori confounders and covariates and ensure more representativeness in the sociodemographic makeup of their samples.

Surgical High Dependency Admissions after Elective Laparoscopic Colorectal Resections: Is It Truly Necessary?

BACKGROUND: Surgical high dependency (SHD) allows for intermediate care provision between general ward (GW) and intensive care unit (ICU) for surgical patients but no universally accepted admission criteria exists. Unnecessary SHD admissions should be minimized to limit resource wastage and maintain spare critical care capacity. This study evaluates the utility of SHD admissions following elective laparoscopic colectomy by comparing post-operative outcomes and interventions performed between SHD and GW patients. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective review of all colorectal cancer patients who underwent elective laparoscopic colectomy in our institution between January 2019 and December 2021 was conducted. Patients converted to open surgery or admitted to IC post-operatively were excluded. Peri-operative parameters and outcomes between patients admitted to GW and SHD post-operatively were evaluated. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 393 patients. There were 153 patients (38.93%) who required SHD admission. SHD patients had higher American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) scores, body mass index, age and intra-operative blood loss. Majority of post-operative morbidity were minor (Clavien-Dindo II or lower) in both groups and the interventions required were safely instituted in both SHD and GW. None of the patients in the cohort required inotropic or ventilatory support in the SHD. CONCLUSIONS: GW patients were "healthier" but post-operative morbidity and interventions required were similar to the SHD group. Nonetheless, treatment delays, absence of continuous monitoring, and decreased nurse-to-patient ratio may be significant for patients with limited physiological reserves. Further studies should evaluate safety and cost-effectiveness of managing high risk surgical patients in GW using continuous remote vital signs monitoring.