Reduction of the emergency activity, during the Covid 19 Italian lockdown, what's the lesson to learn?

The COVID 19 pandemic was declared on the 9th of March 2020. The health crisis affected the whole world with a very high and unexpected number of infected people. The situation forced the declaration of lockdown and a worldwide health system reorganization. Surprisingly, the social distancing laws caused a reduction of urgent hospital activities not COVID 19 related. The aim of this manuscript is to analyze the reasons why fewer emergencies were described during the 2020 Italian lockdown. The Data reporting urgent Emergency Room (ER) activity, during the first three weeks of the Italian lockdown (Group 1), were analyzed and compared with the same period in 2019 (Group 2). During the study period in 2020, there was a 46,5% reduction in ER activity compared to that in 2019. Nevertheless, the hospitalization rate was higher in the 2020 then in 2019 (p<0.05). The present data showed that almost half of the basic ER activity araised from mild health problems that could be followed by territorial health services. The strengthening of territorial medical services would allow hospitals to handle critical situations more easily and to focus activity by reducing the waiting list.

Cognitive load in 3d and 2d minimally invasive colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional (3d) laparoscopy has been introduced to enhance depth perception and facilitate surgical operations. The aim of this study was to compare cognitive load during 3d and 2d laparoscopic procedures. METHODS: Two subjective questionnaires (the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire and the NASA task load index) were used to prospectively collect data regarding cognitive load in surgeons performing 2d and 3d laparoscopic colorectal resections. Moreover, the perioperative results of 3d and 2d laparoscopic operations were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 313 patients were included: 82 in the 2d group and 231 in the 3d group. The NASA TLX results did not reveal significantly major cognitive load differences in the 3d group compared with the 2d group; the SSQ results were better in the 3d group than in the 2d group in terms of general discomfort, whereas difficulty concentrating, difficulty focusing, and fatigue were more frequent in 3d operations than in 2d operations (p = 0.001-0.038). The results of age, sex, and ASA score were comparable between the two groups (p = 0.299-0.374). The median operative time showed no statistically significant difference between the 3d and 2d groups (median, IQR, 2d 150 min [120-180]-3d 160 min [130-190] p = 0.611). There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of severe complications between patients in the 3d group and in the 2d group (2d 7 [8.54%] vs 3d 21 [9.1%], p = 0.271). The median hospitalization time and the reoperation rate showed no difference between the 2d and 3d operations (p = 0.417-0.843). CONCLUSION: The NASA TLX did not reveal a significant difference in cognitive load between the 2d and 3d groups, whereas data reported by the SSQ showed a mild risk of cognitive load in the 3d group. Furthermore, 3d laparoscopic surgery revealed the same postoperative results as 2d standard laparoscopy.