[Detection of female carriers of hemophilia A through comparative determination of factor VIII activity and antigenicity].

A. Parquet‐Gernez,C. Mazurier,M. Goudemand

1974-11-01

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Optimizing Surgical Care Amidst COVID-19: A Scoping Review of Practices and Policies

Nasser A. N. Alzerwi,Musaed Rayzah,Ahmad K. Alnemare,Ahmed M. E. Elkhalifa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12010096

2024-01-01

Health Care

Abstract:Background: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic significantly disrupted surgical care worldwide, affecting different specialties in various ways. Lockdowns, surges in COVID-19 cases, and changes in hospital policies notably impacted patient attendance, management practices, and access to surgical services. This scoping review examines the adverse impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical services and the policies adopted to address these care barriers. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature review using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Our search, spanning 31 December 2019, to 29 January 2023, focused on understanding the multifaceted impacts of COVID-19 on surgical services, particularly across different specialties. Results: An analysis of 75 articles indicated that the pandemic challenged surgeons worldwide to maintain a balance between delivering emergency and elective surgical care, and implementing safety measures against viral transmission. There was a marked decline in the surgical volume, leading to extended waitlists and decreased operating theater usage. Strategies such as prioritizing medically necessary and time-sensitive surgeries and integrating telemedicine have emerged as pivotal for ensuring the continuity of urgent care. Despite the reduced rates, essential surgeries such as appendectomies and cancer-related operations continued, yet faced hurdles, including reduced staffing, limited operating theater capacity, and complications in patient transfers. Conclusions: This review emphasizes the steep reduction in surgical service utilization at the beginning of the pandemic and emergence of new compounded barriers. Policies that designated surgeries as essential, and focused on equitable and timely access, were effective. Incorporating these findings into post-pandemic assessments and future planning is crucial to sustain adequate surgical care during similar health emergencies.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
The COVID Pandemic and Surgical Innovation in the United States

Toby Gordon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15533506211005364

2021-03-27

Surgical Innovation

Abstract:The SARS-COVID-2019 pandemic of 2020 severely weakened the surgical innovation pipeline and ecosystem, primarily due to factors that include lack of a coordinated federal response, weakened health insurance coverage, a politicized approach to public health and safety, and disruption of the US economy. A successful bench to bedside innovation requires trust in the scientific research, open research and clinical facilities, and participation of patients in clinical studies. In addition, stay-at-home orders and the shutdown of elective medical and surgical care and research laboratories diminished opportunities for the informal interactions that are part of the new product development process. The pandemic and how it was managed prolonged the length of time for creation, adoption, and diffusion of new products and services into the market. Furthermore, the loss of hospital revenues from canceled elective care translates into a much smaller market for new technologies. Looking forward, critical success factors for innovation include federal policy that supports science and offers access and insurance coverage for health care, including addressing social determinants of health. Any further shutdowns of research and clinical care will hinder necessary collaborations between scientists, clinicians, and patients. Economic recovery is required to ensure federal and corporate funding for research and development. Trust in science must be restored to ensure support of necessary regulatory review processes and sufficient participation in clinical trials. Surgical discoveries have brought about lifesaving and life-extending cures, and the pipeline of these discoveries must continue without interruption.

surgery
Comparison of poly(A)-mRNA prepared from membranes and free polyribosomes of mouse liver.

P. Clissold,P. Mason,J. Bishop

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.78.6.3697

1981-06-01

Abstract:We have compared poly(A)-mRNA isolated from mouse liver endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membranes (ER mRNA) with that from free polyribosomes (free mRNA) by translation in a cell-free system and by mRNA--cDNA reassociation analysis. The partitioning of certain translation products between the two fractions suggests that the physical contamination of the free mRNA by the ER is 10%, and contamination of the ER by the free is 1%. Reassociation crossreactions suggest that no sequences are totally absent from either fraction. In particular, the rare sequences are shared between the two fractions. Among the more abundant sequences, we detect three groups: (i) a group of about 10 sequences that are relatively abundant in both fractions; (ii) a group that occurs mostly in the free fraction; (iii) a group of about 12 sequences, 6 or 7 of them encoding secretory polypeptides. The members of this group are largely or entirely confined to the ER fraction. Secretory proteins are almost entirely absent from the products of th free mRNA fraction. Quantitation of individual mRNA sequences by hybridization with cDNA clones shows that a range of sequence concentrations exists within the abundant class of ER mRNA.
Value-Based Radiology in Canada: Reducing Low-Value Care and Improving System Efficiency

Tyler D. Yan,Sabeena Jalal,Alison Harris

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08465371241277110

2024-09-03

Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal

Abstract:Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal, Ahead of Print. Radiology departments are increasingly tasked with managing growing demands on services including long waitlists for scanning and interventional procedures, human health resource shortages, equipment needs, and challenges incorporating advanced imaging solutions. The burden of system inefficiencies and the overuse of "low-value" imaging causes downstream impact on patients at the individual level, the economy and healthcare system at the societal level, and planetary health at an overarching level. Low value imaging includes those performed for an inappropriate clinical indication, with little to no value to the management of the patient, and resulting in healthcare resource waste; it is estimated that up to a quarter of advanced imaging studies in Canada meet this criterion. Strategies to reduce low-value imaging include the development and use of referral guidelines, use of appropriateness criteria, optimization of existing protocols, and integration of clinical decision support tools into the ordering provider's workflow. Additional means of optimizing system efficiency such as centralized intake models, improved access to electronic medical records and outside imaging, enhanced communication with patients and referrers, and the utilization of artificial intelligence will further increase the value of radiology provided to patients and care providers.

radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
Virtual urgent care is here to stay: driving toward safe, equitable, and sustainable integration within emergency medicine

S Mehta,K Gardner,J Hall,D Rosenfield,S Tse,K Ho,K Grant,D J Bradbury-Squires,E Lang,L Chartier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-024-00658-8

CJEM

Abstract:Background: Virtual care in Canada rapidly expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic in a low-rules environment in response to pressing needs for ongoing access to care amid public health restrictions. Emergency medicine specialists now face the challenge of advising on which virtual urgent care services ought to remain as part of comprehensive emergency care. Consideration must be given to safe, quality, and appropriate care as well as issues of equitable access, public demand, and sustainability (financial and otherwise). The aim of this project was to summarize current literature and expert opinion and formulate recommendations on the path forward for virtual care in emergency medicine. Methods: We formed a working group of emergency medicine physicians from across Canada working in a variety of practice settings. The virtual care working group conducted a scoping review of the literature and met monthly to discuss themes and develop recommendations. The final recommendations were circulated to stakeholders for input and subsequently presented at the 2023 Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Academic Symposium for discussion, feedback, and refinement. Results: The working group developed and reached unanimity on nine recommendations addressing the themes of system design, equity and accessibility, quality and patient safety, education and curriculum, financial models, and sustainability of virtual urgent care services in Canada. Conclusion: Virtual urgent care has become an established service in the Canadian health care system. Emergency medicine specialists are uniquely suited to provide leadership and guidance on the optimal delivery of these services to enhance and complement emergency care in Canada.
The impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on longitudinal trends of surgical mortality and inpatient quality of care in Ontario, Canada

Steven Habbous,Maggie Ford,Stacey Bar‐Ziv,Terri Donovan,Erik Hellsten

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.16136

IF: 3.057

2024-03-16

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Abstract:Aims Previous studies have shown the COVID‐19 pandemic was associated with reductions in volume across a spectrum of non‐SARS‐CoV‐2 hospitalizations. In the present study, we examine the impact of the pandemic on patient safety and quality of care. Design This is a retrospective population‐based study of discharge abstracts. Methods We applied a set of nationally validated indicators for measuring the quality of inpatient care to hospitalizations in Ontario, Canada between January 2010 and December 2022. We measured 90‐day mortality after selected types of higher risk admissions (such as cancer surgery and cardiovascular emergency) and the rate of patient harm events (such as delirium, pressure injuries and hospital‐acquired infections) occurring during the hospital stay. Results A total 13,876,377 hospitalization episodes were captured. Compared with the pre‐pandemic period, and independent of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, the pandemic period was associated with higher rates of mortality after bladder cancer resection (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.20 (1.07–1.34)) and open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm (aRR 1.45 (1.06–1.99)). The pandemic was also associated with higher rates of delirium (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.04 (1.02–1.06)), venous thromboembolism (aOR 1.10 (1.06–1.13)), pressure injuries (aOR 1.28 (1.24–1.33)), aspiration pneumonitis (aOR 1.15 (1.12–1.18)), urinary tract infections (aOR 1.02 (1.01–1.04)), Clostridiodes difficile infection (aOR 1.05 (1.02–1.09)), pneumothorax (aOR 1.08 (1.03–1.13)), and use of restraints (aOR 1.12 (1.10–1.14)), but was associated with lower rates of viral gastroenteritis (aOR 0.22 (0.18–0.28)). During the pandemic, SARS‐CoV‐2‐positive admissions were associated with a higher likelihood of various harm events. Conclusion The COVID‐19 pandemic was associated with higher rates of patient harm for a wide range of non‐SARS‐CoV‐2 inpatient populations. Impact Understanding which quality measures are improving or deteriorating can help health systems prioritize quality improvement initiatives. Patient or Public Contribution No patient or public contribution.

nursing
175 A Patient Prioritization Tool for Non-elective Spine Surgeries: Improving Patient Outcomes and Reducing Adverse Events in a Level-1 Trauma Center

Freddie Y. Rodriguez Beato,Khadija Soufi,Julius O. Ebinu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000002809_175

IF: 5.315

2024-04-01

Neurosurgery

Abstract:INTRODUCTION: The ability to provide comprehensive care at a level 1 trauma center has become challenging, especially considering the impact of COVID on healthcare. These resource-intensive challenges have been exacerbated by provider burnout and a shortage of healthcare providers. In a high-volume tertiary care center, these factors have led to delayed access to care, and potentially an increased incidence of adverse outcomes for non-elective surgical patients. As health systems learn to adapt to these challenges, developing protocols or tools to prioritize patients is paramount for sustainable healthcare systems. METHODS: A database review of all non-elective surgeries at a single level 1 trauma center. RESULTS: A total of 2,088 surgeries were analyzed and 764 (36%) of surgeries were delayed. There was an increase in the prevalence of delays following the start of COVID-19 (33% to 37%), especially amongst the patients who did not require emergent surgery (<12 hours) (51% vs 38%, p < 0.0001). The average time delay to surgery increased from 54.5 hours to 168 hours peaking at 312 hours mid-pandemic. The prevalence of any complication for all patients was 13.3%, including 1.2% mortality rate, 8.1% readmission rate within 90 days, 0.6% infection rate and prolonged LOS (10.2 vs 9.2 days). Amongst the patients with surgical delays, there was a statistically higher mortality rate (3% vs 1%, p-value < 0.05), complication rate (34.7% vs 13.1%, p < 0.0001) and readmission rate (23% vs 8%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: An increase in delay for non-elective spine surgery led to increased hospital resource utilization, higher complication and readmission rates, and higher mortality rates in a level-1 trauma center.

surgery,clinical neurology
Evaluating Perceptions of Head and Neck Surgeons on the Role of Single-Entry Models in Managing Surgical Waitlists in Ontario: A Qualitative Study

Justin Shapiro,Charlotte Axelrod,Ben B Levy,Saruchi Bandargal,Emily C Steinberg,Emily Wener,John de Almeida,Joel Davies,Brian Rotenberg,Antoine Eskander,Janet Chung,David Urbach,Yvonne Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/19160216241286793

Abstract:Background: Long surgical wait times have long plagued health systems in Canada and abroad. This backlog and associated strain on health human resources has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, affecting surgeries of varying degrees of urgency across all surgical specialties, including head and neck surgery. Single-entry models (SEMs) are being increasingly studied as one possible strategy to help manage surgical wait times, and a growing number of health systems have implemented SEMs within departments such as otolaryngology-head and neck surgery. We sought to evaluate the views of head and neck surgeons at all 8 designated head and neck cancer centers across Ontario on the role of SEMs in managing surgical backlogs. Results: We interviewed 10 Ontario head and neck surgeons on the role of SEMs in managing wait times within the field. The following themes were elicited from interview transcripts: (1) anticipated positive impact, (2) barriers to implementation, (3) patient experience, and (4) roadmap to implementation. Participants agreed that SEMs may have utility for certain types of surgeries if implemented to address local needs. They also believe this model would have the greatest impact if employed together with other approaches, such as increasing operating room time or nursing availability. Conclusion: Our results highlighted the necessity for a nuanced approach to single-entry model implementation in head and neck surgery. While participants recognized the utility of SEMs for high-volume and low-variation surgeries, participants remained divided on the optimal approach to triaging patients necessitating more complex oncologic treatments. Deliberate collaboration among stakeholder organizations and senior surgeons will be critical if SEMs are to succeed in an intricate and political healthcare environment.
The safety and efficacy of ambulatory urologic surgery

Dhiraj S. Bal,David Chung,Harliv Dhillon,Maximilian Fidel,Jainik Shah,Alagarsamy Pandian,Jasmir G. Nayak,Premal Patel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8806

2024-07-15

Canadian Urological Association Journal

Abstract:Introduction: Amidst substantial surgical waitlists, novel methods are needed to improve the delivery of surgical care in Canada. One strategy involves shifting select surgeries from hospitals into community ambulatory centers, which expedite procedures and allow hospitals to prioritize critical and complex patients. We sought to evaluate surgical outcomes at a novel Canadian urologic clinic and surgical center. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted at a novel accredited surgical facility and outpatient ambulatory clinic from August 2022 to August 2023. Procedures ranged from scrotal and transurethral surgeries to inflatable penile prosthesis insertion. Traditional outpatient procedures, including vasectomy and cystoscopy, were excluded. All patients were discharged the same day and seen 4–6 weeks post-procedure. Variables of interest included surgery type, anesthesia administered, additional clinic appointments, unplanned family physician appointments, visits to the emergency department (ED), and hospital admissions. Results: In a 12-month period, 519 surgeries were performed. The mean patient age was 49.6±17.3 years, with most classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) 1–2 (88.8%). Most (95.8%, n=497) patients did not require medical care outside the clinic before scheduled followup; 2.5% (n=13) visited the ED presenting for wound concerns, postoperative pain, query infection, or catheter-related concerns. Only 1.7% (n=9) required an unscheduled appointment with their family physician, with concerns being inadequate postoperative pain management (n=4) or suspected infection (n=4). No patient required hospital admission. Conclusions: Many urologic surgeries classically performed in hospital operating rooms can be safely performed in a non-hospital, outpatient surgical facility with preservation of good outcomes. This strategy can potentially improve the efficiency of urologic healthcare delivery in select patients.

urology & nephrology
Surgery during COVID-19 crisis conditions: can we protect our ethical integrity against the odds?

Jack Macleod,Sermed Mezher,Ragheb Hasan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106446

2020-06-12

Journal of Medical Ethics

Abstract:COVID-19 is reducing the ability to perform surgical procedures worldwide, giving rise to a multitude of ethical, practical and medical dilemmas. Adapting to crisis conditions requires a rethink of traditional best practices in surgical management, delving into an area of unknown risk profiles. Key challenging areas include cancelling elective operations, modifying procedures to adapt local services and updating the consenting process. We aim to provide an ethical rationale to support change in practice and guide future decision-making. Using the four principles approach as a structure, Medline was searched for existing ethical frameworks aimed at resolving conflicting moral duties. Where insufficient data were available, best guidance was sought from educational institutions: National Health Service England and The Royal College of Surgeons. Multiple papers presenting high-quality, reasoned, ethical theory and practice guidance were collected. Using this as a basis to assess current practice, multiple requirements were generated to ensure preservation of ethical integrity when making management decisions. Careful consideration of ethical principles must guide production of local guidance ensuring consistent patient selection thus preserving equality as well as quality of clinical services. A critical issue is balancing the benefit of surgery against the unknown risk of developing COVID-19 and its associated complications. As such, the need for surgery must be sufficiently pressing to proceed with conventional or non-conventional operative management; otherwise, delaying intervention is justified. For delayed operations, it is our duty to quantify the long-term impact on patients’ outcome within the constraints of pandemic management and its long-term outlook.

ethics,medical ethics,social issues,social sciences, biomedical
Innovation Centers in Health Care Delivery Systems: Structures for Success

Onil Bhattacharyya,Justin Shapiro,Eric C Schneider

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/33961

2022-02-10

Abstract:The need to support innovation in health care delivery was prompted by payment reforms and access to digital tools and has been accelerated by the shift to virtual care as part of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Prior to the pandemic, a growing number of health systems set up innovation centers to focus on creating new services and exploring new business models relevant to value-based care. This is distinct from process improvement or implementation science, and often needs a different set of incentives to succeed within a large organization. We used a national survey to identify a diverse sample of innovation centers, and interviewed leaders to describe their aims, organizational structures, and activities. They all aim to improve patient outcomes and experience while reducing costs, but their strategic focus may differ. The centers also vary in their reporting structure, how they build internal capacity, and how they measure success. We highlight the range of strategies through examples of projects that improve quality, reduce costs, and generate new revenue. While the optimal forms and impact of innovation centers are still emerging, the fiscal pressures and the rapid uptake of digital technologies present opportunities for the redesign of health services in the postpandemic era. The experiences of these centers illustrate a set of approaches to increase any organization's capacity for innovation.
A Retrospective Analysis of Surgical Acuity & Procedure Volume Before & During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Xavier P Fowler,Brianna Krafcik,Ming Cai,Barbara Gladders,Emily Spangler,Kayla O Moore,Sandra Wong,David Stone,David Soybel,Jesse Columbo,Philip P Goodney,Louise Davies,Xavier P. Fowler,Kayla O. Moore,Philip P. Goodney

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2023.11.062

IF: 2.417

2024-04-01

Journal of Surgical Research

Abstract:INTRODUCTION: In March 2020, the American College of Surgeons recommended postponing elective procedures amid the COVID-19 pandemic. We used Medicare claims to analyze changes in surgical and interventional procedure volumes from 2016 to 2021.METHODS: We studied 37 common surgical and interventional procedures using 5% Medicare claims files from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2021. Procedures were classified according to American College of Surgeons guidelines as low, intermediate, or high acuity, and counts were analyzed per calendar year quarter (Q1-Q4), with stratification by sex and race/ethnicity.RESULTS: We observed 1,840,577 procedures and identified two periods of marked decline. In Q2 2020, overall procedure counts decreased by 32.2%, with larger declines in low (41.1%) and intermediate (30.8%) acuity procedures. High acuity procedures declined the least (18.2%). Overall volumes increased afterward but never returned to baseline. Another marked decline occurred in Q4 2021, with all acuity levels having declined to a similar extent (40.1%, 44.2%, and 46.9% for low, intermediate, and high acuity, respectively). High and intermediate acuity procedures declined more in Q4 2021 than Q2 2020 (P = 0.002). Similar patterns were observed across sex and race/ethnicity strata.CONCLUSIONS: Two major procedural volume declines occurred between 2020 and 2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. High acuity (life or limb threatening) procedures were least affected in the first decline (Q2 2020) but not spared in second decline (Q4 2021). Future efforts should prioritize preserving high-acuity access during times of stress.

surgery
Analysis and recommendations regarding surgeons' liabilities during an acute health crisis

Sierra Schaffer,Parker O'Neill

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2021.101880

Abstract:The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has highlighted discrepancies between surgeons' professional duties and legal protections when acting outside their specialities during the pandemic. These discrepancies between legal and professional standards leave surgeons and the NHS vulnerable to litigation. In the following article, we explore the liabilities that have arisen for surgeons during this period in the United Kingdom and Canada. We recommend, upon review of the literature, that a two-pronged approach be taken to address these discrepancies; (a) a change in policy at the national level to accurately reflect the constraints and demands placed upon the profession in this acute health crisis and (b) the provision of clearer, more stringent legal protection. In the interim, we suggest that individual surgeons utilise a decision-making framework where they consider their personal and professional obligations in regard to resource stewardship, innovation in practice, patient-specific contexts, and patient advocacy while acting outside of their speciality.
Ramping Up the Delivery of Cardiac Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Guidance Statement From the Canadian Society of Cardiac Surgeons

Ansar Hassan,Rakesh C Arora,Sylvain A Lother,Corey Adams,Denis Bouchard,Richard Cook,Derek Gunning,Yoan Lamarche,Tarek Malas,Michael Moon,Maral Ouzounian,Vivek Rao,Fraser Rubens,Philippe Tremblay,Richard Whitlock,Emmanuel Moss,Jean-François Légaré,of the Canadian Society of Cardiac Surgeons

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2020.04.030

Abstract:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a profound global effect. Its rapid transmissibility has forced whole countries to adopt strict measures to contain its spread. As part of necessary pandemic planning, most Canadian cardiac surgical programs have prioritized and delayed elective procedures in an effort to reduce the burden on the health care system and to mobilize resources in the event of a pandemic surge. While the number of COVID-19 cases continue to increase worldwide, new cases have begun to decline in many jurisdictions. This "flattening of the curve" has inevitably prompted discussions around reopening of the economy, relaxing some public health restrictions, and resuming nonurgent health care delivery. This document provides a template for cardiac surgical programs to begin to ramp-up the delivery of cardiac surgery in a deliberate and graded fashion as the COVID-19 pandemic burden begins to ease that is guided by 3 principles. First, all recommendations from public health authorities regarding COVID-19 containment must continue to be followed to minimize disease spread, ensure patient safety, and protect health care personnel. Second, patients awaiting elective cardiac surgery need to be proactively managed, reprioritizing those with high-risk anatomy or whose clinical status is deteriorating. Finally, case volumes should be steadily increased in a mutually agreed upon fashion and must balance the clinical needs of patients awaiting surgery against the overall requirements of the health care system.
Rural patients’ experiences with anesthesia and surgical consultations in British Columbia: A survey-based comparison between virtual and in-person modalities

Jude Kornelsen,Matilda Taylor,Sean Ebert,Tom Skinner,Kathrin Stoll

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241242667

2024-01-01

Digital Health

Abstract:Introduction Rural patients face barriers to accessing surgical care and often need to travel long distance for pre- or post-surgical consultations. Although adaptation to the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the efficacy of virtual care, there is minimal data available to evaluate patient satisfaction with this modality and consequent health service utilization if virtual services are not available. Methods An online survey was conducted with participants living in rural British Columbia, Canada who had undergone surgery within 12 months of data collection and had either virtual or face-to-face pre- or post-surgical consultations. It was supplemented by an in-person survey administered in two rural sites to all patients who had a virtual visit prior to undergoing procedural care. A ten-point scale was used to assess satisfaction. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analyzed. Results Findings from the province-wide survey (n = 163) revealed no significant differences in average satisfaction ratings between people with in-person and virtual surgical consultations (8.03 versus 8.38, p = 0.26). However, most participants indicated that virtual appointments saved them time traveling, energy, and money and made them less dependent on others, accruing significant social benefit. In the community-focused sample (n = 71), 38% said they would not have had the procedure without a virtual visit option and 21% said that they would have delayed the procedure. Virtual consultations saved patients an average of 9 h (range 1–90). Participants traveled an average of 427 kilometers round trip to have the procedures. Conclusion Findings reveal costs and time saved in accessing care due to the introduction of pre- and post-operative virtual care visits, and further investments in virtual care are warranted. This will contribute to promoting equitable access to healthcare for rural residents.

public, environmental & occupational health,health care sciences & services,medical informatics,health policy & services
Physical and Psychological Health Behavior Changes During the COVID-19 Pandemic that May Inform Surgical Prehabilitation: a Narrative Review

Julie K Silver,Daniel Santa Mina,Andrew Bates,Chelsia Gillis,Emily M Silver,Tracey L Hunter,Sandy Jack

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40140-022-00520-6

Abstract:Purpose of review: Multimodal prehabilitation aims to improve preoperative health in ways that reduce surgical complications and expedite post-operative recovery. However, the extent to which preoperative health has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic is unclear and evidence for the mitigating effects of prehabilitation in this context has not been elucidated. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced a rapid reorganization of perioperative pathways. Delayed diagnosis and surgery have caused a backlog of cases awaiting surgery increasing the risk of more complex procedures due to disease progression. Poor fitness and preoperative deconditioning are predictive of surgical complications and may be compounded by pandemic-related restrictions to accessing supportive services. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced a rapid reorganization of perioperative pathways. This narrative review aims to summarize the understanding of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on preoperative health and related behaviors and their implication for the need and delivery for prehabilitation to engender improved surgical outcomes. A literature search of Medline was conducted for articles related to preoperative health, prehabilitation, and surgical outcomes published between December 1, 2020 and January 31, 2021. Additional hand searches for relevant publications within the included literature were also conducted through October 15, 2021. Recent findings: The COVID-19 pandemic, and measures designed to reduce the spread of the virus, have resulted in physical deconditioning, deleterious dietary changes, substance misuse, and heightened anxiety prior to surgery. Due to the adverse health changes prior to surgery, and often protracted waiting time for surgery, there is likely an elevated risk of peri- and post-operative complications. A small number of prehabilitation services and research programmes have been rapidly adapted or implemented to address these needs. Summary: During the COVID-19 pandemic to date, people undergoing surgery have faced a triple threat posed by extended wait times for surgery, reduced access to supportive services, and an elevated risk of poor outcomes. It is imperative that healthcare providers find ways to employ evidence-based prehabilitation strategies that are accessible and safe to mitigate the negative impact of the pandemic on surgical outcomes. Attention should be paid to cohorts most affected by established health inequities and further exacerbated by the pandemic.
Development, implementation and evaluation of high-quality virtual preoperative anaesthetic assessment during COVID-19 and beyond: a quality improvement report

Petar Popivanov,Sohail Bampoe,Terry Tan,Paul Rafferty

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2022-001959

2022-10-01

BMJ Open Quality

Abstract:Background Preoperative risk factor identification and optimisation are widely accepted as the gold standard of care for elective surgery and are essential for reducing morbidity and mortality. COVID-19 public health restrictions required a careful balance between ensuring best medical practices and maintaining safety by minimising patient face-to-face attendance in the hospital. Based on the successful implementation of telemedicine (TM) in other medical specialties and its feasibility in the preoperative context, this study aimed to develop, implement and evaluate a high-quality virtual preoperative anaesthetic assessment process. Methods The three-step model for improvement was used. The specific, measurable, actionable, relevant, time aim (step 1) and measures for improvement (step 2) were defined at the onset of the project. The plan–do–study–act tool was used for the structured implementation of improvement interventions (step 3) in three phases. Data relating to virtual and in-person referrals, assessments, did-not-attend (DNA) rate, consultation time, day of surgery delays and cancellations, and service-user and provider experience surveys were recorded prospectively. Results A total of 2805 patients were assessed in the preoperative anaesthetic assessment clinic between July 2020 and March 2021. The mean rate of virtual preoperative assessments was 50% (SD ±10) (1390/2805). 0.1% (30/2805) were inappropriately referred on the alternative pathway. The DNA rate was 0.4% (8/1398) and 3% (43/1458) for virtual and in-person pathways, respectively. The mean consultation times for virtual and in-person attendance were 19 (SD ±7) and 31 (SD ±13) min, respectively. There were five same-day surgery cancellations and one delay due to medical reasons. When asked about their experience with the virtual assessment, both service users and providers reported high satisfaction, minimal technical difficulties and shared concerns about limited opportunities for physical examination. Conclusion This is one of the first implementational studies to comprehensively outline the feasibility of TM in preoperative anaesthetic assessment during COVID-19.

English Else
Implementation of the Canadian National Standards in Breast Cancer Surgical Care: Gaps, Barriers, Enablers and Opportunities

Angel Arnaout,Anubha Prashad,Nadine Dunk,Jess Rogers,Christian Finley,Annemarie Edwards,Mary Argent-Katwala

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28010056

2021-01-19

Current Oncology

Abstract:Background: Diagnosis and surgical treatment decision making for breast cancers has become increasingly complex. Recently, Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (CPAC) published pan-Canadian evidence-based surgical standards for the care of breast cancer patients. This study was undertaken to assess the degree to which these standards were currently met in practice and to further understand the determinants of their implementation nationally. Methods: This study was undertaken in two parts—(1) National survey of breast cancer surgeons to assess the perceived extent of implementation of these standards in their institution and province; (2) Formation of a focus group with a representative sample of breast surgeons across Canada to further understand the barriers and facilitators towards future breast standards implementation. Results: 35 surgeons participated in the survey: 66% were from community hospitals. There were four categories of standards that were the most significantly lacking across the country—(a) processes related to quality assurance, (b) turnaround time for pathology results (c) psychosocial and health-related support for the breast cancer patient and (d) breast reconstruction for patients undergoing mastectomy. The focus group included participants from all ten Canadian provinces. For each standard, the 134 determinants fell into three main categories—individual physician (n = 27, 20%); organizational (n = 46, 34%), and system (n = 61, 46%). While specific determinants were present for each category, surgical standards were more likely to be implemented in practice if (1) they aligned with organizational priorities standards; (2) the individual physicians or physician groups were accountable to the organization and/or cancer jurisdiction regarding compliance with the standard; and (3) if infrastructure or resources existed within the organization or system for the reliable collection of relevant, meaningful, practice changing data combined with the capability of benchmarking, peer–peer comparisons and timely feedback to the surgeons. Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrated variation, barriers and opportunities for the national implementation of CPAC’s breast cancer surgery standards and identified determinants of high-quality breast surgical care delivery.

oncology
Consequences of delaying non-urgent surgeries during COVID-19: a population-based retrospective cohort study in Alberta, Canada

Sauro,K.,Vatanpour,S.,Thomas,A.,D'Souza,A. G.,Southern,D. A.,Eastwood,C.,Ibadin,S.,Ademola,A.,Brindle,M.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085247

IF: 3.006

2024-09-04

BMJ Open

Abstract:Objectives To ensure sufficient resources to care for patients with COVID-19, healthcare systems delayed non-urgent surgeries to free capacity. This study explores the consequences of delaying non-urgent surgery on surgical care and healthcare resource use. Design This is a population-based retrospective cohort study. Setting This study took place in Alberta, Canada, from December 2018 to December 2021. Participants Adult patients scheduled for surgery in Alberta during the study period were included. Primary and secondary outcomes measures The proportion of surgeries completed and surgery wait time were the primary outcomes. The secondary outcomes were healthcare resource use (hospital length of stay, emergency room visits and physician visits). The association between the primary outcomes and patient and surgery-related variables was explored using regression. Results There were 202 470 unique patients with 259 677 scheduled surgeries included. Fewer surgeries were completed throughout the pandemic compared with before; in the fourth wave, there was a decrease from 79% pre-COVID-19 to 67%. There was a decrease in wait time for those who had surgery completed during COVID-19 (from 105 to 69 days). Having surgery completed and the wait for surgery were associated with the geographical zone, COVID-19 wave, and the surgery type and priority. There was a decrease in all measures of healthcare resource use and an increase in hospital and all-cause mortality during COVID-19 compared with before COVID-19. Conclusions The change in the proportion of scheduled surgeries completed and the wait time for completed surgery was modest and associated with COVID-19 wave and surgery-related variables, which was aligned with policies enacted during COVID-19 for surgery. The decrease in healthcare resource use suggests the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic may be delayed and may result in many patients presenting with advanced disease requiring surgical care.

medicine, general & internal
BJS commission on surgery and perioperative care post-COVID-19

BJS Commission Team

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znab307

2021-10-23

Abstract:Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the WHO on 11 March 2020 and global surgical practice was compromised. This Commission aimed to document and reflect on the changes seen in the surgical environment during the pandemic, by reviewing colleagues' experiences and published evidence. Methods: In late 2020, BJS contacted colleagues across the global surgical community and asked them to describe how severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had affected their practice. In addition to this, the Commission undertook a literature review on the impact of COVID-19 on surgery and perioperative care. A thematic analysis was performed to identify the issues most frequently encountered by the correspondents, as well as the solutions and ideas suggested to address them. Results: BJS received communications for this Commission from leading clinicians and academics across a variety of surgical specialties in every inhabited continent. The responses from all over the world provided insights into multiple facets of surgical practice from a governmental level to individual clinical practice and training. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has uncovered a variety of problems in healthcare systems, including negative impacts on surgical practice. Global surgical multidisciplinary teams are working collaboratively to address research questions about the future of surgery in the post-COVID-19 era. The COVID-19 pandemic is severely damaging surgical training. The establishment of a multidisciplinary ethics committee should be encouraged at all surgical oncology centres. Innovative leadership and collaboration is vital in the post-COVID-19 era.

[Detection of female carriers of hemophilia A through comparative determination of factor VIII activity and antigenicity].

Optimizing Surgical Care Amidst COVID-19: A Scoping Review of Practices and Policies

The COVID Pandemic and Surgical Innovation in the United States

Comparison of poly(A)-mRNA prepared from membranes and free polyribosomes of mouse liver.

Value-Based Radiology in Canada: Reducing Low-Value Care and Improving System Efficiency

Virtual urgent care is here to stay: driving toward safe, equitable, and sustainable integration within emergency medicine

The impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on longitudinal trends of surgical mortality and inpatient quality of care in Ontario, Canada

175 A Patient Prioritization Tool for Non-elective Spine Surgeries: Improving Patient Outcomes and Reducing Adverse Events in a Level-1 Trauma Center

Evaluating Perceptions of Head and Neck Surgeons on the Role of Single-Entry Models in Managing Surgical Waitlists in Ontario: A Qualitative Study

The safety and efficacy of ambulatory urologic surgery

Surgery during COVID-19 crisis conditions: can we protect our ethical integrity against the odds?

Innovation Centers in Health Care Delivery Systems: Structures for Success

A Retrospective Analysis of Surgical Acuity & Procedure Volume Before & During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Analysis and recommendations regarding surgeons' liabilities during an acute health crisis

Ramping Up the Delivery of Cardiac Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Guidance Statement From the Canadian Society of Cardiac Surgeons

Rural patients’ experiences with anesthesia and surgical consultations in British Columbia: A survey-based comparison between virtual and in-person modalities

Physical and Psychological Health Behavior Changes During the COVID-19 Pandemic that May Inform Surgical Prehabilitation: a Narrative Review

Development, implementation and evaluation of high-quality virtual preoperative anaesthetic assessment during COVID-19 and beyond: a quality improvement report

Implementation of the Canadian National Standards in Breast Cancer Surgical Care: Gaps, Barriers, Enablers and Opportunities

Consequences of delaying non-urgent surgeries during COVID-19: a population-based retrospective cohort study in Alberta, Canada

BJS commission on surgery and perioperative care post-COVID-19