Assessment of trends and clinical presentation in the emergency department of patients with renal colic during the COVID-19 pandemic era

Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Restrict Access to Emergency Urological Services: Assessment of Reorganisation Effectiveness for Hospital Treatment

Urolithiasis derived renal colic is a common urological condition. If treated properly, the disease resolves without complications; if not treated, it causes infection and renal failure. The COVID-19 restrictions impacted hospitalised treatment of diseases. We analysed the impact of COVID-19 on renal colic treatment at a hospital in Poland. Clinical and demographic data of patients treated during the COVID-19 era were compared with those treated before this pandemic. During the COVID-19 restrictions, renal colic patient hospital admissions fell significantly. However, more patients presented with chronic renal colic symptoms and urinary tract infections. Nevertheless, the degree of hydronephrosis and the number and location of stones did not differ between the two groups. No marked changes were observed in the chosen treatment options. The observed decrease in emergency admissions of patients with acute renal colic with a simultaneous increase in the rate of infectious stones might indicate that some patients requiring urgent medical help did not report to the emergency department or came later than they would before the pandemic, reporting more serious symptoms. One plausible explanation for this may be that the reorganisation of the healthcare system restricted access to urological care. Moreover, some patients may have delayed their visit to the hospital due to the fear of contracting the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus.

Lessons learned after the disruption caused by COVID-19 in the management of urolithiasis: An example of adaptation in a high-volume center

Background

The aim was to determine the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on urolithiasis presentation and management.

Methods

In this retrospective study, we comparatively evaluated urgent and elective procedures due to urolithiasis during the early eight months of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 1, 2020, to October 31, 2020) compared to the same period a year before, and between waves. The student’s t-test, chi-square test, Mann–Whitney U test and Fisher’s exact test were used to compare the patients’ characteristics and outcomes between the two periods and waves.

Results

Five hundred and thirty procedures were included. The overall numbers of surgical procedures due to urolithiasis were similar between pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Regarding elective surgery, our data draw attention to the increased complication rate in the pandemic times, but no statistically significant differences in terms of types of procedures and need for complementary treatments were observed. We noted that patterns of presentation of complicated renal colic were different during COVID-19 pandemic, with a higher number of days after the onset of symptoms and a higher proportion of patients presenting acute kidney injury. Furthermore, a significant increase of creatinine levels at presentation in first wave was detected, and a growth in the number of urgent procedures after the first wave was noted, owing to the delay in urolithiasis treatment and diagnosis.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected both urgent and elective management of urolithiasis. Lessons about the management of urolithiasis in this context should be learned to avoid fatal complications and improve standards of care.

[Lessons learned about the disruption caused by COVID-19 in the management of urolithiasis: An example of adaptation in a high-volume centre]

BACKGROUND

 The aim was to determine the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on urolithiasis presentation and management.

METHODS

 In this retrospective study we comparatively evaluated urgent and elective procedures due to urolithiasis during the early eight months of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 1, 2020 to October 31, 2020) compared to the same period a year before, and between waves. The student's t-test, chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare the patients' characteristics and outcomes between the two periods and waves.

RESULTS

530 procedures were included. The overall number of surgical procedures due to urolithiasis were similar between pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Regarding elective surgery, our data draw attention to the increased complication rate in the pandemic times, but no statistically significant differences in terms of types of procedures and need for complementary treatments were observed. We noted that patterns of presentation of complicated renal colic were different during COVID-19 pandemic, with a higher number of days after the onset of symptoms and a higher proportion of patients presenting acute kidney injury. Furthermore, a significant increase of creatinine levels at presentation in 1^st wave was detected. A growth in the number of urgent procedures after the 1^st wave was noted, owing to the delay in urolithiasis treatment and diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected both urgent and elective management of urolithiasis. Lessons about the management of urolithiasis in this context should be learned to avoid fatal complications and improve standards of care.

Adequacy of physician clinical rounds and nursing care elements for non-COVID-19 infected patients admitted during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic created many challenges for healthcare systems. Frontline workers and especially healthcare professionals were the most severely affected through increased working hours, burnout and major psychological distress.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the changes in standard care elements which occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically the physician clinical rounds and nursing care provided to non-COVID-19 infected patients.

DESIGN

Observational retrospective study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh Saudi Arabia. KAMC is a 1200 bed tertiary care referral academic medical center.

PATIENTS (MATERIALS) AND METHODS

We compared the physician clinical rounds and nursing care elements in all admissions due to non-COVID-19 pneumonia and ST elevation myocardial infarction during the lockdown period with similar admissions in a baseline period in the same weeks in the previous pre-lockdown.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

To evaluates the changes occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of the standard care elements, such as the physician rounds and nursing care.

SAMPLE SIZE

Total of 113 patients records were analyzed.

RESULTS

During the lock down period, a total of 113 patients were admitted to the medical and cardiology wards, (95 patients with pneumonia and 18 patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)) compared to 89 patients in the pre lockdown period (74 patients with pneumonia and 15 patients with STEMI). Both groups were similar in age, gender, disposition, length of stay, goal of care planning and outcome. Chronic respiratory disease and Diabetes were more present in patients admitted on the pre lockdown time. Azithromycin was more frequently used as part of the initial antibiotic regimen for pneumonia during the pre-lockdown while doxycycline was significantly more during the lockdown. For the 95 patients admitted in the medical wards during the lockdown, there were a total of 820 physicians' clinical rounds opportunities for senior and junior physicians each. The residents missed 133 (16.2%) and consultant missed 252 (30.7%) of those clinical rounds opportunities. Missed clinical rounds opportunities during the pre-lock down period was higher for residents and consultants at 19.3% (P = 0.429 ) and 36.3% respectively (P = 0.027 ). Similarly, missed clinical rounds opportunities was less during the lockdown period from 35.2% to 25% (p 0.022) and from 38.8% to 30.6% (p = 1 ) for junior staff and consultant cardiology respectively compared to pre lockdown period. For nursing care elements, there was a decrease in missed opportunities in vital signs measurement (p 0.47 and p 0.226), pain assessment (p 0.088 and p 0,366) and skin care (p 0.249 and p 0.576) for patients admitted during the lockdown period in medical and cardiology wards.

CONCLUSIONS

Caring for patients admitted for non COVID 19 infection reasons, physicians' clinical rounds did marginally increase compared to pre lockdown period while nurses monitoring for those patients was significantly higher. No difference in mortality was observed for patients admitted pre and during lockdown. The number of missed opportunities to do clinical rounds by physicians remains high during both periods and measures to improve adherence of physicians to performed clinical rounds are needed.

The Impact of early COVID-19 pandemic on the Presentation and Management of Urinary Calculi Across the Globe - A Systematic Review

Introduction It is acknowledged that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact on healthcare services around the globe with possible worse outcomes. It has resulted in stretch of resources with cancelled or delayed procedures. Patients with urinary calculi have also suffered the negative impact. This systematic review aims to assess the impact of the early COVID-19 pandemic on the presentation and management of urinary calculi around the globe. Methods We reviewed the impact of early COVID-19 on the clinically important aspects of stone disease using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. We searched Medline, Embase and Central databases using themes of (COVID-19 OR Sars-Cov-2 OR pandemic OR coronavirus AND kidney stone, urinary calculi, urolithiasis and similar allied terms. Inclusion criteria were studies with data on both pre and COVID-19 period covering one or more of eight clinical domains. Results Our search returned 231 studies, after removal of duplicates, of which 18 studies were included for analysis. The number of patients presenting to hospital declined by 21-70% at the beginning of the pandemic while majority of studies reported increased associated complications. There are mixed reports in terms of delay to presentation and use of conservative management. There was a consistent trend towards reduction in elective procedures with wide variations (shock wave lithotripsy 38-98%, PCNL 94-100% and ureteroscopy 8%-98%) There was a trend towards increased nephrostomy insertion with the onset of the pandemic. Conclusion This review demonstrated the differences in the number of patients presenting to hospital, complication rates and management of urinary calculi, including surgical interventions, with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. It offers baseline global information that would help understand the impact of early pandemic, variations in practices and be useful for future comparisons.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the primary definitive management of ureteric stones

Objective:

To assess the management pathways of ureteric stones within our department and any impact on this as a result of the pandemic.

Patients and methods:

Retrospective data were collected at two different time points defined as ‘pre-COVID-19’, during April and May 2019, and ‘peri-COVID-19’, during April and May 2020 of all patients with ureteric stones.

Results:

Similar patient numbers presented with ureteric stones pre-COVID-19 (63) and during the pandemic (75). Pre-COVID-19, 31 patients were admitted, of which 48% had primary ureteroscopy (URS) or percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The average time to theatre was 1.2 days. During the pandemic, there were 34 admissions with 56% of these patients receiving primary URS/PCNL. The average time to theatre was 1.5 days. Of the patients referred to the virtual stone clinic, pre-COVID-19, 38% were listed for urgent-elective surgery which was performed at an average of 62 days. During the pandemic, 49% were listed for surgery, waiting 144 days for their procedure.

Conclusion:

Patients who underwent primary surgery during their first admission had their definitive treatment quicker during the pandemic. However, patients listed for elective procedures waited longer in the peri-COVID-19 period.

Level of evidence:

(Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine: Levels of Evidence (March 2009)): 2c

COVID-19 effect on perioperative findings of flexible/semi-rigid ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy: A match-pair analysis

PURPOSE

If not treated on time with proper management options, urolithiasis cause serious morphologic and functional alterations in the involved renal units. Like many other pathologies, the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up principles of patients with urinary stones have been negatively affected by the unestimated changes in the healthcare systems dealing intensively with COVID-19 patients. In this present study, we aimed to evaluate and present the possible effects of COVID-19 infection on the ureterorenoscopic stone treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical and procedural characteristics of 96 patients undergoing flexible and/or rigid ureterorenoscopy because of urolithiasis between March 2020 and January 2021 were evaluated in a retrospective manner. Obtained data were evaluated after match-pair analysis in a comparative manner between cases with a positive medical history of COVID-19 infection (Group 1, n: 48) and those without any COVID-19 infection (Group 2, n: 48).

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups of cases with respect to age, gender, associated comorbidities, and stone characteristics (p > 0.05). The mean serum creatinine level was determined to be higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (1.15 ± 0.59 mg/dl, 0.83 ± 0.21 mg/dl, p = 0.007, respectively). Evaluation of the operative parameters revealed longer mean time from diagnosis to surgery (33.5 ± 14.27 vs 12.12 ± 6.33 days, p = 0.001), operating time, median length of stay in hospital along with higher additional intervention rates, and Clavien-Dindo complication scores again in Group 1 (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the presence of COVID-19 infection anamnesis may affect the clinical and operative parameters of ureteroscopic stone management in cases with urolithiasis due to the possible effects of renal units damage and longer waiting time. Urologists may be aware of these unestimated problems during and after the intervention to take necessary measures for a safe and successful ureteroscopic stone removal.

Impact of COVID‐19 pandemic on patients with obstructing urinary stones complicated by infection

Objective

To assess the influence of COVID‐19‐imposed life changes on presentation and outcomes of patients with obstructing urinary stones complicated by infection.

Patients and methods

All patients presenting with obstructing urinary stones and infection 1 year before the pandemic (March 2019 to February 2020; n = 66) and 1 year since its onset (March 2020 to February 2021; n = 45) were enrolled. Demographics, clinical presentation, laboratory panel, stone characteristics and outcomes were compared between groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were performed for analysis.

Results

The COVID‐19 period was characterised by younger patients, female predominance, higher temperature at presentation and more bilateral obstructing stones (p < 0.05). The admission rate to intensive care units was double that of the pre‐pandemic period, whereas time between diagnosis and treatment was similar. The univariate analysis revealed higher rates of severe sepsis (odds ratio [OR] = 3, p = 0.01), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) ≥ 2 (OR = 2.9, p = 0.01) and risk, injury, failure, loss of kidney function and end‐stage kidney (RIFLE) criteria ≥ 1 (OR = 2.2, p = 0.04) in the pandemic period group. The multivariate analyses revealed the COVID‐19 period as being the sole variable associated with severe sepsis (OR = 3.1, p = 0.02), SIRS ≥ 2 (OR = 3.8, p = 0.005) and RIFLE ≥ 1 (OR = 2.6, p = 0.05).

Conclusions

The pandemic period was characterised by a worse clinical state at presentation of patients with obstructing urinary stones complicated by infection, probably reflecting delay in arrival to emergency services.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on emergency department utilization patterns in South Korea: A retrospective observational study

The purpose of analyzing changes in the use of emergency departments (EDs) was to better understand how to use ED resources efficiently during infectious disease outbreaks.Our study was a retrospective observational study. We analyzed the patterns of visits of adult and pediatric patients to separate EDs during 2020 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak to know the changes in the ED utilization. We collected the patient's demographics and time of visit, patients' acuity level at triage, cause of visit, transportation used, disposition, symptom to visit time, length of stay, and top 10 most common complaints. We compared pediatric and adult EDs before and after COVID-19.The total number of patients who visited the EDs was 197,152 over 3 years. During the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020, the number of visits decreased significantly, especially the number of pediatric patients. The number of ED visits decreased in correlation with a surge in the number of confirmed COVID patients. The proportion of severe cases in pediatric emergency department (PED) visits increased, but there was no difference in adult emergency department. The number of hospitalized PED patients increased, and the number of hospitalized adult emergency department patients decreased. However, both types of ED patients increased in intensive care unit hospitalizations, proportion of deaths, and use of ambulances. The proportion of trauma patients in the PED increased significantly (P  < .001). The time from symptom onset to ED visit time was reduced for patients. The ED length of stay increased in adults, and decreased for pediatric patients.COVID-19 brought about many changes to ED utilization. A greater reduction in ED utilization occurred in pediatric patients compared to adult patients. Our study showed changes in the number and characteristics of patients visiting the ED during the COVID-19 period compared to 2018 and 2019.

Impact of COVID-19 on emergency department attendance in an Australia hospital: a parallel convergent mixed methods study

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way people are accessing healthcare. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of COVID-19 on emergency department (ED) attendance for frequent attenders and to explore potential reasons for changes in attendance.

DESIGN

This convergent parallel mixed methods study comprised two parts.

SETTING

An interrupted time-series analysis evaluated changes in ED presentation rates; interviews investigated reasons for changes for frequent ED users in a culturally and linguistically diverse setting.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 4868 patients were included in the time series. A subgroup of 200 patients were interviewed, mean age 66 years (range 23-99).

RESULTS

Interrupted time-series analysis from 4868 eligible participants showed an instantaneous decrease in weekly ED presentations by 36% (p<0.001), with reduction between 45% and 67% across emergency triage categories. 32% did not know they could leave home to seek care with differences seen in English versus non-English speakers (p<0.001). 35% reported postponing medical care. There was a high fear about the health system becoming overloaded (mean 4.2 (±2) on 6-point scale). Four key themes emerged influencing health-seeking behaviour: fear and/or avoidance of hospital care; use of telehealth for remote assessment; no fear or avoidance of hospital care; not leaving the house for any reason.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated reduced ED use by a vulnerable population of previously frequent attenders. COVID-19 has resulted in some fear and avoidance of hospitals, but has also offered new opportunity for alternative care through telehealth.