Impact of COVID 19 on the provision of surgical services in Ontario, Canada: population-based analysis

Recommendations for Recovery of the COVID-19 Pandemic-related Diagnostic, Screening, and Procedure Backlog in Ontario: A Survey of Healthcare Leaders

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a significant diagnostic, screening, and procedure backlog in Ontario. Engagement of key stakeholders in healthcare leadership positions is urgently needed to inform a comprehensive provincial recovery strategy.

METHODS

A list of 20 policy recommendations addressing the diagnostic, screening and procedure backlog in Ontario were transformed into a national online survey. Policy recommendations were rated on a 7-point Likert scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree) and organized into those retained (≥75% strongly agree to somewhat agree), discarded (≥80% somewhat disagree to strongly disagree), and no consensus reached. Survey participants included a diverse sample of healthcare leaders with the potential to impact policy reform.

RESULTS

Of 56 healthcare leaders invited to participate, there were 34 unique responses (61% response rate). Participants were from diverse clinical backgrounds, including surgical subspecialties, medicine, nursing, and healthcare administration and held institutional or provincial leadership positions. A total of 11 of 20 policy recommendations reached the threshold for consensus agreement with the remaining 9 having no consensus reached.

CONCLUSION

Consensus agreement was reached among Canadian healthcare leaders on 11 policy recommendations to address the diagnostic, screening, and procedure backlog in Ontario. Recommendations included strategies to address patient information needs on expected wait times, expand health and human resource capacity, and streamline efficiencies to increase operating room output. No consensus was reached on the optimal funding strategy within the public system in Ontario or the appropriateness of implementing private funding models.

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

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.

Delivery and Prioritization of Surgical Care in Canada During COVID-19: An Environmental Scan

BACKGROUND

During COVID-19 healthcare systems had to make concessions to make room for the surge of COVID-19 patients requiring hospital and intensive care. Postponing surgeries was a common strategy; however, it is unclear how surgical care was delivered during this time of constraint. The objective of this study was to understand how surgical care was delivered and prioritized during the COVID-19 pandemic response.

METHODS

This was an environmental scan following the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health methodology. This study was conducted in Canada; a universal, publicly funded healthcare system. Evidence sources on policies pertaining to the provision of surgical care between January 2020 and October 2022 were obtained from ministries of health, health services agencies and publicly funded hospitals across all 10 provinces and three territories. We synthesized the evidence sources using framework analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 205 evidence sources that described six themes about the provision of surgical care during the COVID-19 pandemic: the cycle of postponement and resumption; guidelines for triaging and prioritizing surgical cases; Infection Prevention and Control (IPAC), and safety measures for surgical care during COVID-19, patient-centred care, and looking forward (recovery planning, leadership, and decision-making).

CONCLUSION

This study provides a comprehensive understanding of how surgical care was disrupted and innovated during COVID-19 which can inform future strategies for providing effective and efficient surgical care during times of healthcare constraint.

Characterizing the Impact of Procedure Funding on the Covid-19 Generated Procedure Gap in Ontario: A Population-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical procedures in Canada were historically funded through global hospital budgets. Activity-based funding models were developed to improve access, equity, timeliness, and value of care for priority areas. COVID-19 upended health priorities and resulted in unprecedented disruptions to surgical care, which created a significant procedure gap. We hypothesized that activity-based funding models influenced the magnitude and trajectory of this procedure gap.

METHODS

Population-based analysis of procedure rates comparing the pandemic (March 1, 2020-December 31, 2021) to a prepandemic baseline (January 1, 2017-February 29, 2020) in Ontario, Canada. Poisson generalized estimating equation models were used to predict expected rates in the pandemic based on the prepandemic baseline. Analyses were stratified by procedure type (outpatient, inpatient), body region, and funding category (activity-based funding programs vs. global budget).

RESULTS

In all, 281,328 fewer scheduled procedures were performed during the COVID-19 period compared with the prepandemic baseline (Rate Ratio 0.78; 95% CI 0.77-0.80). Inpatient procedures saw a larger reduction (24.8%) in volume compared with outpatient procedures (20.5%). An increase in the proportion of procedures funded through activity-based programs was seen during the pandemic (52%) relative to the prepandemic baseline (50%). Body systems funded predominantly through global hospital budgets (eg, gynecology, otologic surgery) saw the least months at or above baseline volumes, whereas those with multiple activity-based funding options (eg, musculoskeletal, abdominal) saw the most months at or above baseline volumes.

CONCLUSIONS

Those needing procedures funded through global hospital budgets may have been disproportionately disadvantaged by pandemic-related health care disruptions.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Surgical Activities: A Single-Center Experience and Literature Review

Aim The aim of this article is to investigate the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on our surgical department, which is situated in Athens, Greece, as well as to review published literature on the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on surgical activities in our department.  Material and methods We retrospectively reviewed the surgical procedures that were performed in the surgical department of a tertiary University hospital in Athens, Greece, before and during the pandemic. Furthermore, we performed a literature review evaluating articles on surgical activity and COVID-19 published from the beginning of the pandemic up until the January of 2022 on the PubMed database.  Results In total, 894 patients were included in the study. Of those, 264 (29.5%) underwent surgery during the control period and 630 (70.5%) in the pandemic period. Overall, we performed 20.5% fewer surgeries in the post-sanitary period. In particular, elective surgeries decreased on average by 23.9%, emergency procedures decreased by 8.9%, and oncology surgeries increased by an average of 6.4% after the year 2020. Concerning the review of literature, 51 studies were selected for this review. According to them, the main effect of the pandemic on the surgical sector was reflected in the reduction of total surgeries, mainly due to the postponement of elective surgical procedures, which showed a median reduction of 54% compared to the pre-COVID-19 period. A smaller decrease was observed in the number of emergency and oncological surgeries. Conclusions Reduced surgical activity during the pandemic, due to the health measures imposed, requires courageous corrective interventions to avoid its adverse effects, such as disease progression, increased treatment costs, reduced quality of life, and ultimately the survival of the patients.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Elective and Emergency Inpatient Procedure Volumes in Switzerland - A Retrospective Study Based on Insurance Claims Data

BACKGROUND

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) pandemic forced hospitals to redistribute resources for the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet the impact on elective and emergency inpatient procedure volumes is unclear.

METHODS

We analyzed anonymized data on 234 921 hospitalizations in 2017-2020 (55.9% elective) from a big Swiss health insurer. We used linear regression models to predict, based on pre-pandemic data, the expected weekly numbers of procedures in 2020 in the absence of a pandemic and compared these to the observed numbers in 2020. Compensation effects were investigated by discretely integrating the difference between the two numbers over time.

RESULTS

During the first COVID-19 wave in spring 2020, elective procedure numbers decreased by 52.9% (95% confidence interval -64.5% to -42.5%), with cardiovascular and orthopedic elective procedure numbers specifically decreasing by 45.5% and 72.4%. Elective procedure numbers normalized during summer with some compensation of postponed procedures, leaving a deficit of -9.9% (-15.8% to -4.5%) for the whole year 2020. Emergency procedure numbers also decreased by 17.1% (-23.7% to -9.8%) during the first wave, but over the whole year 2020, net emergency procedure volumes were similar to control years.

CONCLUSION

Inpatient procedure volumes in Switzerland decreased considerably in the beginning of the pandemic but recovered quickly after the first wave. Still, there was a net deficit in procedures at the end of the year. Health system leaders must work to ensure that adequate access to non-COVID-19 related care is maintained during future pandemic phases in order to prevent negative health consequences.

Hospitalizations During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Recently Homeless Individuals: a Retrospective Population-Based Matched Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Hospitalizations fell precipitously among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. It remains unclear whether individuals experiencing homelessness experienced similar reductions.

OBJECTIVE

To examine how overall and cause-specific hospitalizations changed among individuals with a recent history of homelessness (IRHH) and their housed counterparts during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, using corresponding weeks in 2019 as a historical control.

DESIGN

Population-based cohort study conducted in Ontario, Canada, between September 30, 2018, and September 26, 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 38,617 IRHH, 15,022,368 housed individuals, and 186,858 low-income housed individuals matched on age, sex, rurality, and comorbidity burden.

MAIN MEASURES

Primary outcomes included medical-surgical, non-elective (overall and cause-specific), elective surgical, and psychiatric hospital admissions.

KEY RESULTS

Average rates of medical-surgical (rate ratio: 3.8, 95% CI: 3.7-3.8), non-elective (10.3, 95% CI: 10.1-10.4), and psychiatric admissions (128.1, 95% CI: 126.1-130.1) between January and September 2020 were substantially higher among IRHH compared to housed individuals. During the peak period (March 17 to June 16, 2020), rates of medical-surgical (0.47, 95% CI: 0.47-0.47), non-elective (0.80, 95% CI: 0.79-0.80), and psychiatric admissions (0.86, 95% CI: 0.84-0.88) were significantly lower among housed individuals relative to equivalent weeks in 2019. No significant changes were observed among IRHH. During the re-opening period (June 17-September 26, 2020), rates of non-elective hospitalizations for liver disease (1.41, 95% CI: 1.23-1.69), kidney disease (1.29, 95% CI: 1.14-1.47), and trauma (1.19, 95% CI: 1.07-1.32) increased substantially among IRHH but not housed individuals. Distinct hospitalization patterns were observed among IRHH even in comparison with more medically and socially vulnerable matched housed individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Persistence in overall hospital admissions and increases in non-elective hospitalizations for liver disease, kidney disease, and trauma indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic presented unique challenges for recently homeless individuals. Health systems must better address the needs of this population during public health crises.

A Population-based Analysis of the COVID-19 Generated Surgical Backlog and Associated Emergency Department Presentations for Inguinal Hernias and Gallstone Disease

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the downstream effects of the COVID-19 generated surgical backlog.

BACKGROUND

Delayed elective surgeries may result in emergency department (ED) presentations and the need for urgent interventions.

METHODS

Population-based repeated cross-sectional study utilizing administrative data. We quantified rates of elective cholecystectomy and inguinal hernia repair and rates of ED presentations, urgent interventions, and outcomes during the first and second waves of COVID-19 (March 1, 2020-February 28, 2021) as compared to a 3-year pre-COVID-19 period (January 1, 2017-February 29, 2020) in Ontario, Canada. Poisson generalized estimating equation models were used to predict expected rates during COVID-19 based on the pre-COVID-19 period. The ratio of observed (actual events) to expected rates was generated for surgical procedures (SRRs) and ED visits (ED-RRs).

RESULTS

We identified 74,709 elective cholecystectomies and 60,038 elective inguinal hernia repairs. During the COVID-19 period, elective inguinal hernia repairs decreased by 21% (SRR 0.791; 0.760-0.824) whereas elective cholecystectomies decreased by 23% (SRR 0.773; 0.732-0.816). ED visits for inguinal hernia decreased by 17% (ED-RR 0.829; 0.786-0.874) whereas ED visits for gallstones decreased by 8% (ED-RR 0.922; 0.878-0.967). A higher population rate of urgent cholecystectomy was observed, particularly after the first wave (SRR 1.076; 1.000-1.158). No difference was seen in inguinal hernias.

CONCLUSIONS

An over 20% reduction in elective surgeries and an increase in urgent cholecystectomies was observed during the COVID-19 period suggesting a rebound effect secondary to the surgical backlog. The COVID-19 generated surgical backlog will have a heterogeneous downstream effect with significant implications for surgical recovery planning.

A Population-Based Analysis of Diabetes-Related Care Measures, Foot Complications, and Amputation During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Ontario, Canada

IMPORTANCE

Deferred diabetic foot screening and delays in timely care of acute foot complications during the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to an increase in limb loss.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with diabetes-related care measures, foot complications, and amputation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This population-based cohort study included all adult residents of Ontario, Canada, with diabetes and compared the rates of selected outcomes from January 1, 2020, to February 23, 2021, vs January 1, 2019, to February 23, 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Comprehensive in-person diabetes care assessment, including foot examination; hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement; emergency department visit or hospitalization for diabetic foot ulceration, osteomyelitis, or gangrene; lower extremity open or endovascular revascularization; minor (toe or partial-foot) amputation; and major (above-ankle) leg amputation. Rates and rate ratios (RRs) comparing 2020-2021 vs 2019-2020 for each measure were calculated for 10-week periods, anchored relative to onset of the pandemic on March 11, 2020 (11th week of 2020).

RESULTS

On March 11, 2020, the study included 1 488 605 adults with diabetes (median [IQR] age, 65 [55-74] years; 776 665 [52.2%] men), and on March 11, 2019, the study included 1 441 029 adults with diabetes (median [IQR] age, 65 [55-74] years; 751 459 [52.1%] men). After the onset of the pandemic, rates of major amputation in 2020-2021 decreased compared with 2019-2020 levels. The RR for the prepandemic period from January 1 to March 10 was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.88-1.25), with RRs in the pandemic periods ranging from 0.86 (95% CI, 0.72-1.03) in May 20 to July 28 to 0.95 (95% CI, 0.80-1.13) in October 7 to December 15. There were no consistent differences in demographic characteristics or comorbidities of patients undergoing amputation in the 2020-2021 vs 2019-2020 periods. Rates of comprehensive in-person diabetes care assessment and HbA1c measurement declined sharply and remained below 2019-2020 levels (eg, in-person assessment, March 11 to May 19: RR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.28-0.28). The rates of emergency department visits (eg, March 11 to May 19: RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.61-0.75), hospitalization (eg, March 11 to May 19: RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68-0.87), open revascularization (eg, March 11 to May 19: RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.79), endovascular revascularization (March 11 to May 19: RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.81), and minor amputation (March 11 to May 19: RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.60-0.83) initially dropped but recovered to 2019-2020 levels over the study period.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this population-based cohort study, disruptions in care related to the COVID-19 pandemic were not associated with excess leg amputations among people living with diabetes. As the pandemic ends, improved prevention and treatment of diabetic foot complications will be necessary to maintain these positive results.

Nimble Approach: fast, adapting, calculating and ethically mindful approach to managing colorectal cancer screening programmes during a pandemic

OBJECTIVE

To describe a conceptual framework that provides understanding of the challenges encountered and the adaptive approaches taken by organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

This was a qualitative case study of international CRC screening programmes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with programme managers/leaders and programme experts, researchers and clinical leaders of large, population-based screening programmes. Data analysis, using elements of grounded theory, as well as cross-cases analysis was conducted by two experienced qualitative researchers.

RESULTS

19 participants were interviewed from seven programmes in North America, Europe and Australasia. A conceptual framework ('Nimble Approach') was the key outcome of the analysis. Four concepts constitute this approach to managing CRC screening programmes during COVID-19: Fast (meeting the need to make decisions and communicate quickly), Adapting (flexibly and creatively managing testing/colonoscopy capacity, access and backlogs), Calculating (modelling and actively monitoring programmes to inform decision-making and support programme quality) and Ethically Mindful (considering ethical conundrums emerging from programme responses). Highly integrated programmes, those with highly integrated communication networks, and that managed greater portions of the screening process seemed best positioned to respond to the crisis.

CONCLUSIONS

The Nimble Approach has potentially broad applications; it can be deployed to effectively respond to programme-specific challenges or manage CRC programmes during future pandemics, other health crises or emergencies.

Variable impact of COVID-19 on urgent intervention in Ontario

COVID-19 had a variable impact on urgent interventions among hospitalized patients in Ontario Canada.