Variable impact of COVID-19 on urgent intervention in Ontario

Step, Error, and Event Frameworks in Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVE

Competency-based surgical education requires detailed and actionable feedback to ensure adequate and efficient skill development. Comprehensive operative capture systems such as the Operating Room Black Box (ORBB; Surgical Safety Technologies, Inc), which continuously records and synchronizes multiple sources of intraoperative data, have recently been integrated into hybrid rooms to provide targeted feedback to endovascular teams. The objective of this study is to develop step, error, and event frameworks to evaluate technical performance in elective endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) comprehensively captured by the ORBB (Surgical Safety Technologies, Inc; Toronto, Canada).

METHODS

This study is based upon a modified Delphi consensus process to create evaluation frameworks for steps, errors, and events in EVAR. International experts from Vascular Surgery and Interventional Radiology were identified, based on their records of publications and invited presentations, or serving on relevant journal editorial boards. In an initial open-ended survey round, experts were asked to volunteer a comprehensive list of steps, errors, and events for a standard EVAR of an infrarenal aorto-iliac aneurysm (AAA). In subsequent survey rounds, the identified items were presented to the expert panel to rate on a 5-point Likert scale. Delphi survey rounds were repeated until the process reached consensus with a predefined agreement threshold (Cronbach α>0.7). The final frameworks were constructed with items achieving an agreement (responses of 4 or 5) from greater than 70% of experts.

RESULTS

Of 98 invited proceduralists, 38 formed the expert consensus panel (39%), consisting of 29 vascular surgeons and 9 interventional radiologists, with 34% from North America and 66% from Europe. Consensus criteria were met following the third round of the Delphi consensus process (Cronbach α=0.82-0.93). There were 15, 32, and 25 items in the error, step, and event frameworks, respectively (within-item agreement=74%-100%).

CONCLUSION

A detailed evaluation tool for the procedural steps, errors, and events in infrarenal EVAR was developed. This tool will be validated on recorded procedures in future work: It may focus skill development on common errors and hazardous steps. This tool might be used to provide high-quality feedback on technical performance of trainees and experienced surgeons alike, thus promoting surgical mastery.

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.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on provision and outcomes of emergency abdominal surgery in Irish public hospitals

Background

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic caused severe disruption to scheduled surgery in Ireland but its impact on emergency abdominal surgery (EAS) is unknown.

Aims

The primary objective was to identify changes in volume, length of stay (LOS), and survival outcomes following EAS during the pandemic. A secondary objective was to evaluate differences in EAS patient flow including admission source, ITU utilisation, discharge destination, and readmission rates.

Methods

Using a national administrative dataset, demographic, comorbidity, and patient flow data on 5611 patients admitted for EAS between 2018 and 2020 were extracted. Pre-pandemic and pandemic timeframes were compared using graphic and regression analyses, and bivariate logistic regression, adjusting for demographics and case-mix.

Results

There was a 19.9% decrease in EAS during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic with no difference in comorbidity, nor in the commonest procedures. Most patients (92.4%) were admitted from home. In-hospital post-operative mortality was unchanged (7.6%). Patients over 80 comprised 16.3% of EAS pre-COVID, but 17.9% during COVID. Average total LOS reduced significantly by 4.9 days and 3.5 days during COVID-19 waves 1 (29 Feb 2020–30 June 2020) and 2 (1 July 2020–30 Nov 2020), respectively. During wave 1, pre-operative LOS reduced (1 day) and ICU LOS was significantly shorter (0.8 days), but similar change was not observed during wave 2.

Conclusions

Significant improvements in patient flow following admission for EAS during the pandemic were observed. These changes were not associated with greater mortality nor increased readmission rates and offer important insights into optimal delivery of EAS services.