The Detrimental Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Major Trauma Outcomes in the Netherlands: A Comprehensive Nationwide Study

Missing patient registrations in the Dutch National Trauma Registry of Southwest Netherlands: Prevalence and epidemiology

INTRODUCTION

Health care patient records have been digitalised the past twenty years, and registries have been automated. Missing registrations are common, and can result in selection bias.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence and characteristics of missed registrations in a Dutch regional trauma registry.

METHODS

An automatically generated trauma registry export was done for ten out of eleven hospitals in trauma region Southwest Netherlands, between June 1 and August 31, 2020. Second, lists were checked for being falsely flagged as 'non-trauma'. Finally, a list was generated with trauma tick box flagged as 'trauma' but were not automatically in the export due to administrative errors. Automated and missed registration datasets were compared on patient characteristics and logistic regression models were run with random intercepts and missed registration as outcome variable on the complete dataset.

RESULTS

A total of 2,230 automated registrations and 175 (7.3 %) missed registrations were included for the Dutch National Trauma Registry, ranging from 1 to 14 % between participating hospitals. Patients of the missed registration dataset had characteristics of a higher level of care, compared with patients of automated registrations. Level of trauma care (level II OR 0.464 95 % CI 0.328-0.666, p < 0.001; level III OR 0.179 95 % CI 0.092-0.325, p < 0.001), major trauma (OR 2.928 95 % CI 1.792-4.65, p < 0.001), ICU admission (OR 2.337 95 % CI 1.792-4.650, p < 0.001), and surgery (OR 1.871 95 % CI 1.371-2.570, p < 0.001) were potential predictors for missed registrations in multivariate logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

Missed registrations occur frequently and the rate of missed registrations differs greatly between hospitals. Automated and missed registration datasets display differences related to patients requiring more intensive care, which held for the major trauma subset. Checking for missed registrations is time consuming, automated registration lists need a human touch for validation and to be complete.

Clinical presentation of severe COVID‑19 with heart failure: A single‑center retrospective study

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a global transformation in public health interventions. The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical features as well as the outcomes of severe heart failure (HF) among patients with severe COVID-19. A single-center observational study was carried out at The 904th Hospital of Joint Logistic Support Force (Wuxi, China) from November 2022 to April 2023, and a total of 210 patients diagnosed with severe HF were included. Among these patients, 128 patients had COVID-19 whereas the remaining patients were not diagnosed with COVID-19. The analysis entailed investigated pre-existing medical records, that is, admission and discharge, laboratory values, neuroimaging, length of hospitalization, mortality and costs incurred by patients throughout the COVID-19 pandemic from the records. All the 210 incorporated patients accomplished the follow-up and it was established that there was no significant differences in baseline characteristics between HF combined with COVID-19 and HF without COVID-19 were affirmed (P>0.05). HF coupled with COVID-19 infection demonstrated an increased risk of 30-day mortality (28.91 vs. 14.63%; P=0.017), extended length of hospital stays (22.54±6.73 vs. 19.35±5.69; P<0.001) and higher expenses for hospitalization (P<0.001). Complications related to hospitalization, including pneumonia (76.56 vs. 35.37%; P=1.0x10-4), respiratory failure (47.66 vs. 24.39%; P=0.001), pulmonary embolism (8.59 vs. 2.44%; P=0.031), deep vein thrombosis (30.47 vs. 14.63%; P=0.009), 7 days delirium (60.16 vs. 45.12%; P=0.033), multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (32.81 vs. 18.29%; P=0.021) and neurological deficits (30.47% vs. 17.07%, P=0.029) increased significantly. In conclusion, HF combined with COVID-19, treatment and prognosis are getting worse. Enhancing preparedness for future COVID-19 and other similar pandemics necessitates the comprehension of this to refine care provided to patients with HF (registration no. THH-IPR-20221101 on 01 November 2022).

Measures and Impact of Caseload Surge During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

COVID-19 pandemic surges strained hospitals globally. We performed a systematic review to examine measures of pandemic caseload surge and its impact on mortality of hospitalized patients.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language studies published between December 1, 2019, and November 22, 2023, which reported the association between pandemic "surge"-related measures and mortality in hospitalized patients.

DATA EXTRACTION

Three authors independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed individual study risk of bias. We assessed measures of surge qualitatively across included studies. Given multidomain heterogeneity, we semiquantitatively aggregated surge-mortality associations.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 17,831 citations, we included 39 studies, 17 of which specifically described surge effects in ICU settings. The majority of studies were from high-income countries (n = 35 studies) and included patients with COVID-19 (n = 31). There were 37 different surge metrics which were mapped into four broad themes, incorporating caseloads either directly as unadjusted counts (n = 11), nested in occupancy (n = 14), including additional factors (e.g., resource needs, speed of occupancy; n = 10), or using indirect proxies (e.g., altered staffing ratios, alternative care settings; n = 4). Notwithstanding metric heterogeneity, 32 of 39 studies (82%) reported detrimental adjusted odds/hazard ratio for caseload surge-mortality outcomes, reporting point estimates of up to four-fold increased risk of mortality. This signal persisted among study subgroups categorized by publication year, patient types, clinical settings, and country income status.

CONCLUSIONS

Pandemic caseload surge was associated with lower survival across most studies regardless of jurisdiction, timing, and population. Markedly variable surge strain measures precluded meta-analysis and findings have uncertain generalizability to lower-middle-income countries (LMICs). These findings underscore the need for establishing a consensus surge metric that is sensitive to capturing harms in everyday fluctuations and future pandemics and is scalable to LMICs.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number and short-term outcomes in hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: Results from the Japanese National Clinical Database, 2018-2021

AIM

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly impacted the allocation of medical resources, including cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment. We aimed to investigate the effects of the pandemic on morbidity and mortality following hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

We identified patients who underwent hepatectomy for HCC between 2018 and 2021 from the Japanese National Clinical Database (NCD). The number of surgical cases, the use of intensive care units, and the incidence of morbidity were assessed. The standardized morbidity / mortality ratio (SMR) was used to evaluate the rates of morbidity (bile leakage and pneumonia) and mortality in each month, which compares the observed incidence to the expected incidence calculated by the NCD's risk calculator.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 10 647 cases. The number of patients undergoing hepatectomy for HCC gradually decreased. The proportion of patients aged 80 years or older increased and that of cases with T1 stage decreased. The proportion of patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit did not change between the pre- and postpandemic period. The mean actual incidence rates of bile leakage, pneumonia, 30-day mortality, and surgical mortality were 9.2%, 2.3%, 1.4%, and 2.1%, respectively. The SMR for the mortalities and morbidities in each month did not increase mostly throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study showed the decreasing number of resected cases for HCC, while the surgical safety for hepatectomy was enough to be maintained by managing medical resources in Japan.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on trauma mortality patients: A retrospective observational study in an Iranian level 1 trauma center

Background and Aims

The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped the epidemiology of various clinical conditions, including trauma which is closely tied to social policies. This study examines and compares the characteristics of trauma mortality patients, and their initial prognostic trauma scores, in the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective observational study involving patients who passed away at a level 1 trauma center from July 23, 2018, to February 19, 2020 (prepandemic), and from February 20, 2020, to September 22, 2021 (pandemic). A subgroup analysis that matched 12 of the same months of the year in the two periods was also done. Patients who arrived deceased or passed away immediately upon arrival were excluded from data analysis. We collected and analyzed demographic and clinical data, employing the Abbreviated Injury Score (AIS), Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and Trauma and ISS (TRISS) to compare initial prognoses.

Results

Our study encompassed 1128 patients, with 529 in the prepandemic group and 599 in the pandemic group. Demographic characteristics showed no significant differences in the number of patients in the two periods. Motor vehicle accidents remained the predominant injury mechanism in both periods. While the mean ISS increased insignificantly (22.80 vs. 22.91, p = 0.902), the mean RTS decreased (6.32 vs. 5.82), and TRISS increased (23.97% vs. 28.93%) during the pandemic (p < 0.05). Hospital length of stay decreased in the pandemic period (15.57 vs. 12.54 days, p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed increased ISS, decreased RTS, and increased TRISS during the pandemic (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

In conclusion, while overall demographics and injury mechanisms remained virtually unchanged, trauma patients during the pandemic displayed worse estimated clinical prognoses, particularly in physiological trauma scores. The heightened mortality rate was attributed to poorer clinical conditions of patients.

[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the care of major trauma patients: analysis from the TraumaRegister DGU®]

BACKGROUND

The treatment of major trauma patients requires intensive care capacity, which is a critical resource particularly during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze the impact on major trauma care considering the intensive care treatment of COVID-19 positive patients.

METHODS

Demographic, prehospital, and intensive care treatment data from the TraumaRegister DGU® of the German Trauma Society (DGU) in 2019 and 2020 were analyzed. Only major trauma patients from the state of Bavaria were included. Inpatient treatment data of COVID-19 patients in Bavaria in 2020 were obtained using IVENA eHealth.

RESULTS

In total, 8307 major trauma patients were treated in the state of Bavaria in the time period investigated. The number of patients in 2020 (n = 4032) compared to 2019 (n = 4275) was not significantly decreased (p = 0.4). Regarding COVID-19 case numbers, maximum values were reached in the months of April and December with more than 800 intensive care unit (ICU) patients per day. In the critical period (> 100 patients with COVID-19 on ICU), a prolonged rescue time was evident (64.8 ± 32.5 vs. 67.4 ± 30.6 min; p = 0.003). The length of stay and ICU treatment of major trauma patients were not negatively affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSION

The intensive medical care of major trauma patients could be ensured during the high-incidence phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. The prolonged prehospital rescue times show possible optimization potential of the horizontal integration of prehospital and hospital.

The clinical features of severe COVID-19 with respiratory failure: A Chinese single-center retrospective study

The global pandemic of COVID-19, caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has resulted in widespread alterations to public health measures worldwide. This observational study aimed to assess the clinical features and results of respiratory failure in patients with severe COVID-19. A single-center observational study was performed at a Chinese hospital between November 1, 2022, and February 31, 2023. All 182 enrolled patients were diagnosed with respiratory failure, 84 patients were infected with COVID-19, and the other 98 patients were not infected. A review of available medical records at admission and discharge, including neuroimaging, laboratory values at admission, mortality, length of hospitalization, and hospital costs, was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. All 182 eligible patients completed the follow-up. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between respiratory failure combined with COVID-19 (P > .05). Respiratory failure combined with COVID-19 infection may lead to higher 30-day mortality (16.36% vs 7.14%, P = .005), longer hospital stays (22.5 ± 5.9 vs 12.8 ± 4.2, P < .001), larger hospitalization costs (P < .001), and increased hospitalization complications, such as pulmonary embolism (10.30% vs 4.76%, P = .039), deep vein thrombosis (33.33% vs 18.57%, P = .001), incidence of 7-day delirium (69.70% vs 46.19%, P < .001), and respiratory failure (38.18% vs 24.77%, P = .005). If respiratory failure occurs while the patient is infected with COVID-19, treatment and prognosis worsen. Our understanding of COVID-19 and the care we provide to patients with respiratory failure is crucial to better prepare for a potential pandemic.

Effects of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic in chest trauma patients in China: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

An international pandemic of severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. A large number of patients with chest trauma were infected with COVID-19. The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the management of chest trauma.

OBJECTIVE

The present observational study was conducted to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of chest trauma patients with or without COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

A multicenter observational study was performed at three Chinese hospitals between November 1, 2022, and January 31, 2023. All enrolled patients were diagnosed with chest trauma. We analyzed data from existing medical records, including all baseline data and prognostic follow-up data, such as 30-day mortality, hospital stays, hospitalization costs, and complications.

RESULTS

All 375 eligible patients completed the follow-up. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between chest trauma combined with COVID-19 (p > 0.05). Chest trauma combined with COVID-19 infection may lead to higher 30-day mortality (16.36% vs. 7.14%, p = 0.005), longer hospital stays (22.5 ± 5.9 vs. 12.8 ± 4.2, p < 0.001), larger hospitalization costs (p < 0.001), and increased hospitalization complications, such as pulmonary embolism (10.30% vs. 4.76%, p = 0.039), deep vein thrombosis (DVT, 33.33% vs. 18.57%, p = 0.001), the incidence of 7-day delirium (69.70% vs. 46.19%, p < 0.001), and respiratory failure (38.18% vs. 24.77%, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to chest trauma alone, it may lead to higher mortality, larger hospitalization costs, and more complications. To better respond to the future of COVID-19 or other similar virus-borne disease pandemics, it is important to understand the clinical characteristics and complications, such as pulmonary embolism, DVT, and respiratory failure after COVID-19 infection. To guide the future treatment of chest trauma combined with COVID-19 infection or other infectious diseases.

The impact of COVID-19 for postoperative outcomes using a nationwide Japanese database of patients undergoing distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had resulted in either failure to provide required medical resources or delayed treatment for gastric cancer patients. This study aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the incidence of postoperative complications using a nationwide Japanese database of patients undergoing distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Methods

We collected the data of patients who underwent distal gastrectomy from January 2018 to December 2021 from the National Clinical Database (NCD), a web-based surgical registration system in Japan. The number of surgical cases, the use of intensive care units, and the incidence of morbidity per month were analyzed. We also calculated the standardized mortality ratio (SMR), defined as the ratio of the number of observed patients to the expected number of patients calculated using the risk calculator established in the NCD, for several morbidities, including pneumonia, sepsis, 30-day mortality, and surgical mortality.

Results

A decrease of 568 gastrectomies was observed from April 2020 to May 2020. Although the absolute number of patients admitted to intensive care units had declined since 2020, the proportion of patients admitted to the ICU did not change before and after the pandemic. Mortality and critical morbidity (such as pneumonia and sepsis) rates were not worse during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic periods per the SMR.

Conclusions

Surgical management was conducted adequately through the organized efforts of the entire surgery department in our country even in a pandemic during which medical resources and staff may have been limited.

Analysis of the short-term outcomes after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic using data from a nationwide Japanese database

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had adversely impacted cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment. We investigated the change in medical resource, such as the intensive care unit use, and short-term outcomes after esophagectomy during the pandemic.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer registered in the National Clinical Database (NCD) in Japan from January 2018 to December 2021 were analyzed. The time series change in the number of surgical cases; usage of intensive care unit; incidence of morbidity and mortality; standardized mortality and morbidity ratio (SMR) for 30-days mortality; surgical mortality; and morbidities for pneumonia, sepsis, unplanned intubation, and anastomotic leakage were evaluated.

RESULTS

The annual number of patients undergoing esophagectomy remained similar from 2018 to 2021. The negative impact of the pandemic on medical resources was strongly identified in the patients from an epidemic area where there is a higher cumulative number of infections per population as compared to all prefectures. The proportions of patients admitted to the intensive care unit were 91.4%, 93.0%, 91.6%, and 90.5% in 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively. Moreover, 93.3%, 94.0%, 92.0%, and 90.9% patients who underwent surgery in an epidemic area were admitted to the intensive care unit in 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively. However, the morbidity and mortality rates during the pandemic did not worsen according to the SMR values.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophagectomy was performed during the pandemic despite limited medical resources by a systematic endeavor of the entire surgical department in Japan, without increasing the incidence rate of worse outcome.

Outcome of early rehabilitation of patients with traumatic brain injury during COVID-19 pandemic in The Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed a tremendous burden on the healthcare system. Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) have to get fast track treatment which is independent of environmental conditions. The aim of this study was to investigate epidemiological and clinical outcomes of early rehabilitation and compare it with the literature data during the non-COVID-19 period.

Materials and methods

A retrospective study included 174 patients with TBI, average 57 ± 19.08 years. They all underwent treatment in the University Clinical Center, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina during the period January-December 2021. We have analyzed the epidemiological data and clinical course in 174 patients as well as the outcome of early rehabilitation in 107 patients. In clinical evaluation were used: Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and Barthel Index on admission and at discharge, as well as Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) at discharge. ANOVA, SPANOVA, Student t-test and Pearson correlation coefficient were used in statistical analysis. The value (p < 0.05) was used for statistical significance.

Results

A total of 174 patients with TBI were included in this study. Most of the patients (n = 94) were older than 60, male (n = 125) and the most frequent cause of TBI was falling over (n = 88). About a half (n = 92) had a mild TBI, almost one third of the sample had moderate (n = 52), while only 30 patients had severe TBI. Total of 139 (80.3%) patients had the improved outcome, the worsening was registered in 2 (1.2%), while the fatal outcome was reported with 33 (18.5%) patients. When comparing the scores on admission and at discharge, the improvement of mean parameter values was reported for GCS (9.9 vs. 14.1), for Barthel Index (57.25 vs. 86.85), and for FIM (67.35 vs. 105.15), (p < 0.001). A complete recovery at discharge was found in 63.79%, a mild deficit in 8.62%, while serious deficit was found with 6.32%, and vegetative state with 2.29% patients.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant effect on the epidemiological data but not on the clinical outcome of patients with TBI. Early rehabilitation proved to be effective and to contribute to positive treatment outcome.

In patients with combined clavicle and multiple rib fractures, does fracture fixation of the clavicle improve clinical outcomes? A multicenter prospective cohort study of 232 patients

BACKGROUND

Clavicle and rib fractures are often sustained concomitantly. The combination of injuries may result in decreased stability of the chest wall, making these patients prone to (respiratory) complications and prolonged hospitalization. This study aimed to assess whether adding chest wall stability by performing clavicle fixation improves clinical outcomes in patients with concurrent clavicle and rib fractures.

METHODS

A prospective multicenter study was performed including all adult patients admitted between January 2018 and March 2021 with concurrent ipsilateral clavicle and rib fractures. Patients treated operatively versus nonoperatively for their clavicle fracture were matched using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (HLOS). Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, pain, complications, and quality of life at 6 weeks and 12 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

In total, 232 patients with concomitant ipsilateral clavicle and rib fractures were included. Fifty-two patients (22%) underwent operative treatment of which 39 could be adequately matched to 39 nonoperatively treated patients. No association was observed between clavicle plate fixation and HLOS (mean difference, 2.3 days; 95% confidence interval, -2.1 to 6.8; p = 0.301) or any secondary endpoint. Eight of the 180 nonoperatively treated patients (4%) had a symptomatic nonunion, for which 5 underwent secondary clavicle fixation.

CONCLUSION

We found no evidence that, in patients with combined clavicle and multiple rib fractures, plate fixation of the clavicle reduces HLOS, pain, or (pulmonary) complications, nor that it improves quality of life.

STUDY TYPE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Concepts, utilization, and perspectives on the Dutch Nationwide Trauma registry: a position paper

Over the last decades, the Dutch trauma care have seen major improvements. To assess the performance of the Dutch trauma system, in 2007, the Dutch Nationwide Trauma Registry (DNTR) was established, which developed into rich source of information for quality assessment, quality improvement of the trauma system, and for research purposes. The DNTR is one of the most comprehensive trauma registries in the world as it includes 100% of all trauma patients admitted to the hospital through the emergency department. This inclusive trauma registry has shown its benefit over less inclusive systems; however, it comes with a high workload for high-quality data collection and thus more expenses. The comprehensive prospectively collected data in the DNTR allows multiple types of studies to be performed. Recent changes in legislation allow the DNTR to include the citizen service numbers, which enables new possibilities and eases patient follow-up. However, in order to maximally exploit the possibilities of the DNTR, further development is required, for example, regarding data quality improvement and routine incorporation of health-related quality of life questionnaires. This would improve the quality assessment and scientific output from the DNTR. Finally, the DNTR and all other (European) trauma registries should strive to ensure that the trauma registries are eligible for comparisons between countries and healthcare systems, with the goal to improve trauma patient care worldwide.

Major trauma presentations and patient outcomes in English hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Single-centre studies suggest that successive Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related "lockdown" restrictions in England may have led to significant changes in the characteristics of major trauma patients. There is also evidence from other countries that diversion of intensive care capacity and other healthcare resources to treating patients with COVID-19 may have impacted on outcomes for major trauma patients. We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number, characteristics, care pathways, and outcomes of major trauma patients presenting to hospitals in England.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We completed an observational cohort study and interrupted time series analysis including all patients eligible for inclusion in England in the national clinical audit for major trauma presenting between 1 January 2017 and 31 of August 2021 (354,202 patients). Demographic characteristics (age, sex, physiology, and injury severity) and clinical pathways of major trauma patients in the first lockdown (17,510 patients) and second lockdown (38,262 patients) were compared to pre-COVID-19 periods in 2018 to 2019 (comparator period 1: 22,243 patients; comparator period 2: 18,099 patients). Discontinuities in trends for weekly estimated excess survival rate were estimated when lockdown measures were introduced using segmented linear regression. The first lockdown had a larger associated reduction in numbers of major trauma patients (-4,733 (21%)) compared to the pre-COVID period than the second lockdown (-2,754 (6.7%)). The largest reductions observed were in numbers of people injured in road traffic collisions excepting cyclists where numbers increased. During the second lockdown, there were increases in the numbers of people injured aged 65 and over (665 (3%)) and 85 and over (828 (9.3%)). In the second week of March 2020, there was a reduction in level of major trauma excess survival rate (-1.71%; 95% CI: -2.76% to -0.66%) associated with the first lockdown. This was followed by a weekly trend of improving survival until the lifting of restrictions in July 2020 (0.25; 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.35). Limitations include eligibility criteria for inclusion to the audit and COVID status of patients not being recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

This national evaluation of the impact of COVID on major trauma presentations to English hospitals has observed important public health findings: The large reduction in overall numbers injured has been primarily driven by reductions in road traffic collisions, while numbers of older people injured at home increased over the second lockdown. Future research is needed to better understand the initial reduction in likelihood of survival after major trauma observed with the implementation of the first lockdown.

Excess mortality among non-COVID-19 surgical patients attributable to the exposure of French intensive and intermediate care units to the pandemic

PURPOSE

The mobilization of most available hospital resources to manage coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may have affected the safety of care for non-COVID-19 surgical patients due to restricted access to intensive or intermediate care units (ICU/IMCUs). We estimated excess surgical mortality potentially attributable to ICU/IMCUs overwhelmed by COVID-19, and any hospital learning effects between two successive pandemic waves.

METHODS

This nationwide observational study included all patients without COVID-19 who underwent surgery in France from 01/01/2019 to 31/12/2020. We determined pandemic exposure of each operated patient based on the daily proportion of COVID-19 patients among all patients treated within the ICU/IMCU beds of the same hospital during his/her stay. Multilevel models, with an embedded triple-difference analysis, estimated standardized in-hospital mortality and compared mortality between years, pandemic exposure groups, and semesters, distinguishing deaths inside or outside the ICU/IMCUs.

RESULTS

Of 1,870,515 non-COVID-19 patients admitted for surgery in 655 hospitals, 2% died. Compared to 2019, standardized mortality increased by 1% (95% CI 0.6-1.4%) and 0.4% (0-1%) during the first and second semesters of 2020, among patients operated in hospitals highly exposed to pandemic. Compared to the low-or-no exposure group, this corresponded to a higher risk of death during the first semester (adjusted ratio of odds-ratios 1.56, 95% CI 1.34-1.81) both inside (1.27, 1.02-1.58) and outside the ICU/IMCU (1.98, 1.57-2.5), with a significant learning effect during the second semester compared to the first (0.76, 0.58-0.99).

CONCLUSION

Significant excess mortality essentially occurred outside of the ICU/IMCU, suggesting that access of surgical patients to critical care was limited.

Emergencies do not shut down during a pandemic: COVID pandemic impact on Acute Care Surgery volume and mortality at a level I trauma center

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volume and outcomes of Acute Care Surgery patients, and we hypothesized that inpatient mortality would increase due to COVID+ and resource constraints.

METHODS

An American College of Surgeons verified Level I Trauma Center's trauma and operative emergency general surgery (EGS) registries were queried for all patients from Jan. 2019 to Dec. 2020. April 1st, 2020, was the demarcation date for pre- and during COVID pandemic. Primary outcome was inpatient mortality.

RESULTS

There were 14,460 trauma and 3091 EGS patients, and month-over-month volumes of both remained similar (p > 0.05). Blunt trauma decreased by 7.4% and penetrating increased by 31%, with a concomitant 25% increase in initial operative management (p < 0.001). Despite this, trauma (3.7%) and EGS (2.9-3.0%) mortality rates remained stable which was confirmed on multivariate analysis; p > 0.05. COVID + mortality was 8.8% and 3.7% in trauma and EGS patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Acute Care Surgeons provided high quality care to trauma and EGS patients during the pandemic without allowing excess mortality despite many hardships and resource constraints.

Traumatic Brain Injury during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemics in Slovenia: A Single Center Study

(1) Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had a significant impact on the management of traumatic brain injury (TBI). We aimed to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of TBI patients before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.; (2) Methods: We analyzed depicted data from existing medical records on sex, age, mechanism of injury, clinical performance at admission and discharge, neuroimaging, laboratory values at admission, mortality, duration of hospitalization, and referrals after discharge from the traumatology department for all adult patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and a year before. Variables were compared using the Chi-square or t-test between both groups.; (3) Results: Most patients had mild (n = 477), followed by moderate (11) and severe (11) TBI. Mild TBI was less frequent during the SARS-CoV-2 period (n = 174 vs. n = 303). The incidence of high falls increased during the SARS-CoV-2 period (14.5% vs. 24.7%; p < 0.05) in the group with mild TBI. Patients had similar mean Glasgow Coma Scales (GCS), Glasgow Outcome Scales-Extended (GOSE), and glucose levels at admission before and during the pandemic. Serum ethanol levels were significantly lower during the SARS-CoV-2 period (1.3 ± 0.7 mmol/L vs. 0.7 ± 1.2 mmol/L; p < 0.001). At discharge, the mean GCS was significantly lower (14.7 ± 1.8 vs. 14.1 ± 0.5; p < 0.05) for patients treated during the SARS-CoV-2 period than before the SARS-CoV-2 period. There were no differences in GOSE; (4) Conclusions: our results demonstrated a significant impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the frequency, mechanism, and consequences of TBI, and may help improve care for our patients.

Injury mortality and morbidity changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed society. We aimed to examine the systematic impact of the COVID-19 on injury burden in the United States.

Methods

We extracted mortality and morbidity data from CDC WONDER and WISQARS. We estimated age-standardized injury mortality rate ratio and morbidity rate ratio (MtRR and MbRR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for all injuries, all unintentional injuries, homicide/assault by all methods, suicide/self-harm by all methods, as well as other 11 specific unintentional or intentional injury categories. Injury rate ratios were compared for 2020 vs. 2019 to those of 2019 vs. 2018 to demonstrate the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on fatal and nonfatal injury burden. The ratio of MtRRs (RMtRR) and the ratio of MbRRs (RMbRR) with 95% CI between 2020 vs. 2019 and 2019 vs. 2018 were calculated separately.

Results

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an increase in injury mortality (RMtRR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.11, 1.13) but injury morbidity decreased (RMbRR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.88, 0.89) when the changes of these rates from 2019 to 2020 were compared to those from 2018 to 2019. Mortality disparities between the two time periods were primarily driven by greater mortality during the COVID-influenced 2020 vs. 2019 from road traffic crashes (particularly motorcyclist mortality), drug poisoning, and homicide by firearm. Similar patterns were not present from 2019 vs. 2018. There were morbidity reductions from road traffic crashes (particularly occupant and pedestrian morbidity from motor vehicle crashes), unintentional falls, and self-harm by suffocation from 2019 to 2020 compared to the previous period. Change patterns in sexes and age groups were generally similar, but exceptions were observed for some injury types.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed specific injury burden in the United States. Some discrepancies also existed across sex and age groups, meriting attention of injury researchers and policymakers to tailor injury prevention strategies to particular populations and the environmental contexts citizens face.