The management of emergency spinal surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy

[Translated article] Impact of COVID-19 pandemia on spine surgery in 2nd level hospital

INTRODUCTION

The consequences of COVID-19 pandemic, like in any other field of medicine, had such a massive effect in the activity of spine surgeons.

OBJECTIVES

The main purpose of the study is quantifying the number of interventions done between 2016 and 2021 and analyze the time between the indication and the intervention as an indirect measurement of the waiting list. As secondary objectives we focused on variations of the length of stay and duration of the surgeries during this specific period.

METHODS

We performed a descriptive retrospective study including all the interventions and diagnosis made during a period including pre-pandemic data (starting on 2016) until 2021, when we considered the normalization of surgical activity was achieved. A total of 1039 registers were compiled. The data collected included age, gender, days in waiting list before the intervention, diagnosis, time of hospitalization and surgery duration.

RESULTS

We found that the total number of interventions during the pandemic has significantly decreased compared to 2019 (32.15% less in 2020 and 23.5% less in 2021). After data analysis, we found an increase of data dispersion, average waiting list time and for diagnosis after 2020. No differences were found regarding hospitalization time or surgical time.

CONCLUSION

The number of surgeries decreased during pandemic due to the redistribution of human and material resources to face the raising of critical COVID-19 patients. The increase of data dispersion and median of waiting time, is the consequence of a growing waiting list for non-urgent surgeries during the pandemic as the urgent interventions also raised, those with a shorter waiting time.

Paraparesis and congenital severe hyperkyphosis in Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome: A rare deformity management during the Sars-Cov-2 pandemic

Introduction

Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome (MRKH) syndrome can be classified into two types: type I (isolated) without extragenital abnormalities; type II (associated) with the presence of extragenital dimorphisms. Skeletal abnormalities are the second most frequent extragenital manifestations.

Research question

Association between MRKH and congenital scoliosis has been described; on the contrary, hyperkyphosis is very rare and sparsely described in the medical literature. Here we report our experience in the management of thoracolumbar hyperkyphosis in 16-year-old patient diagnosed with MRKH syndrome with an acute neurological impairment due to T11-T12 disc herniation.

Material and methods

Clinical and radiological images of the case were retrieved from the medical notes, operative records and imaging system.

Results

Posterior surgical correction was proposed to treat the severe spinal deformity; however, surgery was delayed because of SARS-CoV2 pandemic outbreak. During the pandemic, the patient had a major clinical and radiological deterioration with development of paraparesis. Complete clinical resolution of the paraparesis and restoration of balance was achieved with a two stage surgical approach, with a first anterior stage followed by a delayed posterior approach aimed at deformity correction.

Discussion

Congenital kyphosis are rare deformities that can progress rapidly leading to severe neurological deficits and worsening of the deformity. When patient has neurological deficit the surgical strategy to address the neurological problem first and plan the more complex and demanding corrective surgery remains a valid strategy that must be consider.

Conclusion

This is the first reported case of hyperkyphosis in Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome (MRKH) syndrome surgically treated.

Surgical decompressions for cauda equina syndrome during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The novel coronarvirus disease (COVID-19) has had a major impact on provision of spinal neurosurgery across the world, especially in the UK, with a significant fall in operating and patient volumes, and elective clinical activities. It is unclear whether the pandemic has affected the volume of urgent spinal procedures in the UK, especially surgical decompressions for cauda equina syndrome (CES).

METHODS

Therefore, we conducted a retrospective analysis of theatre records and electronic operation notes at our institution to identify all procedures performed for CES before (December 2019 to February 2020) and during (March 2020 to May 2020) the COVID-19 pandemic. Statistical analyses were performed on SPSS v22 (IBM).

RESULTS

Forty-four patients underwent surgical decompressions during the study period. Over half (54.5%) were female and the median age was 45 years (range = 22-78 years). Three in four procedures were performed at L4-5 and L5-S1 levels (79.5%). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of decompressions performed each month [χ²(5)=1.818; p = 0.874]. On the other hand, the number of referrals for suspected or confirmed CES fell by 81.8% between December 2019 and April 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results did not show any statistically significant decline in the volume of surgical decompressions performed for CES despite the considerable fall in electronic referrals for CES and degenerative spinal conditions. This suggests that patients with critical neurological symptoms continued to present and were treated appropriately despite the restrictions imposed on spinal surgeons during the pandemic.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemia on spine surgery in 2nd level hospital

INTRODUCTION

The consequences of COVID-19 pandemic, like in any other field of medicine, had such a massive effect in the activity of spine surgeons.

OBJECTIVES

The main purpose of the study is quantifying the number of interventions done between 2016 and 2021 and analyze the time between the indication and the intervention as an indirect measurement of the waiting list. As secondary objectives we focused on variations of the length of stay and duration of the surgeries during this specific period.

METHODS

We performed a descriptive retrospective study including all the interventions and diagnosis made during a period including pre-pandemic data (starting on 2016) until 2021, when we considered the normalization of surgical activity was achieved. A total of 1039 registers were compiled. The data collected included age, gender, days in waiting list before the intervention, diagnosis, time of hospitalization and surgery duration.

RESULTS

We found that the total number of interventions during the pandemic has significantly decreased compared to 2019 (32.15% less in 2020 and 23.5% less in 2021). After data analysis, we found an increase of data dispersion, average waiting list time and for diagnosis after 2020. No differences were found regarding hospitalization time or surgical time.

CONCLUSION

The number of surgeries decreased during pandemic due to the redistribution of human and material resources to face the raising of critical COVID-19 patients. The increase of data dispersion and median of waiting time, is the consequence of a growing waiting list for non-urgent surgeries during the pandemic as the urgent interventions also raised, those with a shorter waiting time.

Global research hotspots and trends in the field of spine surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A bibliometric and visual analysis

Background

The Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) significantly affected the healthcare and research systems, including spine surgery, throughout the world. A bibliometric analysis allows graphical visualization of the development of an academic field and its frontiers. Since research concerning spine surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is being constantly upgraded, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of this literature to investigate the current status, research hotspots, and trends in this field.

Methods

We searched the Web of Science database for literature published (from December 1, 2019, to March 24, 2022) using the terms “COVID-19” OR “2019-nCoV” OR “SARS-CoV-2” AND “spine surgery” OR “spinal surgery” OR “discectomy” OR “decompression” OR “laminectomy” OR “interbody fusion” OR “pedicle screws.” Detailed bibliometric and visual analysis of the number of publications, geographical distribution, institutions, journals, authors, and keywords was done using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and R-Bibliometrix.

Results

Of the initially screened 173 articles, we included 84 relevant articles—62 original articles, 10 editorial materials, 8 reviews, and 4 others. The United States, China, Egypt, and Argentina were most actively publishing in the field of spine surgery and COVID-19. The AOSpine International community contributed 7 articles (24 citations). The Hospital for Special Surgery (13.1%) and Johns Hopkins University (13.1%) were institutions with the most publications. Using the Law of Bradford, we found that World Neurosurgery, Global Spine Journal, and European Spine Journal are the core journals in this field, with P. K. Louie being the most influential author. “Elective surgery,” “intensive care,” “telehealth,” “patient satisfaction,” and “follow-up” had the strongest citation bursts.

Conclusions

During the COVID-19 pandemic, spine surgeons were more concerned with surgical timing, care, treatment, and patient’s quality of life. Accordingly, research hotspots in spine surgery during the pandemic shifted from “early healthcare” to “virus management” and “experience and education.”

Managing Traumatic Brain Injury During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic-A Case-Matched Controlled Analysis of Immediate Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to compare their outcome with case-matched controls from the prepandemic phase.

METHODS

This is a retrospective case-control study in which all patients with TBI admitted during COVID-19 pandemic phase (Arm A) from March 24, 2020 to November 30, 2020 were matched with age and Glasgow Coma Scale score-matched controls from the patients admitted before March 2020 (Arm B).

RESULTS

The total number of patients matched in each arm was 118. The length of hospital stay (8 days vs. 5 days; P < 0.001), transit time from emergency room to operation room (150 minutes vs. 97 minutes; P = 0.271), anesthesia induction time (75 minutes vs. 45 minutes; P = 0.002), and operative duration (275 minutes vs. 180 minutes; P = 0.002) were longer in arm A. Although the incidence of fever and pneumonia was significantly higher in arm A than in arm B (50% vs. 26.3%, P < 0.001 and 27.1% vs. 1.7%, P < 0.001, respectively), outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended) and mortality (18.6% vs. 14.4% respectively; P = 0.42) were similar in both the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome of the patients managed for TBI during the COVID-19 pandemic was similar to matched patients with TBI managed at our center before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This finding suggests that the guidelines followed during the COVID-19 pandemic were effective in dealing with patients with TBI. This model can serve as a guide for any future pandemic waves for effective management of patients with TBI without compromising their outcome.

A Retrospective Study of the Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic Related Administrative Restrictions on Spine Surgery Practice and Outcomes in an Urban Healthcare System

The study objective is to characterize the impact of COVID-19 related hospital administrative restrictions on patient demographics, surgical care, logistics, and patient outcomes in spine surgery. This was a retrospective study of 331 spine surgery patients at UCSD conducted during 1 March 2019-31 May 2019 (pre-COVID-19) and 1 March 2020-31 May 2020 (first COVID-19 surge). All variables were collected through RedCap and compared between pre- and during-COVID groups. There were no significant differences in patient demographics, operating room duration, and skin-to-skin time. However, length of stay was 4.7 days shorter during COVID-19 (p = 0.03) and more cases were classified as 'urgent' (p = 0.04). Preoperative pain scores did not differ between groups (p = 0.51). However, pain levels at discharge were significantly higher during COVID (p = 0.04) and trended towards remaining higher in the short- (p = 0.05) but not long-term (p = 0.17) after surgery. There was no significant difference in the number of post-operative complications, but there was an increase in the use of the emergency room and telemedicine to address complications when they arose. Overall, the pandemic resulted in a greater proportion of 'urgent' spine surgery cases and shorter length of hospital stay. Pain levels upon discharge and at short-term timepoints were higher following surgery but did not persist in the long term.

Trends in emergency department visits due to back pain and spine surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic in Finland

We aim to report the incidences of ED visits due to back pain, hospitalizations, and urgent spine surgeries during the first and second waves of COVID-19 in Finland. The number of emergency department visits and hospitalizations due to back pain as well as urgent spine surgeries in the adult population was collected from hospital discharge registers for the years 2017 through 2019 (reference years) and 2020.This study was conducted at three large Finnish hospitals. The monthly incidence with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of emergency department visits and hospitalizations due to back pain and spine surgeries in the three participating hospitals were calculated and compared by incidence rate ratios (IRR).Visits to ED due to back pain decreased during the pandemic. The incidence of ED visits due to back pain was similar in February (IRR 0.95, CI: 0.82-1.10), but a decrease was seen after lockdown began (March IRR 0.67, CI: 0.57-0.78; April IRR 0.65, CI: 0.56-0.76) compared to the reference years. A second decrease in visits was seen after regional restrictions were implemented in October (IRR 0.88, CI: 0.76-1.02). The most common diagnoses were non-specific back pain, lumbar disk herniation, and back contusion. Incidence of non-specific back pain decreased during the lockdown (March IRR 0.65, CI: 0.55-0.78) and regional restrictions (October IRR 0.83, CI: 0.70-0.98), whereas the rates of other diagnoses remained unchanged, and incidences of hospitalizations and urgent spine surgeries remained stable.A clear decrease in ED visits due to back pain was seen during the first and second waves of the pandemic. This decrease was mainly the result of patients with non-specific back pain avoiding visits to the ED. The incidence of specific back pain, hospitalizations, and urgent spine surgeries remained unchanged during the pandemic.

The Covid 19 Pandemic Effect on the Epidemiology of Thoracolumbar Fractures Presenting to the Emergency Department in Patients Above 65 years Old

Introduction

Studies investigating the Covid-19 Pandemic’s orthopedic aspects are accumulating, including reports on a 10-33% decrease in hip fracture incidence alongside shorter times to surgery. Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCF) have not yet been discussed. This study evaluated the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic’s first wave on VCF in the elderly.

Method

A retrospective cohort of elderly patients diagnosed with VCF between 2018-19 (Pre-Covid-19 pandemic) to 2020.

Results

The cohort included 172 patients above 65 years with VCF during 2018-2020. Patients’ age and gender were similar between the two study groups. We found a higher proportion of high-energy VCF during 2020 (10.5% vs 6.7%). Incidence of recurrent fractures was 7.5 times higher during 2020 (5.3% vs .7%, P =.06), and significantly higher rates of Ankylosing Spondylitis or Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis in 2020 (7.9% vs 1.5%, P=.04). VCF ED admission rates were similar, with 60% treated conservatively. Admitted patients underwent more surgeries in 2020 (66.7% vs 60%, P =.71) and a tendency towards Precoutaneus Balloon Kyphoplasty (BKP) + fixation compared with BKP alone (15.8% in 2020 vs 7.5% in 2018-19, P =.29). RR for BKP + fixation vs BKP alone was 1.95, suggesting higher odds for a more complex surgery during the Covid-19 pandemic. The complication rate was significantly higher during 2020 (18.4% vs 3.7%, P <.001). Admission length was slightly longer during 2020 (12.2 days vs 9.9 days, P = .27), and time to surgery was marginally longer, 6.25 vs 5.3 days (P = .55). Many patients chose home over institutional rehabilitation during the Covid-19 pandemic (72.2% vs 58.8%).

Conclusion

The Covid-19 pandemic did not alter VCF incidence, but patients’ characteristics changed, affecting admissions, institutional rehabilitation, and a tendency towards complex surgery rather than BKP alone. It is still unclear if Covid-19 will remain an issue in the upcoming years, but its impact and lessons are still worthwhile.

Excess mortality after hip fracture during COVID-19 pandemic: More about disruption, less about virulence—Lesson from a trauma center

To date, literature has depicted an increase in mortality among patients with hip fractures, directly related to acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and not due to underlying comorbidities. Usual orthogeriatric pathway in our Department was disrupted during the pandemic. This study aimed to evaluate early mortality within 30 days, in 2019 and 2020 in our Level 1 trauma-center. We compared two groups of patients aged >60 years, with osteoporotic upper hip fractures, in February/March/April 2020 and February/March/April 2019, in our level 1 trauma center. A total of 102 and 79 patients met the eligibility criteria in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Mortality was evaluated, merging our database with the French open database for death from the INSEE, which is prospectively updated each month. Causes of death were recorded. Charlson Comorbidity Index was evaluated for comorbidities, Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (IADL), and Activity of Daily Living (ADL) scores were assessed for autonomy. There were no differences in age, sex, fracture type, Charlson Comorbidity Index, IADL, and ADL. 19 patients developed COVID-19 infection. The 30-day survival was 97% (95% CI, 94%–100%) in 2019 and 86% (95% CI, 79%–94%) in 2020 (HR = 5, 95%CI, 1.4–18.2, p = 0.013). In multivariable Cox’PH model, the period (2019/2020) was significantly associated to the 30-day mortality (HR = 6.4, 95%CI, 1.7–23, p = 0.005) and 6-month mortality (HR = 3.4, 95%CI, 1.2–9.2, p = 0.01). COVID infection did not modify significantly the 30-day and 6-month mortality. This series brought new important information, early mortality significantly increased because of underlying disease decompensation. Minimal comprehensive care should be maintained in all circumstances in order to avoid excess of mortality among elderly population with hip fractures.

COVID-19 pandemic: An update on the reaction attitude of the spine societies and their members worldwide

BACKGROUND

All surgical specialties have been influenced by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and substantial changes have been determined in medical assistance, especially in elective surgery. Several spine societies have published recommendations to provide optimal care during this unique situation.

AIM

To discuss the recommendations by many spine societies for the management of spinal diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

The present study was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. A review of the MEDLINE database (PubMed – National Library of Medicine), Google, and Google Scholar was performed from March 2020 to date for articles published in the English Language.

RESULTS

Spine associations and societies worldwide were divided into three groups: Continental, specialty and country-based societies. A total of 27 spine associations were included in this review. There were eight major continental associations, but only one-third of these had published guidelines and recommendations on this topic. On the other hand, the specialty-based societies have not addressed the topic, except in two cases.

CONCLUSION

The national spine societies showed the deepest concern on this topic with several publications in scientific journals influenced by the local epidemiological severity. Contrarily, continental and specialty-based societies showed less interest in this topic.

The Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Healthcare Provision in Italy to non-COVID Patients: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Italy has been one of the countries most affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, and the regional healthcare system has had to quickly adapt its organization to meet the needs of infected patients. This has led to a drastic change in the routine management of non-communicable diseases with a potential long-term impact on patient health care. Therefore, we investigated the management of non-COVID-19 patients across all medical specialities in Italy.

METHODS

A PRISMA guideline-based systematic review of the literature was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, restricting the search to the main outbreak period in Italy (from February 20 to June 25 2020). We selected articles in English or Italian that detailed changes in the Italian hospital care for non-COVID-19 patients due to the pandemic. Our keywords included all medical specialities combined with our geographical focus (Italy) and COVID-19.

RESULTS

Of the 4643 potentially eligible studies identified by the search, 247 were included. A decrease in the management of emergencies in non-COVID patients was found together with an increase in mortality. Similarly, non-deferrable conditions met a tendency toward decreased diagnosis. All specialities have been affected by the re-organization of healthcare provision in the hub-and-spoke system and have benefited from telemedicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Our work highlights the changes in the Italian public healthcare system to tackle the developing health crisis due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings of our review may be useful to analyse future directions for the healthcare system in the case of new pandemic scenarios.

Impact and Strategies on Joint Surgery Centers without Lockdowns during the Peak of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

The real psychological impact of COVID-19 remains difficult to quantify and may differ between hospital sizes and levels. Taiwan’s response to COVID-19 differed in that it successfully prevented its spread, without implementing any lockdowns before May 2021. Patients’ fear would be the major reason for the reduction of surgeries. The daily data for patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA), total hip arthroplasty, and hemiarthroplasty were collected from two major joint surgery centers of a university hospital and a community hospital in Taiwan. Compared with the previous year, the initial impact of the pandemic evidently reduced the total number of patients (outpatient: 20–29%; admission: 22–37%; surgery: 18–35%) in both hospitals. During the study period, the total number of TKAs decreased by 56–61% in both hospitals. The reduction in arthroplasty surgeries was attributable to patients’ fear. Even with confirmed COVID-19 cases, the university hospital experienced less impact than the community hospital. The TKA was the most affected of all surgery types. Even without local epidemics and restrictions in Taiwan, the worldwide pandemic inevitably led to a reduction of approximately 60% of the total TKA operation volume, especially for community hospitals. The surgery scheduling strategies helped maintain the routine arthroplasty services.

Efeito da COVID-19 na artroplastia de ombro em um centro médico terciário na cidade de Nova York

Objetivo A pandemia de COVID-19 causou uma pausa sem precedentes em cirurgias eletivas, inclusive artroplastia de ombro. Procuramos determinar as possíveis diferenças clínicas e/ou demográficas entre os pacientes que realizaram artroplastia de ombro durante a pandemia em comparação com o ano anterior (2019).

Métodos Os registros institucionais foram consultados para obtenção de informações sobre pacientes submetidos a artroplastia de ombro entre 1° de março a 1° de julho de 2019 e 2020. Dados demográficos, amplitude de movimento, duração da cirurgia, tempo de hospitalização, condições à alta e manejo pós-operatório foram analisados.

Resultados O tempo médio de cirurgia foi de 160 ± 50 minutos em 2020 e de 179 ± 54 minutos em 2019 (p = 0,13). O tempo médio de internação foi de 36 ± 13 horas em 2020 e de 51 ± 40 horas em 2019 (p = 0,04). Em 2019, 96% dos pacientes fizeram fisioterapia, enquanto 71% o fizeram em 2020 (p = 0,003). Todos os pacientes de 2019 e 86% dos pacientes de 2020 participaram do acompanhamento pós-operatório presencial (p = 0,006). Os pacientes de 2019 retornaram para a consulta médica em média 14 ± 11 dias após a cirurgia; os pacientes de 2020 retornaram para o acompanhamento em 25 ± 25 dias (p = 0,10). A amplitude de movimento, a idade, a pontuação da American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA, na sigla em inglês) e as taxas de complicações não diferiram entre as coortes.

Conclusão Os pacientes submetidos a cirurgia na fase inicial da pandemia eram demográfica e clinicamente semelhantes aos pacientes de 2019. No entanto, o tempo de internação diminuiu de forma significativa durante a pandemia de COVID-19. O acompanhamento pós-operatório e a fisioterapia foram adiados em 2020, mas isso não levou a diferenças nas taxas de complicações ou de reinternações em comparação às da coorte de 2019.

Nível de Evidência III.

The Association Between Patient Satisfaction and Mode of Visit (Telemedicine Versus In-Person) in a Large Orthopaedic Practice During the COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown: A Retrospective Study

Background:

During the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telemedicine was rapidly adopted to provide continued, efficient, and safe medical care. Little is known about patient satisfaction with telemedicine in orthopedics or the factors associated with selection of telemedicine versus face-to-face care. Thus, we examined (1) the association between patient satisfaction and mode of visit (telemedicine versus in-person) and (2) predictors of patient satisfaction in a large orthopedic practice during the onset of the pandemic.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of in-person and telemedicine visits within a large, university-affiliated orthopaedic practice between March 2020 and April 2020 during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients who completed a patient satisfaction survey were included. Demographic and other office visit (eg, type of provider and type of visit) data were collected. A Patient Satisfaction Aggregate (PSA, range 0 to 1) score was calculated by taking the average of five patient satisfaction questions. Linear regression was used to examine (1) the association between PSA score and mode of visit and (2) predictors of PSA score.

Results:

A total of 2,049 of 6,515 patient satisfaction surveys were completed and included for analysis, of which 748 had telemedicine visits and 1,301 had in-person visits. No association was found between PSA score and mode of visit with and without adjustment for duration of patient-physician relationship, appointment type (new versus follow-up), provider type (physician versus nonphysician), and provider subspecialty (β_unadjusted = 0.004 [SE = 0.01], P = 0.44; β_adjusted = 0.001 [SE = 0.01], P = 0.92). Predictors of increased PSA score were White race (P = 0.001), >1 year relationship with provider (P_{1-3 years} = 0.01, P_{3-5 years} = 0.04, and P_{5+ years} = 0.002), physician provider (P = 0.004), and foot/ankle provider (P = 0.04), whereas predictors of decreased PSA score were oncology provider (P = 0.02) and spine provider (P = 0.001).

Conclusion:

We found no association between PSA score and mode of visit. Predictors of PSA score included race, duration of patient-physician relationship, provider type, and provider subspecialty.

The changing pattern of acute spinal referrals during primary and secondary waves of the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating effect on health systems globally. This led to changes in patient access to healthcare particularly spinal services. This study investigates the impact of the pandemic on the volume of patients being referred to and accessing spinal services during both the first and second waves.

METHODS

All emergency spinal referrals and related hospital attendances to the emergency department in a busy district general hospital were analysed. The data were evaluated at three time points each covering a 3-month period. Data collected included patient demographics, duration and nature of symptoms, reason for referral, clinical and MRI findings, length of stay in hospital, any interventions performed and the follow-up plan.

RESULTS

There were a total of 316 emergency referrals across the three time periods. The number of referrals fell by 15% between the pre-COVID-19 period and the first wave. Comparing the first and second waves, the number of referrals was increased by 58%. Comparing the second wave to the pre-COVID-19 period, referrals were 34% greater in the second wave (p < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

We highlight an increase in referrals to our spinal service during the secondary wave, having fallen during the first wave. We hypothesise that the increase in referrals, despite similar restrictions to the first wave, is a result of changing patterns of behaviour due to the fear of contracting COVID during the first wave and difficulty in accessing primary care services in the second wave.

Integrated care pathways in neurosurgery: A systematic review

Introduction

Integrated care pathways (ICPs) are a pre-defined framework of evidence based, multidisciplinary practice for specific patients. They have the potential to enhance continuity of care, patient safety, patient satisfaction, efficiency gains, teamwork and staff education. In order to inform the development of neurosurgical ICPs in the future, we performed a systematic review to aggregate examples of neurosurgical ICP, to consider their impact and design features that may be associated with their success.

Methods

Electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched for relevant literature published from date of inception to July 2020. Primary studies reporting details of neurosurgical ICPs, across all pathologies and age groups were eligible for inclusion. Patient outcomes in each case were also recorded.

Results

Twenty-four studies were included in our final dataset, from the United States, United Kingdom, Italy, China, Korea, France, Netherlands and Switzerland, and a number of sub-specialties. 3 for cerebrospinal fluid diversion, 1 functional, 2 neurovascular, 1 neuro-oncology, 2 paediatric, 2 skull base, 10 spine, 1 for trauma, 2 miscellaneous (other craniotomies). All were single centre studies with no regional or national examples. Thirteen were cohort studies while 11 were case series which lacked a control group. Effectiveness was typically evaluated using hospital or professional performance metrics, such as length of stay (n = 11, 45.8%) or adverse events (n = 17, 70.8%) including readmission, surgical complications and mortality. Patient reported outcomes, including satisfaction, were evaluated infrequently (n = 3, 12.5%). All studies reported a positive impact. No study reported how the design of the ICP was informed by published literature or other methods

Conclusions

ICPs have been successfully developed across numerous neurosurgical sub-specialities. However, there is often a lack of clarity over their design and weaknesses in their evaluation, including an underrepresentation of the patient’s perspective.

The Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Neurosurgical Practice and Feasibility of Safe Resumption of Elective Procedures During this Era in a Large Referral Center in Tehran, Iran: An Unmatched Case-Control Study

Objective

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has considerably affected surgical practice. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of the pandemic on neurosurgical practice and the safety of the resumption of elective procedures through implementing screening protocols in a high-volume academic public center in Iran, as one of the countries severely affected by the pandemic.

Methods

This unmatched case-control study compared 2 populations of patients who underwent neurosurgical procedures between June 1, 2019 and September 1, 2019 and the same period in 2020. In the prospective part of the study, patients who underwent elective procedures were tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection postoperatively to evaluate the viability of our screening protocol.

Results

Elective and emergency procedures showed significant reduction during the pandemic (59.4%, n = 168 vs. 71.3%, n = 380) and increase (28.7%, n = 153 vs. 40.6%, n = 115, respectively; P = 0.003). The proportional distribution of neurosurgical categories remained unchanged during the pandemic. Poisson regression showed that the reduction in total daily admissions and some categories, including spine, trauma, oncology, and infection were significantly correlated with the pandemic. Among patients who underwent elective procedures, 0 (0.0%) and 26 (16.25%) had positive test results on days 30 and 60 postoperatively, respectively. Overall mortality was comparable between the pre–COVID-19 and COVID-19 periods, yet patients with concurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection showed substantially higher mortality (65%).

Conclusions

By implementing safety and screening protocols with proper resource allocation, the emergency care capacity can be maintained and the risk minimized of hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection, complications, and mortality among neurosurgical patients during the pandemic. Similarly, for elective procedures, according to available resources, hospital beds can be allocated for patients with a higher risk of delayed hospitalization and those who are concerned about the risk of hospital-acquired infection can be reassured.

Emergent spine surgery during COVID-19 pandemic: 10 Months experience in Dr. Sardjito general hospital, Indonesia a case series

Background

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the spine surgeon had to deal with some new challenges in treating emergency spine cases. This paper aimed to report our experience with spine emergency surgery during the pandemic, with already limited resources for surgery.

Methods

This was a retrospective, single-center study, involving all patients admitted to our hospital during a period of 1st March - 31^st December 2020 and underwent emergent spinal surgery. The data were collected from the patients' medical records.

Results

We found 15 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Four patients were suspected to be infected by COVID-19, but none of them was confirmed to be infected by COVID-19 based on the PCR test. All patients had a history of injury: fell from height (53.3%), traffic accident (40%), and direct trauma (6.7%). The average time interval from injury to hospital admission was 38.6 h, from admission to surgery was 6.3 days, and from injury to surgery was 8.1 days. The patient who was suspected to be infected with COVID-19 has a significantly greater time interval from admission to surgery (p = 0.012). The surgery lasted for 3-6 h, with an average of 4.6 h. The average hospital stay duration was 13.3 days and it has a significant positive correlation with the time interval from admission to surgery (p = 0.001). Three months post-operatively, seven patients experienced an improvement in the Frankel grade, 4 patients had no changes in Frankel grade, and 2 patients died.

Conclusion

To our experience, the lack of human and material resources during the pandemic caused some delay in surgery. However, surgery performed later than 24 h during the pandemic might still bring benefit to the patient.

Does Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Affect Perioperative Morbidity and Mortality for Patients Requiring Emergency Instrumented Spinal Surgery? A Single-Center Cohort Study

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic sent shockwaves through health services worldwide. Resources were reallocated. Patients with COVID-19 still required instrumented spinal surgery for emergencies. Clinical outcomes for these patients are not known. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of COVID-19 on perioperative morbidity and mortality for patients undergoing emergency instrumented spinal surgery and to determine risk factors for increased morbidity/mortality.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included 11 patients who were negative for COVID-19 and 8 patients who were positive for COVID-19 who underwent emergency instrumented spinal surgery in 1 hospital in the United Kingdom during the pandemic peak. Data collection was performed through case note review. Patients in both treatment groups were comparable for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, surgical indication, and preoperative neurologic status. Predefined perioperative outcomes were recorded within a 30-day postoperative period. Univariable analysis was used to identify risk factors for increased morbidity.

Results

There were no mortalities in either treatment group. Four patients positive for COVID-19 (50%) developed a complication compared with 6 (55%) in the COVID-19–negative group (P > 0.05). The commonest complication in both groups was respiratory infection. Three patients positive for COVID-19 (37.5%) required intensive care unit admission, compared with 4 (36%) in the COVID-19–negative group (P > 0.05). The average time between surgery and discharge was 19 and 10 days in COVID-19–positive and –negative groups, respectively (P = 0.02). In the COVID-19 positive group, smoking, abnormal BMI, preoperative oxygen requirement, presence of fever, and oxygen saturations <95% correlated with increased risk of complications.

Conclusions

Emergency instrumented spinal surgery in patients positive for COVID-19 was associated with increased length of hospital stay. There was no difference in occurrence of complications or intensive care unit admission. Risk factors for increased morbidity in patients with COVID-19 included smoking, abnormal BMI, preoperative oxygen requirement, fever and saturations <95%.

How SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic Changed Traumatology and Hospital Setting: An Analysis of 498 Fractured Patients

Background: SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is one of the biggest challenges for many health systems in the world, making lots of them overwhelmed by the enormous pressure to manage patients. We reported our Institutional Experience, with specific aims to describe the distribution and type of treated injuries, and the organizational setup of our hospital. Methods: Data of fractured patients admitted for surgical treatment in the time frames 9 March 2020–4 May 2020 and 1 March 2019–31 May 2019 were collected and compared. Furthermore, surgery duration and some parameters of effectiveness in health management were compared. Results: A total of 498 patients were included. Mean age significantly lower age in 2019 and femoral fractures were significantly more frequent 2020. Mean surgery time was significantly longer in 2020. Mortality rate difference between the two years was found to be statistically significant. Time interval between diagnosis and surgery and between diagnosis and discharge/decease was significantly lower in 2020. In 2020, no patient admitted with a negative swab turned positive in any of the following tests for SARS-CoV-2. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has modified the epidemiology of hospitalized patients for traumatic reasons, leading to an increased admission of older patients with femoral fractures. Nevertheless, our institutional experience showed that an efficient change in the hospital organization, with an improvement of several parameters of effectiveness in health management, led to a null infection rate between patients.

Emergently planned exclusive hub-and-spoke system in the epicenter of the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy: the experience of the largest COVID-19-free ICU hub for time-dependent diseases

BACKGROUND

Lombardy was the epicenter in Italy of the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic. To face the contagion growth, from March 8 to May 8 2020, a regional law re-designed the hub-and-spoke system for time-dependent diseases to better allocate resources for COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We report the reorganization of the major hospital in Lombardy during COVID-19 pandemic, including the rearrangement of its ICU beds to face COVID-19 pandemic and fulfill its role as extended hub for time-dependent diseases while preserving transplant activity. To highlight the impact of the emergently planned hub-and-spoke system, all patients admitted to a COVID-19-free ICU hub for trauma, neurosurgical emergencies and stroke during the two-month period were retrospectively collected and compared to 2019 cohort. Regional data on organ procurement was retrieved. Observed-to-expected (OE) in-ICU mortality ratios were computed to test the impact of the pandemic on patients affected by time-dependent diseases.

RESULTS

Dynamic changes in ICU resource allocation occurred according to local COVID-19 epidemiology/trends of patients referred for time-dependent diseases. The absolute increase of admissions for trauma, neurosurgical emergencies and stroke was roughly two-fold. Patients referred to the hub were older and characterized by more severe conditions. An increase in crude mortality was observed, though OE ratios for in-ICU mortality were not statistically different when comparing 2020 vs. 2019. An increase in local organ procurement was observed, limiting the debacle of regional transplant activity.

CONCLUSIONS

We described the effects of a regional emergently planned hub-and-spoke system for time-dependent diseases settled in the epicenter of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy.

COVID-19 pandemic did not affect emergency theatre patient demographic and length of stay in the first phase of UK countrywide lockdown in a district general hospital

INTRODUCTION

We aim to identify any changes in outcome for patients undergoing nonelective surgery at the start of the UK pandemic in our district general hospital. This was a single-centre retrospective cohort review of a UK district general hospital serving a population of over 250,000 people.

METHODS

Participants were all patients undergoing a surgical procedure in the acute theatre list between 23 March to 11 May in both 2019 and 2020. Primary outcome was 90-day postoperative mortality. Secondary outcomes include time to surgical intervention and length of inpatient stay.

RESULTS

A total of 132 patients (2020) versus 141 (2019) patients were included. Although overall 90-day postoperative mortality was higher in 2020 (9.8%) compared with 2019 (5.7%), this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.196). In 2020, eight patients tested positive for COVID-19 either as an inpatient or within 2 weeks of discharge, of whom five patients died. Time to surgical intervention was significantly faster for NCEPOD (National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death) code 3 patients in 2020 than in 2019 (p=0.027). There were no significant differences in mean length of inpatient stay.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that patients were appropriately prioritised using NCEPOD classification, with no statistically significant differences in 90-day postoperative mortality and length of inpatient stay compared with the 2019 period. A study on a larger scale would further elucidate the profile and outcomes of patients requiring acute surgery to generate statistical significance.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and its related psychological effect on orthopedic surgeries conducted in different types of hospitals in Taiwan

AIM

Taiwan's response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) differed in that it successfully prevented the spread without having to shutdown or overburden medical services. Patients' fear regarding the pandemic would be the only reason to reduce surgeries, so Taiwan could be the most suitable place for research on the influence of psychological factors. This study aimed to assess the impact of patients' fear on orthopedic surgeries in Taiwan amid the peak period of the COVID-19 pandemic.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The investigation period included the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020 to April 2020) and the corresponding period in the previous year. The following data on patients with orthopedic diseases were collected: outpatient visits, hospital admission, and surgical modalities.

RESULTS

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a 22%-29% and 20%-26% reduction in outpatients, 22%-27% and 25%-37% reduction in admissions, and 26%-35% and 18%-34% reduction in surgeries, respectively, at both hospitals. The weekly mean number of patients was significantly smaller during the COVID-19 pandemic for all types of surgery and elective surgeries at the university hospital, and for all types of surgery, elective surgeries, and total knee arthroplasties at the community hospital. Further, patients visiting the community hospital during the pandemic were significantly younger, for all types of surgery, elective surgeries, and total knee arthroplasties.

CONCLUSIONS

The reduction in orthopedic surgeries in Taiwan's hospitals during COVID-19 could be attributed to patients' fear. Even without restriction, the pandemic inevitably led to a reduction of about 20%-30% of the operation volume.

Spinal surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: the experience in a tertiary referral centre

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic first came to prominence in December 2019, and since then has swept the globe, causing one of the largest public health problems seen. It has had a wide-ranging impact on healthcare provision, with a cessation of elective operating. We aimed to assess the impact of COVID-19 on a tertiary referral centre for spinal surgery in England.

Methods

An 82-day study period from 20^th March 2020 to 10^th June 2020 was used, and all spinal surgical patients were followed up prospectively, comparing patients from the same date range in 2019. We assessed rate of COVID transmission, 30-day mortality rates, complication rates and length of hospital stay in a large tertiary Teaching hospital in England.

Results

Seventy-eight patients were operated on during the COVID-19 pandemic period, with a 30-day mortality rate of 4.2%. Two of these deaths were attributable to COVID-19 (2.56%). The mean length of stay was 10.8 days. Neither the 30-day mortality rate or the length of stay was statistically significant compared to the 2019 control period. Five patients (6.4%) tested positive for COVID-19, all were negative at time of surgical intervention. Our complication rate was 10.3% during the COVID-19 pandemic period.

Conclusions

The number of operative cases performed during the COVID-19 pandemic fell by one-third compared to the same period in 2019. The COVID-19 pandemic did not cause a significant increase in 30-day mortality rate, length of stay, or complication rates. Further studies with larger patient numbers and longer-term outcomes will be needed to fully assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on spinal surgery.

The impact of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) on neurosurgical practice and training: a review article

The 2019 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has affected all of society at different levels. Similarly, COVID-19 has significantly impacted every medical field, including neurosurgery. By exposing scarcities in the healthcare industry and requiring the reallocation of available resources towards the priority setting and away from elective surgeries and outpatient visits, the pandemic posed new, unprecedented challenges to the medical community. Despite the redistribution of resources towards COVID-19 patients and away from elective surgeries, urgent and emergent surgeries for life-threatening conditions needed to be continued. The neurosurgical community, like other specialties not directly involved in the care of COVID-19 patients, initially struggled to balance the needs of COVID-19 patients with those of neurosurgical patients, residents, and researchers. Several articles describing the effect of COVID-19 on neurosurgical practice and training have been published throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. This article aims to provide a focused review of the impact COVID-19 has had on neurosurgical practice and training as well as describe neurological manifestations of the disease.

Mortality and morbidity in COVID-19 orthopedic trauma patients: is early surgery the keystone?

In the pandemic disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus, trauma surgery continued the management of patients with fractures. The purpose of the study is to evaluate mortality and morbidity in orthopedic trauma patients surgically treated with a diagnosis of COVID-19 infection, comparing them to a control group of COVID-19 negative. We retrospectively identified patients admitted to our Emergency Room from March 8^th to May 4^th 2020 (time frame corresponding to the first wave of the pandemic peak, one of the most severe in the world at that time) with a diagnosis of fracture that were subsequently surgically treated. We applied a dedicated pathway for the management of COVID-19 trauma patients allowed to perform an early surgery and short hospitalization. For each patient included demographics, clinical, laboratory, radiological data and type of treatment for COVID-19 infection were collected. Sixty-five (65) patients were identified. Of those, 17 (6 women and 11 men, mean age 63.41 years old, mean ASA grade 2.35) were COVID-19 positive (study group), while the others were control group (mean age 56.58 years old, mean ASA grade 2.21). In the study group, the preoperative laboratory tests showed leukocytosis in six and lymphopenia in 15 cases. Fourteen patients had a high level of C-reactive protein. Fifteen patients had an abnormal level of D-dimer. The mortality recorded was 5.8% and 4.1% in the study and control group respectively. Perioperative adverse events were registered in 5 cases (29.4%) in the study group and in 8 (16.6%) in the control group (p>0.05). Dedicated COVID-19 trauma pathway with the aim of an early surgery could be key for a better result in terms of mortality and morbidity. Age and ASA grade could represent independent risk factors for perioperative complications.

Trampolines injuries are bouncing back

Aims

This observational study examines the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic upon the paediatric trauma burden of a district general hospital. We aim to compare the nature and volume of the paediatric trauma during the first 2020 UK lockdown period with the same period in 2019.

Methods

Prospective data was collected from 23 March 2020 to 14 June 2020 and compared with retrospective data collected from 23 March 2019 to 14 June 2019. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, nature of the injury, and details of any surgery were tabulated and statistically analyzed using the independent-samples t-test for normally distributed data and the Mann-Whitney-U test for non-parametric data. Additionally, patients were contacted by telephone to further explore the mechanism of injury where required, to gain some qualitative insight into the risk factors for injury.

Results

The 2020 lockdown resulted in 30% fewer paediatric trauma presentations (441 vs 306), but no significant change in the number of patients requiring surgery (47 vs 51; p = 0.686). Trampolining injuries increased in absolute numbers by 168% (p < 0.001), almost four times more common when considered as percentage of all injuries observed in 2020 vs 2019. There was a decrease in high energy trauma from road traffic accidents and falls from height (21.5% decrease, p < 0.001). Despite a shift towards more conservative treatment options, trampolining injuries continued to require surgery in similar proportions (19.4 vs 20%; p = 0.708). Qualitative investigation revealed that the most common risk factor for trampolining injury was concurrent usage, especially with an older child.

Conclusion

COVID-19 lockdown has resulted in a decrease in paediatric orthopaedic presentations and high energy trauma. However, due to a marked increase in home trampolining injuries, and their unchanged requirement for surgery, there has been no change in the requirement for surgery during the lockdown period. As home exercise becomes more prevalent, a duty of public health falls upon clinicians to advise parents against trampoline usage.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(2):86–92.

Clinical Pathway for Emergency Brain Surgery during COVID-19 Pandemic and Its Impact on Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

One of the challenges neurosurgeons are facing in the global public health crisis caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is to balance COVID-19 screening with timely surgery. We described a clinical pathway for patients who needed emergency brain surgery and determined whether differences in the surgery preparation process caused by COVID-19 screening affected clinical outcomes.

METHODS

During the COVID-19 period, patients in need of emergency brain surgery in our institution were managed using a novel standardized pathway designed for COVID-19 screening. We conducted a retrospective review of patients who were hospitalized through the emergency room and underwent emergency brain surgery. A total of 32 patients who underwent emergency brain surgery from February 1 to June 30, 2020 were included in the COVID-19 group, and 65 patients who underwent surgery from February 1 to June 30, 2019 were included in the pre-COVID-19 group. The baseline characteristics, disease severity indicators, time intervals of emergency processes, and clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared. Subgroup analysis was performed between the immediate surgery group and the semi-elective surgery group during the COVID-19 period.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics and severity indicators between the pre-COVID-19 group and COVID-19 group. The time interval to skin incision was significantly increased in the COVID-19 group (P = 0.027). However, there were no significant differences in the clinical outcomes between the two groups. In subgroup comparison, the time interval to skin incision was shorter in the immediate surgery group during the COVID-19 period compared with the pre-COVID-19 group (P = 0.040). The screening process did not significantly increase the time interval to classification and admission for immediate surgery. The time interval to surgery initiation was longer in the COVID-19 period due to the increased time interval in the semi-elective surgery group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We proposed a clinical pathway for the preoperative screening of COVID-19 in patients requiring emergency brain surgery. No significant differences were observed in the clinical outcomes before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The protocol we described showed acceptable results during this pandemic.

A Systematic Review on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Neurosurgical Practice and Indian Perspective

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to systematically review the impact of the current pandemic on neurosurgical practice and to find out a safe way of practicing neurosurgery amid the highly infectious patients with COVID-19.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review of the PubMed and EMBASE databases was performed. The literature was systematically searched using keywords such as "COVID-19" and "Neurosurgery."

RESULTS

Among the 425 records, 128 articles were found to be eligible for analysis. These articles described the perspectives of the neurosurgical departments during the pandemic, departmental models, and organizational schemes for triaging emergent and nonemergent neurosurgical cases for the optimal utilization of limited resources, and solutions to continue academic and research activities. Triaging systems help us to optimally utilize the limited resources available. Guidelines have been developed for safe neurosurgical practice and for the continuation of clinical and academic activities during this pandemic by various national and international neurosurgical societies. Key changes in the telemedicine regulatory guidelines would help us to continue to provide neurosurgical care. Videoconferences, online education programs, and webinars could help us to overcome the disadvantages brought upon the neurosurgical education by the social-distancing norms.

CONCLUSION

In an unprecedented time like this, no single algorithm is going to clear the ethical dilemma faced by us. Individual patient triage is a way for maintaining our ethical practice and at the same time, for efficiently utilizing the limited resources. As the pandemic progresses, new guidelines and protocols will continue to evolve for better neurosurgical practice.

Epidemiological pattern of pediatric trauma in COVID-19 outbreak: Data from a tertiary trauma center in Iran

INTRODUCTION

In Iran, like most other countries, COVID-19 has had a deep impact on children's lives. Our hypothesis was that, a significant change in the number of pediatric injuries has happened in trauma centers. In the current study, we intend to identify the possible epidemiological shift in pediatric fracture patterns, by comparing the data from 'COVID-19 era' and the mean data from the past 2 years. To the best of our knowledge there are only few reports on epidemiology of pediatric fractures during the COVID-19 outbreak.

METHODS

Data are reported in two sections. In the descriptive section, epidemiological data regarding pediatric fractures referred to Taleghani tertiary trauma center, including demographics, distribution curves, etiologies and fracture types are presented during the 'COVID era', from 1 March 2020 to 15 April 2020. In the comparative section, the aforementioned data are compared with mean data from the past 2 years, the 'non-COVID era'.

RESULTS

Altogether 117 of the 288 trauma children (40.62%) had a fractured bone (145 fractures). Patients were mostly boys, with a mean age of 9.87 years (SD=5.27). The three most common fracture types in children included distal radius, mid-forearm and humeral supracondylar fractures. Compared to non-COVID era, the number of pediatric trauma admissions dropped from 589 to 288. No significant change happened in the mean age, male/female ratio and percentage of motor vehicle accidents. Proportion of proximal humeral, proximal forearm, carpal, and hand fractures declined. The number of open fractures significantly dropped (from 12 to 2).

CONCLUSIONS

In Iran, overall trend of pediatric trauma has been decreasing during the outbreak; but the lack of reduction in proportion of accidents may pose an alarm that an effective lock-down has not been imposed. This study has implications as to preparing appropriate resources particular to common "COVID era fractures".

COVID-19 Impact on Neurosurgical Practice: Lockdown Attitude and Experience of a European Academic Center

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented challenge. Different models of reorganization have been described aiming to preserve resources and ensure optimal medical care. Limited clinical neurosurgical experience with patients with COVID-19 has been reported. We share organizational experience, attitudes, and preliminary data of patients treated at our institution.

METHODS

Institutional guidelines and patient workflow are described and visualized. A cohort of all neurosurgical patients managed during the lockdown period is presented and analyzed, assessing suspected nosocomial infection risk factors. A comparative surgical subcohort from the previous year was used to investigate the impact on surgical activity.

RESULTS

A total of 176 patients were admitted in 66 days, 20 of whom tested positive for COVID-19. Patients initially admitted to the neurosurgical ward were less likely to be suspected for a COVID-19 infection compared with patients admitted for critical emergencies, particularly with neurovascular and stroke-related diseases. The mortality of patients with COVID-19 was remarkably high (45%), and even higher in patients who underwent surgical intervention (77%). In addition to the expected decrease in surgical activity (-53%), a decrease in traumatic emergencies was noted.

CONCLUSIONS

By applying infection prevention and resource-sparing logistics measures shared by the international medical community, we were able to maintain essential neurosurgical care in a pandemic with controlled nosocomial infection risk. Special consideration should be given to medical management and surgical indications in patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, because they seem to show a problematic hemostatic profile that might result in an unfavorable clinical and surgical outcome.

The impact of COVID-19 on elective and trauma spine service in a district general hospital

Aims

The aim of this paper is to describe the impact of COVID-19 on spine surgery services in a district general hospital in England in order to understand the spinal service provisions that may be required during a pandemic.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was undertaken between 17 March 2020 and 30 April 2020 and compared with retrospective data from same time period in 2019. We compared the number of patients requiring acute hospital admission or orthopaedic referrals and indications of referrals from our admission sheets and obtained operative data from our theatre software.

Results

Between 17 March to 30 April 2020, there were 48 acute spine referrals as compared to 68 acute referrals during the same time period last year. In the 2019 period, 69% (47/68) of cases referred to the on-call team presented with back pain, radiculopathy or myelopathy compared to 43% (21/48) in the 2020 period. Almost 20% (14/68) of spine referrals consisted of spine trauma as compared to 35% (17/48) this year. There were no confirmed cases of cauda equine last year during this time. Overall, 150 spine cases were carried out during this time period last year, and 261 spine elective cases were cancelled since 17 March 2020.

Recommendations

We recommend following steps can be helpful to deal with similar situations or new pandemics in future:24 hours on-call spine service during the pandemic.Clinical criteria in place to prioritize urgent spinal cases.Pre-screening spine patients before elective operating.Start of separate specialist trauma list for patients needing urgent surgeries.

Conclusion

This paper highlights the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in a district general hospital of England. We demonstrate a decrease in hospital attendances of spine pathologies, despite an increase in emergency spine operations.Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:281-286.

Management of Traumatology Patients During the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: Experience in a Hub Trauma Hospital in Northern Italy

BACKGROUND

As a result of the uncontrolled spread of the COVID-19 virus infection, a health reorganization according to the "hub and spoke" model was necessary. The purpose of the article was to document the adopted corporate protocol and describe the management of the traumatized patient in a Hub center.

METHODS

Our hospital has been identified as one of the three regional Hubs for polytrauma and major traumas, requiring suitable pathways to receive confirmed or suspected COVID-19-positive patients, from the emergency room entrance to the operating room, and finally to the inpatient ward or ICU. From February 23th to April 30th 2020 we analyzed the total number of trauma patients hospitalized and the number of femoral neck fractures surgically treated within 48 h; the data were then compared with the corresponding period of the previous year.

RESULTS

There has been a reduction in the overall number of traumas as a result of government restraint measures. Total occupancy time in the operating theater has increased, but not drastically considering dressing procedures and anesthesia (carried out inside the operating room). The number of patients with femoral neck fractures surgically treated within 48 h (none of the COVID-19-positive patients) decreased from 83.33 to 58.70%, but only slightly lower than the Italian pre-COVID average of 64.70%.

CONCLUSIONS

The correct management of the hospital and the meticulous organization of the traumatized patient have made it possible to contain the potential negative effects on the medical care quality during this unexpected and severe health emergency.

Managing acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic in Jiaxing, China

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic and has had a profound impact on our routine surgical activities. Acute appendicitis is the most common abdominal emergency worldwide. Therefore, it is highly essential to assess the influence the pandemic has on acute appendicitis.

AIM

To assess the efficacy of the management of acute appendicitis during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 90 patients who presented with acute appendicitis during the outbreak of COVID-19 in Jiaxing, China. Clinical data regarding appendectomies patients were also collected for the corresponding time frame from 2019. Preoperative management, intraoperative protective measures, and postoperative management were conducted.

RESULTS

After screening, six patients were identified as unqualified due to fever and were then referred to the COVID-19 expert group. The results of the nucleic acid test were negative. Of the 76 patients enrolled in the simple group, nine patients received medication therapy, and all others underwent surgery. From this same group, 66 patients were diagnosed with suppurative appendicitis, and one patient was diagnosed with perforated appendicitis after surgery. There were 14 patients in the complex group, for which the postoperative diagnosis indicated perforated appendicitis. The proportion of men with perforated appendicitis was higher than that in 2019 (P < 0.05). The chief complaint duration for perforated appendicitis patients in 2020 was longer than that in 2019 (P < 0.05). The routine blood test showed that white blood cell counts and neutrophil ratios were higher in perforated appendicitis patients in 2020 than in 2019 (P < 0.05). The ratio of open appendectomies to the amount of mean blood loss during surgery was greater in 2020 than in 2019 (P < 0.05). Online consultation after discharge was selected in 59 cases (65.6%). No perioperative infection with COVID-19 or long-term postoperative complications were found.

CONCLUSION

The management of acute appendicitis from Jiaxing effectively reduced the influence of the pandemic and minimized the risk of nosocomial infection.

Neurosurgical Practice During Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a highly contagious life-threatening condition with unprecedented impacts for worldwide societies and health care systems. Since the first detection in China, it has spread rapidly worldwide. The increased burden has substantially affected neurosurgical practice and intensive modifications have been required in surgical scheduling, inpatient and outpatient clinics, management of emergency cases, and even in academic activities. In some systems, nonoverlapping teams have been created to minimize transmission among health care workers. In cases of a massive burden, neurosurgeons may need to be reassigned to COVID-19 wards, or teams from other regions may need to be sent to severely affected areas. Recommendations are as following. In outpatient practice, if possible, appointments should be undertaken via telemedicine. All staff assigned to the non-COVID treatment unit should be clothed in level 1 personal protective equipment. If possible, postponement is recommended for operations that do not require urgent or emergent intervention. All patients indicated for surgery must receive COVID-19 screening, including a nasopharyngeal swab and thorax computed tomography. Level 2 protection measures are appropriate during COVID-19-negative patients' operations. Operations of COVID-19-positive patients and emergency operations, in which screening cannot be obtained, should be performed after level 3 protective measures. During surgery, the use of high-speed drills and electrocautery should be reduced to minimize aerosol production. Screening is crucial in all patients because the surgical outcome is highly mortal in patients with COVID-19. All educational and academic conferences can be undertaken as virtual webinars.

Scoring System to Triage Patients for Spine Surgery in the Setting of Limited Resources: Application to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic and Beyond

BACKGROUND

As of May 4, 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected >3.5 million people and touched every inhabited continent. Accordingly, it has stressed health systems worldwide, leading to the cancellation of elective surgical cases and discussions regarding health care resource rationing. It is expected that rationing of surgical resources will continue even after the pandemic peak and may recur with future pandemics, creating a need for a means of triaging patients for emergent and elective spine surgery.

METHODS

Using a modified Delphi technique, a cohort of 16 fellowship-trained spine surgeons from 10 academic medical centers constructed a scoring system for the triage and prioritization of emergent and elective spine surgeries. Three separate rounds of videoconferencing and written correspondence were used to reach a final scoring system. Sixteen test cases were used to optimize the scoring system so that it could categorize cases as requiring emergent, urgent, high-priority elective, or low-priority elective scheduling.

RESULTS

The devised scoring system included 8 independent components: neurologic status, underlying spine stability, presentation of a high-risk postoperative complication, patient medical comorbidities, expected hospital course, expected discharge disposition, facility resource limitations, and local disease burden. The resultant calculator was deployed as a freely available Web-based calculator (https://jhuspine3.shinyapps.io/SpineUrgencyCalculator/).

CONCLUSIONS

We present the first quantitative urgency scoring system for the triage and prioritizing of spine surgery cases in resource-limited settings. We believe that our scoring system, although not all encompassing, has potential value as a guide for triaging spine surgical cases during the COVID pandemic and post-COVID period.

Neurosurgical Procedures and Safety During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case-Control Multicenter Study

Objective

Quantitative documentation of the effects of outbreaks, including the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, is limited in neurosurgery. Our study aimed to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on neurosurgical practice and to determine whether surgical procedures are associated with increased morbidity and mortality.

Methods

A multicenter case-control study was conducted, involving patients who underwent neurosurgical intervention in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during 2 periods: pre-COVID-19 and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The surgical intervention data evaluated included diagnostic category, case priority, complications, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality.

Results

A total of 850 procedures were included, 36% during COVID-19. The median number of procedures per day was significantly lower during the COVID-19 period (5.5 cases) than during the pre-COVID-19 period (12 cases; P < 0.0001). Complications, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality did not differ during the pandemic. In a multivariate analysis comparing both periods, case priority levels 1 (immediate) (odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24–2.67), 1 (1–24 h) (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.10–2.41), and 4 (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19–0.42) showed significant differences.

Conclusions

During the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the overall number of neurosurgical procedures declined, but the load of emergency procedures remained the same, thus highlighting the need to allocate sufficient resources for emergencies. More importantly, performing neurosurgical procedures during the pandemic in regions with limited effects of the outbreak on the health care system was safe. Our findings may aid in developing guidelines for acute and long-term care during pandemics in surgical subspecialties.

Fracture management during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected orthopedic practices worldwide. Few studies focusing on epidemiology and management of fractures in COVID-19 patients have been published. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the fracture types, presentation, treatment, complications, and early outcomes of fractures occurring amidst COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A systematic review of the all published papers was conducted with a comprehensive search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Cochrane Library database using keywords 'COVID-19', 'Coronavirus', 'trauma∗'and 'fracture' from January-April 2020.

RESULTS

The searches yielded a total of ten studies with 112 Patients who were positive for COVID-19 associated with fractures was performed for six studies, reporting data separately for 44 patients with COVID 19 and an associated fracture. A diagnosis of COVID 19 was made on the basis of positive Computed Tomography scan in 39 patients and 30 patients had a positive Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction test. Overall, there were 29 proximal femoral fractures, 8 spine fractures, 7 fractures of the other bones. The fractures were treated surgically in 30 cases (68.18%) and the remaining 14 cases (31.82%) were managed conservatively. There were 16 patients (36.36%) who died, mostly due to respiratory failure with a median age of 82 years.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 has led to a significant reduction in a load of fracture patients globally, though the incidence of fragility fractures continues to be unaffected. There is a significantly higher risk of mortality in elderly patients with fractures and hence they should only be operated in a facility with a robust intensive care. Conservative treatment should be adopted as far as possible in non-obligatory fractures and in lesser equipped centers. Surgery in patients with proximal femur fragility fractures when judiciously selected did result in improvement in respiratory status. Reorganizing medical services is vital to deliver effective fracture care and also mitigate disease transmission.

Remodulation of neurosurgical activities in an Italian region (Emilia-Romagna) under COVID- 19 emergency: maintaining the standard of care during the crisis

BACKGROUND

The impact of COVID-19 outbreak in the neurosurgical practice has been dramatic, imposing several limitations. The aim of this study is to present how the neurosurgical departments of Emilia-Romagna, a northern Italian region, have re-set their organization to maintain the higher standard of care as possible.

METHODS

All OR and out-patients activities performed during the COVID-19 emergency in the neurosurgical department of Emilia-Romagna have been collected and compared to the means of the same timeframe in 2018 and 2019.

RESULTS

In 2020, 205 surgical procedures and 466 out-patients consultations have been performed, representing respectively 28.8% and 26.4% of the previous biennium. The most of OR procedures had been emergencies/urgencies and oncological patients (respectively 113 and 66 vs 164.5 and 84.5 of the previous biennium), while elective surgeries decrease up to -97.1%, as for spinal nerves and endoscopic skull base procedures. The patients phone contacts and telemedicine evaluations of their examinations have permitted to reduce the hospital access for outpatients of 75.6%, but these modalities have, also, permitted to follow-up a large number of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The outbreak of COVID-19 has imposed several limits to our current practice, however this should not represent an excuse to reduce the standard of care. In our experience, the net integration of different local centers has permitted for each of them to effectively cope the crisis, managing the local cases requiring a prompt surgery and keeping the care continuity with already discharged patients.

From "business continuity" to "back to business" for orthopaedic surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. Orthopaedic departments have adopted business continuity models and guidelines for essential and non-essential surgeries to preserve hospital resources as well as protect patients and staff. These guidelines broadly encompass reduction of ambulatory care with a move towards telemedicine, redeployment of orthopaedic surgeons/residents to the frontline battle against COVID-19, continuation of education and research through web-based means, and cancellation of non-essential elective procedures. However, if containment of COVID-19 community spread is achieved, resumption of elective orthopaedic procedures and transition plans to return to normalcy must be considered for orthopaedic departments. The COVID-19 pandemic also presents a moral dilemma to the orthopaedic surgeon considering elective procedures. What is the best treatment for our patients and how does the fear of COVID-19 influence the risk-benefit discussion during a pandemic? Surgeons must deliberate the fine balance between elective surgery for a patient’s wellbeing versus risks to the operating team and utilization of precious hospital resources. Attrition of healthcare workers or Orthopaedic surgeons from restarting elective procedures prematurely or in an unsafe manner may render us ill-equipped to handle the second wave of infections. This highlights the need to develop effective screening protocols or preoperative COVID-19 testing before elective procedures in high-risk, elderly individuals with comorbidities. Alternatively, high-risk individuals should be postponed until the risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection is minimal. In addition, given the higher mortality and perioperative morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing surgery, the decision to operate must be carefully deliberated. As we ramp-up elective services and get “back to business” as orthopaedic surgeons, we have to be constantly mindful to proceed in a cautious and calibrated fashion, delivering the best care, while maintaining utmost vigilance to prevent the resurgence of COVID-19 during this critical transition period.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:222–228.

The impact of COVID-19 on elective and trauma spine service in a district general hospital

Aims

The aim of this paper is to describe the impact of COVID-19 on spine surgery services in a district general hospital in England in order to understand the spinal service provisions that may be required during a pandemic.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was undertaken between 17 March 2020 and 30 April 2020 and compared with retrospective data from same time period in 2019. We compared the number of patients requiring acute hospital admission or orthopaedic referrals and indications of referrals from our admission sheets and obtained operative data from our theatre software.

Results

Between 17 March to 30 April 2020, there were 48 acute spine referrals as compared to 68 acute referrals during the same time period last year. In the 2019 period, 69% (47/68) of cases referred to the on-call team presented with back pain, radiculopathy or myelopathy compared to 43% (21/48) in the 2020 period. Almost 20% (14/68) of spine referrals consisted of spine trauma as compared to 35% (17/48) this year. There were no confirmed cases of cauda equine last year during this time. Overall, 150 spine cases were carried out during this time period last year, and 261 spine elective cases were cancelled since 17 March 2020.

Recommendations

We recommend following steps can be helpful to deal with similar situations or new pandemics in future: 24 hours on-call spine service during the pandemic. Clinical criteria in place to prioritize urgent spinal cases. Pre-screening spine patients before elective operating. Start of separate specialist trauma list for patients needing urgent surgeries.

Conclusion

This paper highlights the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in a district general hospital of England. We demonstrate a decrease in hospital attendances of spine pathologies, despite an increase in emergency spine operations. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:281–286.