The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on urological emergencies: a single-center experience.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Motterle G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7245166 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on urological emergencies: a single-center experience.
Motterle Giovanni G Morlacco Alessandro A Iafrate Massimo M Bianco Marta M Federa Giuliano G Xhafka Orest O Zattoni Filiberto F Prayer-Galetti Tommaso T
World journal of urology 20200523 6
<h4>Purpose</h4>COVID-19 pandemic represents a novel challenge for healthcare systems, and it affects even the daily urological practice. Italy was the first country after China to experience a lock-down period. Our objective is to determine whether, during the COVID-19 period, there has been any modification in urological emergencies.<h4>Methods</h4>we retrospectively reviewed urgent urological consultations requested by the Emergency Department (ED) of Padua University Hospital in the 36-day p ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:AimDetermine changes in rapid response team (RRT) activations and describe institutional adaptations made during a surge in hospitalizations for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsUsing prospectively collected data, we compared characteristics of RRT calls at our academic hospital from March 7 through May 31, 2020 (COVID-19 era) versus those from January 1 through March 6, 2020 (pre-COVID-19 era). We used negative binomial regression to test differences in RRT activation rates normalized to floor (non-ICU) inpatient census between pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 eras, including the sub-era of rapid COVID-19 census surge and plateau (March 28 through May 2, 2020).ResultsRRT activations for respiratory distress rose substantially during the rapid COVID-19 surge and plateau (2.38 (95% CI 1.39-3.36) activations per 1000 floor patient-days v. 1.27 (0.82-1.71) during the pre-COVID-19 era; p = 0.02); all-cause RRT rates were not significantly different (5.40 (95% CI 3.94-6.85) v. 4.83 (3.86-5.80) activations per 1000 floor patient-days, respectively; p = 0.52). Throughout the COVID-19 era, respiratory distress accounted for a higher percentage of RRT activations in COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 patients (57% vs. 28%, respectively; p = 0.001). During the surge, we adapted RRT guidelines to reduce in-room personnel and standardize personal protective equipment based on COVID-19 status and risk to providers, created decision-support pathways for respiratory emergencies that accounted for COVID-19 status uncertainty, and expanded critical care consultative support to floor teams.ConclusionIncreased frequency and complexity of RRT activations for respiratory distress during the COVID-19 surge prompted the creation of clinical tools and strategies that could be applied to other hospitals.
| S-EPMC8096179 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Health-care workers are on the front line to combat the peculiar coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic and are susceptible to acquiring this infection. This study is aimed at documenting the effect of "coronaphobia" on mental well-being and to report burnout among physicians. The study was conducted as a cross-sectional survey between November 17, 2020 and January 1, 2021 via a Google form distributed among the physicians of a tertiary care hospital, in Karachi, Pakistan. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) was used to assess the mental well-being of physicians. Burnout was documented by using the Maslach Burnout Inventory Human Services Survey for Medical Personnel. Eighty-seven physicians participated in the survey (mean age, 30.9 ± 7.3 years). The mean WEMWBS score of the study participants was 51.6 ± 10.8. Regarding the WEMWBS, emotional exhaustion was observed in 54% (N = 47) of participants, depersonalization in 77% (N = 67), and low personal accomplishment was reported in 31% (N = 27) of participants. The results of the survey further highlight that depersonalization, emotional exhaustion, and low personal accomplishment were associated significantly with a history of COVID-19 infection and COVID-19 postings. Hence, immediate measures are required to reduce the burnout among physicians while battling the second wave of the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8176473 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused an unprecedented clinical situation. A retrospective cross-sectional study was designed with the aim to evaluate psychiatric emergencies from March 14 to May 1, 2020, coinciding with the start of the emergency state and the lockdown until the attenuation of the confinement. Data obtained during this period were compared with the emergencies attended in the same period of 2019. A total of 213 psychiatric emergencies were attended in 2020 compared with 367 in 2019. The mean number of emergencies per day was significantly lower during the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 (M=4.35, SD= 2.04) vs. the same period in 2019 (M=7.50, SD= 3.18). A higher percentage of patients with schizo/psychotic disorders (34.3% in 2020, vs. 24.3% in 2019), as well as a lower percentage of patients with anxiety/adaptive disorders (25.4% in 2020 vs. 35.4% in 2019) was observed during the outbreak. A significant lower mean discharge/emergency ratio (M=42.17, SD= 26.94 in 2020 vs. M=63.43, SD= 17.64 in 2019) and a higher referral to Internal Medicine/emergency ratio (M=20.55, SD= 22.16 in 2020 vs. M=3.32, SD= 6.63 in 2019) was observed. The results suggest important changes in psychiatric emergencies during the most critical period of the COVID-19 outbreak in Spain.
| S-EPMC7672359 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS:Since December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative pathogen of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has posed a pandemic threat to global health and has challenged health care system in all affected countries. PATIENTS AND METHODS:This is a combined study including a descriptive part about the changes in the daily work routine of an Interdisciplinary Endoscopic Unit (IEU) and a prospective analysis of patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 who required endoscopic interventions. Conclusively, we present the finding of a point-prevalence analysis in the staff of the IEU. RESULTS:We present effects of the COVID-19-related restructuring of processes in our interdisciplinary endoscopy unit (IEU) with respect to cancelation of examinations, relocation of staff to other departments, impact of SARS-CoV-2 on medical staff of the IEU, and supply of protective clothing. Additionally, we analyzed the cohort of COVID-19 patients: Sixteen endoscopic interventions were done in ten patients. In all patients with confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2, emergency endoscopies were required for relevant bleeding situations. Re-endoscopies were required only in critically ill COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSIONS:The restructuring of processes in the IEU was feasible in short time, effective, and can also be applied broadly at least in developed countries [Garbe et al. in Gastroenterology 159:778-780, 2020; Repici A, Pace F, Gabbiadini R, Colombo M, Hassan C, Dinelli M, Group IG-CW, Maselli R, Spadaccini M, Mutignani M, Gabbrielli A, Signorelli C, Spada C, Leoni P, Fabbri C, Segato S, Gaffuri N, Mangiavillano B, Radaelli F, Salerno R, Bargiggia S, Maroni L, Benedetti A, Occhipinti P, De Grazia F, Ferraris L, Cengia G, Greco S, Alvisi C, Scarcelli A, De Luca L, Cereatti F, Testoni PA, Mingotto R, Aragona G, Manes G, Beretta P, Amvrosiadis G, Cennamo V, Lella F, Missale G, Lagoussis P, Triossi O, Giovanardi M, De Roberto G, Cantu P, Buscarini E, Anderloni A, Carrara S, Fugazza A, Galtieri PA, Pellegatta G, Antonelli G, Rosch T, Sharma P (2020) Endoscopy units and the COVID-19 Outbreak: a Multi-Center Experience from Italy. Gastroenterology;]. The endoscopy-related rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection of staff is low, but supply of protective equipment is crucial for this. Endoscopic procedures in COVID-19 patients were not directly related to SARS-CoV-2 infection, but to other underlying diseases or typical complications of long-term ICU treatment.
| S-EPMC7605334 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Craniofacial clinics are composed of multidisciplinary teams of providers to deliver coordinated and comprehensive patient care. The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted this model, as social distancing guidelines have precluded in-person patient appointments and forced clinics to reconsider their method of care delivery. The University of California, San Francisco, Craniofacial Center has continued to serve patients during this acute period, adopting a hybrid model in which the vast majority of patients are seen through telehealth and a limited number of patients are evaluated in-person. Surveyed patients and families reported high rates of satisfaction, with time savings cited as a particular benefit. Furthermore, most felt comfortable using the video technology required for their appointment. This experience has demonstrated to us that multidisciplinary craniofacial evaluations can be effectively delivered in a telehealth format and has informed our conception of idealized clinic structure. Moving forward, we intend to utilize telehealth visits for selected components of craniofacial evaluations in an effort to maximize efficiency and minimize burden, including addressing barriers to accessing care. Benefits of a hybrid model will include decongestion of clinics and waiting areas, allowing social distancing, addressing clinic space limits, and increased efficiency by eliminating the need for patient and family movement. Demonstration of the safety and efficacy of telehealth visits, combined with regulatory reform that improves reimbursement and allows for appointments across state lines, will be critical for this model to persist beyond the pandemic.
| S-EPMC7544296 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo report on the outcomes of urological cancer patients undergoing radical surgery between March-September 2020 (compared with 2019) in the European Institute of Oncology (IEO) in Milan and the South East London Cancer Alliance (SELCA).Materials and methodsSince March 2020, both institutions implemented a COVID-19 minimal 'green' pathway, whereby patients were required to isolate for 14 days prior to admission and report a negative COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test within 3 days of surgery. COVID-19 positive patients had surgery deferred until a negative swab. Surgical outcomes assessed were: American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade; surgery time; theatre time; intensive care unit (ICU) stay >24 h; pneumonia; length of stay (LOS); re-admission. Postoperative COVID-19 infection rates and associated mortality were also recorded.ResultsAt IEO, uro-oncological surgery increased by 4%, as compared with the same period in 2019 (n = 515 vs. 534). The main increase was observed for renal (16%, n = 98 vs. 114), bladder (24%, n = 45 vs. 56) and testicular (27%, n = 26 vs. 33). Patient demographics were all comparable between 2019 and 2020. Only one bladder cancer patient developed COVID-19, reporting mild/moderate disease. There was no COVID-19 associated mortality. In the SELCA cohort, uro-oncological surgery declined by 23% (n = 403 vs. 312) compared with the previous year. The biggest decrease was seen for prostate (-42%, n = 156 vs. 91), penile (-100%, n = 4 vs. 0) and testicular cancers (-46%, n = 35 vs. 24). Various patient demographic characteristics were notably different when comparing 2020 versus 2019. This likely reflects the clinical decision of deferring COVID-19 vulnerable patients. One patient developed COVID-19, with no COVID-19 related mortality.ConclusionThe COVID-19 minimal 'green' pathways that were put in place have shown to be safe for uro-oncological patients requiring radical surgery. There were limited complications, almost no peri-operative COVID-19 infection and no COVID-19-related mortality in either cohort.
| S-EPMC9231679 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAlthough the rate and severity of complications after coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) resolution is currently unknown, evidence regarding their presence is increasing in the literature. This study presents a series of cases with post COVID-19 short-term pulmonary complications.MethodsThis is a single center retrospective case series study. The demographic and clinical data were collected from the center's electronic records. All the included cases were confirmed COVID-19 patients who had pulmonary complications even after their recovery.ResultsNineteen COVID-19 patients were involved in this study. Fourteen of them were male (73.7%) and only 5 (26.3%) cases were female, with a mean age of 52.05 years (26-77). All of the patients developed severe COVID-19 and were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). The average infection duration was 13.5 days (10-21). The most common complaints after recovery from COVID-19 were shortness of breath, fever, and hemoptysis. Computed tomography scan showed different pulmonary abnormalities between the cases. Different surgical procedures were performed for the patients according to their conditions, such as decortications, lobectomy, and bullectomy. More than half of the patients (n = 10) recovered and were discharged from hospital without complications, five patients were admitted to the ICU, 3 cases developed mucormycosis, and one case passed away.ConclusionFollowing the resolution of COVID-19, patients may experience severe pulmonary complications that may last for months and can affect quality of life, ICU admission, or even death.
| S-EPMC8578026 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs a result of the COVID-19 widespread pandemic, cryopreservation of allogeneic donor apheresis products was implemented to mitigate the challenges of donor availability and product transport. Although logistically beneficial, the impact of cryopreservation on clinical outcomes and graft composition remains unclear.ObjectivesTo compare the outcomes and graft composition with cryopreserved versus fresh allografts in the setting of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT).Study designWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical outcomes of 30 consecutive patients who received cryopreserved allografts between March and August 2020 as compared to 60 consecutive patients who received fresh allografts prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Primary endpoints were hematopoietic engraftment, graft failure (GF) and secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), relapse free survival (RFS) and non-relapse mortality (NRM). In addition, extended immunophenotype analysis was performed on cryopreserved versus prospectively collected fresh apheresis samples.ResultsCompared to fresh allografts, both neutrophil and platelet recovery were delayed in recipients of cryopreserved reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) allo-HCT with median times to engraftment of 24 days vs 18 days (P = .01) and 27 days vs 18 days (P = .069), respectively. We observed primary GF in 4 of 30 patients in the cryopreserved cohort (13.3%) vs only one of 60 patients (1.7 %) in the fresh cohort (P = .03). Cryopreserved RIC allo-HCT was associated with significantly lower median total, myeloid and T-cell donor chimerism at 1 month. OS and RFS were inferior for cryograft recipients with hazard ratio [HR (95%Cl)]: 2.16 (1.00, 4.67) and 1.90 (0.95, 3.79), respectively. Using an extended immunophenotype analysis we compared 14 samples from the cryopreserved cohort to 6 prospectively collected fresh apheresis donor samples. These analyses showed both decrease in total cell viability and significantly reduced absolute numbers of NK cells (CD3-CD56+) in the cryopreserved apheresis samples.ConclusionIn this single institution study we note delayed engraftment and a trend toward clinical inferiority of cryopreserved vs fresh allografts. Further evaluation of the use of cryopreserved allografts and their impact on clinical and laboratory outcomes is warranted.
| S-EPMC8760704 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is commonly associated with myocardial injury and heart failure. The pathophysiology behind this phenomenon remains unclear, with many diverse and multifaceted hypotheses. To contribute to this understanding, we describe the underlying cardiac findings in fifty patients who died with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsIncluded were autopsies performed on patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain reaction test from the index hospitalization. In the case of out-of-hospital death, patients were included if post-mortem testing was positive. Complete autopsies were performed according to a COVID-19 safety protocol, and all patients underwent both macroscopic and microscopic examination. If available, laboratory findings and echocardiograms were reported.ResultsThe median age of the decedents was 63.5 years. The most common comorbidities included hypertension (90.0%), diabetes (56.0%) and obesity (50.0%). Lymphocytic inflammatory infiltrates in the heart were present in eight (16.0%) patients, with focal myocarditis present in two (4.0%) patients. Acute myocardial ischemia was observed in eight (16.0%) patients. The most common findings were myocardial fibrosis (80.0%), hypertrophy (72.0%), and microthrombi (66.0%). The most common causes of death were COVID-19 pneumonia in 18 (36.0%), COVID-19 pneumonia with bacterial superinfection in 12 (24.0%), and COVID-19 pneumonia with pulmonary embolism in 10 (20.0%) patients.ConclusionsCardiovascular comorbidities were prevalent, and pathologic changes associated with hypertensive and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were the most common findings. Despite markedly elevated inflammatory markers and cardiac enzymes, few patients exhibited inflammatory infiltrates or necrosis within cardiac myocytes. A unifying pathophysiologic mechanism behind myocardial injury in COVID-19 remains elusive, and additional autopsy studies are needed.
| S-EPMC8278836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction/aimsThe initial surge of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in early 2020 led to widespread cancellation of elective medical procedures in the United States, including nonurgent outpatient and inpatient electrodiagnostic (EDx) studies. As certain regions later showed a downtrend in daily new cases, EDx laboratories have reopened under the guidance of the American Association of Neuromuscular & Electrodiagnostic Medicine (AANEM). In our reopening experience guided by the AANEM, we measured relevant outcomes to determine further workflow adaptations. We aimed to detail our experience and share the lessons learned.MethodsWe reviewed the clinical volumes, billing data, diagnosis distributions, and rates of COVID-19 exposure and transmission among patients and staff in our EDx laboratory during the first 6 months of reopening, starting on June 1, 2020. For context, we detailed the recent AANEM guidelines we adopted at our laboratory, supplemented by other consensus statements.ResultsWe completed 816 outpatient studies from June 1 to December 1, 2020, reaching 97% of the total volume and 97% of total billing compared with the same time period in 2019. The average relative value units per study were similar. There were no major shifts in diagnosis distributions. We completed 10 of 12 requested inpatient studies during this period. There were no known COVID-19 transmissions between patients and staff.DiscussionOur experience suggests that it is possible to safely operate an EDx laboratory under the guidance of the AANEM and other experts, with clinical volume and billing rates comparable to pre-pandemic baselines.
| S-EPMC8441863 | biostudies-literature