Dataset Information

International surgical guidance for COVID-19: Validation using an international Delphi process - Cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

International professional bodies have been quick to disseminate initial guidance documents during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the absence of firm evidence, these have been developed by expert committees, limited in participant number. This study aimed to validate international COVID-19 surgical guidance using a rapid Delphi consensus exercise.

Methods

Delphi statements were directly mapped to guidance from surgical professional bodies in the US and Europe (SAGES/EAES), the UK (Joint RCS), and Australasia (RACS), to validate content against international consensus. Agreement from ≥70% participants was determined as consensus agreement.

Results

The Delphi exercise was completed by 339 individuals from 41 countries and 52 statements were mapped to the guidance, 47 (90.4%) reaching consensus agreement. Of these, 27 statements were mapped to SAGES/EAES guidance, 21 to the Joint RCS document, and 33 to the RACS document. Within the SAGES/EAES document, 92.9% of items reached consensus agreement (median 89.0%, range 60.5-99.2%), 90.4% within the Joint RCS document (87.6%, 63.4-97.9%), and 90.9% within the RACS document (85.5%, 18.7-98.8%). Statements lacking consensus related to the surgical approach (open vs. laparoscopic), dual consultant operating, separate instrument decontamination, and stoma formation rather than anastomosis.

Conclusion

Initial surgical COVID-19 guidance from the US, Europe and Australasia was widely supported by an international expert community, although a small number of contentious areas emerged. These findings should be addressed in future guidance iterations, and should stimulate urgent investigation of non-consensus areas.

SUBMITTER: Aj B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7282765 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

International surgical guidance for COVID-19: Validation using an international Delphi process - Cross-sectional study.

Aj Beamish B C Brown B T Abdelrahman A Harper E Ryan R Rl Harries H Rj Egan E

International journal of surgery (London, England) 20200609

<h4>Background</h4>International professional bodies have been quick to disseminate initial guidance documents during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the absence of firm evidence, these have been developed by expert committees, limited in participant number. This study aimed to validate international COVID-19 surgical guidance using a rapid Delphi consensus exercise.<h4>Methods</h4>Delphi statements were directly mapped to guidance from surgical professional bodies in the US and Europe (SAGES/EAES), t ...[more]

PMID: 32531308

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: To describe the utility and patterns of COVID-19 simulation scenarios across different international healthcare centers. Methods: This is a cross-sectional, international survey for multiple simulation centers team members, including team-leaders and healthcare workers (HCWs), based on each center's debriefing reports from 30 countries in all WHO regions. The main outcome measures were the COVID-19 simulations characteristics, facilitators, obstacles, and challenges encountered during the simulation sessions. Results: Invitation was sent to 343 simulation team leaders and multidisciplinary HCWs who responded; 121 completed the survey. The frequency of simulation sessions was monthly (27.1%), weekly (24.8%), twice weekly (19.8%), or daily (21.5%). Regarding the themes of the simulation sessions, they were COVID-19 patient arrival to ER (69.4%), COVID-19 patient intubation due to respiratory failure (66.1%), COVID-19 patient requiring CPR (53.7%), COVID-19 transport inside the hospital (53.7%), COVID-19 elective intubation in OR (37.2%), or Delivery of COVID-19 mother and neonatal care (19%). Among participants, 55.6% reported the team's full engagement in the simulation sessions. The average session length was 30-60 min. The debriefing process was conducted by the ICU facilitator in (51%) of the sessions followed by simulation staff in 41% of the sessions. A total of 80% reported significant improvement in clinical preparedness after simulation sessions, and 70% were satisfied with the COVID-19 sessions. Most perceived issues reported were related to infection control measures, followed by team dynamics, logistics, and patient transport issues. Conclusion: Simulation centers team leaders and HCWs reported positive feedback on COVID-19 simulation sessions with multidisciplinary personnel involvement. These drills are a valuable tool for rehearsing safe dynamics on the frontline of COVID-19. More research on COVID-19 simulation outcomes is warranted; to explore variable factors for each country and healthcare system.

Project description:BackgroundBreastfeeding promotes children's health and is associated with positive effects to maternal physical and mental health. Uncertainties regarding SARS-CoV-2 transmission led to worries experienced by women and health professionals which impacted breastfeeding plans. We aimed to investigate the impact of self-reported and country-specific factors on breastfeeding rates during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis study is part of a broader international prospective cohort study about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perinatal mental health (Riseup-PPD-COVID-19). We analysed data from 5612 women, across 12 countries. Potential covariates of breastfeeding (sociodemographic, perinatal, physical/mental health, professional perinatal care, changes in healthcare due to the pandemic, COVID-19 related, breastfeeding support, governmental containment measures and countries' inequality levels) were studied by Generalized Linear Mixed-Effects Models.ResultsA model encompassing all covariates of interest explained 24% of the variance of breastfeeding rates across countries (first six months postpartum). Overall, first child (β = -0.27), age of the child (β = -0.29), preterm birth (β = -0.52), admission to the neonatal/pediatric care (β = -0.44), lack of breastfeeding support (β = -0.18), current psychiatric treatment (β = -0.69) and inequality (β = -0.71) were negatively associated with breastfeeding (p < .001). Access to postnatal support groups was positively associated with breastfeeding (β = 0.59; p < .001). In countries with low-inequality, governmental measures to contain virus transmission had a deleterious effect on breastfeeding (β = -0.16; p < .05) while access to maternity leave protected breastfeeding (β = 0.50; p < .001).DiscussionThis study shows that mother's COVID-19 diagnosis and changes in healthcare and birth/postnatal plans did not influence breastfeeding rates. Virtual support groups help women manage breastfeeding, particularly when their experiencing a first child and for those under psychiatric treatment. The complex associations between covariates and breastfeeding vary across countries, suggesting the need to define context-specific measures to support breastfeeding.

Project description:Introduction: Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women worldwide, with most experiencing difficulties achieving adequate symptom control. These difficulties have been compounded by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic due to worldwide shifts in health care resource allocation. As cannabis is a relatively common form of self-management in endometriosis, this study aims to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cannabis consumption in those with endometriosis. Methods: An anonymous, cross-sectional online international survey was developed and promoted by endometriosis advocacy/support organizations worldwide. Respondents needed to have a diagnosis of endometriosis and be aged between 18 and 55. Results: A total of 1634 responses were received from 46 different countries. The average age of respondents was 30, with a mean diagnosis age of 25. Eight hundred forty-six respondents (51%) reported consuming cannabis in the past 3 months, with 55% of these reporting use for symptom management only. One in five respondents (20%) reported having consumed cannabis previously, the most common reason for discontinuation (65%) was access difficulties during COVID. Those who had legal access were more likely to consume cannabis than those without (p<0.0001) and were more likely to disclose usage to health care professionals (p<0.0001). The most common reasons for consuming cannabis during COVID was increased stress/anxiety (59%) and lack of access to normal medical care (48%). Pre-pandemic, cannabis was mostly consumed at least once a day (61%) and in inhaled forms (51.6%). Consumption increased for most people (57%) during the pandemic. During the pandemic just under a quarter (23%) of respondents changed their mode of consumption, with a reduction in inhaled forms (39.5%) and an increase in consumption of edibles (40%) or oil (25.2%). Conclusions: Cannabis consumption, especially for symptom relief, was relatively common among those with endometriosis, with some people starting their consumption of cannabis due to health care restrictions that occurred due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Difficulties accessing cannabis and unpleasant/unwanted side effects were the most common reasons for lack of current cannabis consumption in those who had previously consumed it. Cannabis consumption may form an important part of endometriosis management especially when access to routine medical care is restricted.

Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic exposed people to significant and prolonged stress. The psychosocial impacts of the pandemic have been well recognised and reported in high-income countries (HICs) but it is important to understand the unique challenges posed by COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where limited international comparisons have been undertaken. This protocol was therefore devised to study the psychosocial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in seven LMICs using scales that had been designed for or translated for this purpose.Methods and analysisThis cross-sectional study uses an online survey to administer a novel COVID Psychosocial Impacts Scale (CPIS) alongside established measures of psychological distress, post-traumatic stress, well-being and post-traumatic growth in the appropriate language. Participants will include adults aged 18 years and above, recruited from Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Malaysia, Pakistan, Somalia and Turkey, with a pragmatic target sample size of 500 in each country.Data will be analysed descriptively on sociodemographic and study variables. In addition, CPIS will be analysed psychometrically (for reliability and validity) to assess the suitability of use in a given context. Finally, within-subjects and between-subjects analyses will be carried out using multi-level mixed-effect models to examine associations between key sociodemographic and study variables.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was granted by the Human Ethics Committee, University of Otago, New Zealand (Ref. No. 21/102). In addition, international collaborators obtained local authorisation or ethical approval in their respective host universities before data collection commenced.Participants will give informed consent before taking part. Data will be collected and stored securely on the University of Otago, New Zealand Qualtrics platform using an auto-generated non-identifiable letter-number string. Data will be available on reasonable request. Findings will be disseminated by publications in scientific journals and/or conference presentations.Trial registration numberNCT05052333.

Project description:BackgroundThe impact of COVID-19 international travel restrictions has to date, not been fully explored, and with the ongoing threat that new variants could potentially restrict movement further, it is important to consider the impacts that travel restrictions have on community members. This study aimed to evaluate the psychological and financial impact of COVID-19 travel restrictions on those separated from their partners or immediate families, as well as temporary visa holders who were unable to migrate.MethodsBetween 4 November 2021 to 1 December 2021, we executed a cross-sectional online survey targeting three specific groups; (1) those stranded from their partners; (2) those stranded from immediate families; and (3) temporary visa holders unable to migrate or cross international borders. We collected data on respondents' demographic profile; the nature of COVID-19-related travel impacts; depression, anxiety, and stress levels (using the validated DASS-21); and finally, data on respondents financial, employment and accommodation situation.Results1363 respondents located globally completed the survey. 71.2% reported financial stress, 76.8% ([Formula: see text], SD = 5.94) reported moderate-to-extremely severe depression, 51.6% ([Formula: see text], SD = 5.49) moderate-to-extremely severe anxiety, and 62.6% ([Formula: see text], SD = 5.55) moderate-to-extremely severe stress levels. Statistically significant factors associated with moderate-to-extremely severe depression, anxiety, and stress included being female, chronic illness, and experiencing financial stress. Employment during COVID-19 -specifically essential services workers or unemployed-was associated with higher levels of anxiety and stress, with only essential workers being a predictor of higher stress severity. Factors that provided psychological protection included being older and having children.ConclusionThis study is one of the first to explore the impact COVID-19-related international travel restrictions have had on the financial status and psychological health of affected individuals. It highlights the significant human cost associated with the restrictions and identifies psychologically vulnerable populations. These results will help the design of targeted health and social policy responses.

Dataset Information

International surgical guidance for COVID-19: Validation using an international Delphi process - Cross-sectional study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

International surgical guidance for COVID-19: Validation using an international Delphi process - Cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets