Project description:PURPOSE:People with cancer face an elevated risk of infection and severe sequelae from COVID-19. Dexamethasone is commonly used for antiemetic prophylaxis with systemic therapy for cancer. However, dexamethasone is associated with increased risk of viral and respiratory infections, and causes lymphopenia, which is associated with worse outcomes during COVID-19 infections. Our purpose was to minimize dexamethasone exposure during antiemetic prophylaxis for systemic therapy for solid tumors during the COVID-19 pandemic, while maintaining control of nausea and emesis. METHODS:We convened an expert panel to systematically review the literature and formulate consensus recommendations. RESULTS:No studies considered the impact of dexamethasone-based antiemetic regimens on the risk and severity of COVID-19 infection. Expert consensus recommended modifications to the 2019 Cancer Care Ontario Antiemetic Recommendations. CONCLUSION:Clinicians should prescribe the minimally effective dose of dexamethasone for antiemetic prophylaxis. Single-day dexamethasone dosing is recommended over multi-day dosing for regimens with high emetogenic risk excluding high-dose cisplatin, preferably in combination with palonosetron, netupitant, and olanzapine. For regimens with low emetogenic risk, 5-HT3 antagonists are recommended over dexamethasone.
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 pandemic presented an unexpected challenge for the surgical community in general and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) specialists in particular. This document aims to summarize recent evidence and experts' opinion and formulate recommendations to guide the surgical community on how to best organize the recovery plan for surgical activity across different sub-specialities after the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsRecommendations were developed through a Delphi process for establishment of expert consensus. Domain topics were formulated and subsequently subdivided into questions pertinent to different surgical specialities following the COVID-19 crisis. Sixty-five experts from 24 countries, representing the entire EAES board, were invited. Fifty clinicians and six engineers accepted the invitation and drafted statements based on specific key questions. Anonymous voting on the statements was performed until consensus was achieved, defined by at least 70% agreement.ResultsA total of 92 consensus statements were formulated with regard to safe resumption of surgery across eight domains, addressing general surgery, upper GI, lower GI, bariatrics, endocrine, HPB, abdominal wall and technology/research. The statements addressed elective and emergency services across all subspecialties with specific attention to the role of MIS during the recovery plan. Eighty-four of the statements were approved during the first round of Delphi voting (91.3%) and another 8 during the following round after substantial modification, resulting in a 100% consensus.ConclusionThe recommendations formulated by the EAES board establish a framework for resumption of surgery following COVID-19 pandemic with particular focus on the role of MIS across surgical specialities. The statements have the potential for wide application in the clinical setting, education activities and research work across different healthcare systems.
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated existing health disparities and disproportionately affected vulnerable individuals and communities (e.g., low-income, precariously housed or in institutional settings, racialized, migrant, refugee, 2SLBGTQ+). Despite their higher risk of infection and sub-optimal access to healthcare, Canada's COVID-19 vaccination strategy focused primarily on age, as well as medical and occupational risk factors.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods constant comparative qualitative analysis of epidemiological data from a national database of COVID-19 cases and vaccine coverage in four Canadian jurisdictions. Jurisdictional policies, policy updates, and associated press releases were collected from government websites, and qualitative data were collected through 34 semi-structured interviews of key informants from nine Canadian jurisdictions. Interviews were coded and analyzed for themes and patterns.ResultsCOVID-19 vaccines were rolled out in Canada in three phases, each accompanied by specific challenges. Vaccine delivery systems typically featured large-venue mass immunization sites that presented a variety of barriers for those from vulnerable communities. The engagement and targeted outreach that featured in the later phases were driven predominantly by the efforts of community organizations and primary care providers, with limited support from provincial governments.ConclusionsWhile COVID-19 vaccine rollout in Canada is largely considered a success, such an interpretation is shaped by the metrics chosen. Vaccine delivery systems across Canada need substantial improvements to ensure optimal uptake and equitable access for all. Our findings suggest a more equitable model for vaccine delivery featuring early establishment of local barrier-free clinics, culturally safe and representative environment, as well as multi-lingual assistance, among other vulnerability-sensitive elements.
Project description:BackgroundAt the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was foreseen that the number of face-to-face psychiatry consultations would suffer a reduction. In order to compensate, the Australian Government introduced new Medicare-subsidized telephone and video-linked consultations. This study investigates how these developments affected the pre-existing inequity of psychiatry service delivery in Australia.MethodsThe study analyses five and a half years of national Medicare data listing all subsidized psychiatry consultation consumption aggregated to areas defined as Statistical Area level 3 (SA3s; which have population sizes of 30 k-300 k). Face-to-face, video-linked and telephone consultations are considered separately. The analysis consists of presenting rates of consumption, concentration graphs, and concentration indices to quantify inequity, using Socio Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) scores to rank the SA3 areas according to socio-economic disadvantage.ResultsThere is a 22% drop in the rate of face-to-face psychiatry consultation consumption across Australia in the final study period compared with the last study period predating the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the loss is made up by the introduction of the new subsidized telephone and video-linked consultations. Referring to the same time periods, there is a reduction in the inequity of the distribution of face-to-face consultations, where the concentration index reduces from 0.166 to 0.129. The new subsidized video-linked consultations are distributed with severe inequity in the great majority of subpopulations studied. Australia-wide, video-linked consultations are also distributed with gross inequity, with a concentration index of 0.356 in the final study period. The effect of this upon overall inequity was to cancel out the reduction of inequity resulting from the reduction of face-to face appointments.ConclusionAustralian subsidized video-linked psychiatry consultations have been distributed with gross inequity and have been a significant exacerbator of the overall inequity of psychiatric service provision. Future policy decisions wishing to reduce this inequity should take care to reduce the risk posed by expanding telepsychiatry.
Project description:Dental clinics were suspected to be a hotspot for nosocomial transmission of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), yet there has been no clear recommendation about emergency dental care and appropriate personal protective equipment during pandemics. In this paper, we aim to summarize recommendations for (i) patient risk assessment, (ii) patient triage, and (iii) measures to prevent infection of health professionals and nosocomial transmission in dental clinics. The available evidence was collected by performing searches on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. We reviewed papers on COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), influenza, and related respiratory viral diseases. Legal and ethical frameworks, as well as international (e.g., World Health Organization (WHO)) and national (e.g., public health institutes, dental associations) guidelines were screened to summarize recommendations related to dental emergency care. To assess the patient risk, a questionnaire was developed to classify patients at unknown, high, and very high risk. Patient triage recommendations were summarized in a flow chart that graded the emergency level of treatments (i.e., urgent, as soon as possible, and postpone). Measures to prevent disease transmission based on current evidence were grouped for dental health professionals, dental clinics, and patients. The present recommendations may support health professionals implement preventative measures during the pandemic.
Project description:BackgroundDuring major pandemics such as COVID-19, the fear of being infected, uncertain prognoses, and the imposition of restrictions may result in greater odds of emotional and psychological distress. Hence, the present study examines the predictors of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada, and how they differ by gender.MethodsData of 2,756 adults aged 18 years and above from a cross-sectional online survey conducted between July and October 2020 was used for this study. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was carried out. The results were presented as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with their respective confidence interval (CI).ResultsLower odds of psychological distress were found among males compared to females and among individuals aged 45-64 or 65-84 years compared to those aged 18-44. The odds of psychological distress decreased with a rise in income, with individuals whose annual income was greater than or equal to $100,000 being less likely to experience psychological distress compared to those whose income was less than $20,000. The odds of psychological distress were higher among residents of Ontario compared to residents of Quebec. Similarly, the odds of psychological distress were higher among individuals who reported experiencing COVID-19 symptoms compared to those who did not report any COVID-19 symptoms. The disaggregated results by gender showed that age, province, and self-reported COVID-19 symptoms had significant associations with psychological distress in both males and females, but these effects were more pronounced among females compared to males. In addition, income was negatively associated with psychological distress for both males and females, with this effect being stronger among males.ConclusionFive exposure variables (gender, age, province, experiencing COVID-19 symptoms, and total annual income in 2019) significantly predicted the likelihood of reporting psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. Clearly, there is an imminent need to provide mental health support services to vulnerable groups. Additionally, interventions and policies aimed at combating psychological distress during pandemics such as COVID-19 should be gender specific.
Project description:IntroductionMany Canadians report decreased mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic, and concerns have been raised about possible increases in suicide. This study investigates the pandemic's potential impact on adults' suicide ideation.MethodsWe compared self-reported suicide ideation in 2020 versus 2019 by analyzing data from the Survey on COVID-19 and Mental Health (11 September to 4 December 2020) and the 2019 Canadian Community Health Survey. Logistic regression was conducted to determine which populations were at higher risk of suicide ideation during the pandemic.ResultsThe percentage of adults reporting suicide ideation since the pandemic began (2.44%) was not significantly different from the percentage reporting suicide ideation in the past 12 months in 2019 (2.73%). Significant differences in the prevalence of recent suicide ideation in 2020 versus 2019 also tended to be absent in the numerous sociodemographic groups we examined. Risk factors of reporting suicide ideation during the pandemic included being under 65 years, Canadian-born or a frontline worker; reporting pandemic-related income/job loss or loneliness/isolation; experiencing a lifetime highly stressful/traumatic event; and having lower household income and educational attainment.ConclusionEvidence of changes in suicide ideation due to the pandemic were generally not observed in this research. Continued surveillance of suicide and risk/protective factors is needed to inform suicide prevention efforts.
Project description:US racial and ethnic minorities have well-established elevated rates of comorbidities, which, compounded with healthcare access inequity, often lead to worse health outcomes. In the current COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to understand existing disparities in minority groups' critical care outcomes and mechanisms behind these-topics that have yet to be well-explored. Assess for disparities in racial and ethnic minority groups' COVID-19 critical care outcomes. Retrospective cohort study. A total of 2125 adult patients who tested positive for COVID-19 via RT-PCR between March and December 2020 and required ICU admission at the Cleveland Clinic Hospital Systems were included. Primary outcomes were mortality and hospital length of stay. Cohort-wide analysis and subgroup analyses by pandemic wave were performed. Multivariable logistic regression models were built to study the associations between mortality and covariates. While crude mortality was increased in White as compared to Black patients (37.5% vs. 30.5%, respectively; p = 0.002), no significant differences were appraised after adjustment or across pandemic waves. Although median hospital length of stay was comparable between these groups, ICU stay was significantly different (4.4 vs. 3.4, p = 0.003). Mortality and median hospital and ICU length of stay did not differ significantly between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients. Neither race nor ethnicity was associated with mortality due to COVID-19, although APACHE score, CKD, malignant neoplasms, antibiotic use, vasopressor requirement, and age were. We found no significant differences in mortality or hospital length of stay between different races and ethnicities. In a pandemic-influenced critical care setting that operated outside conditions of ICU strain and implemented standardized protocol enabling equitable resource distribution, disparities in outcomes often seen among racial and ethnic minority groups were successfully mitigated.
Project description:To understand and analyse the global impact of COVID-19 on outpatient services, inpatient care, elective surgery, and perioperative colorectal cancer care, a DElayed COloRectal cancer surgery (DECOR-19) survey was conducted in collaboration with numerous international colorectal societies with the objective of obtaining several learning points from the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on our colorectal cancer patients which will assist us in the ongoing management of our colorectal cancer patients and to provide us safe oncological pathways for future outbreaks.