Retina Procedure Volume Changes during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Patel S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9892319 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Retina Procedure Volume Changes during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Patel Shriji S Finn Avni A Kim Stephen S Sternberg Paul P
Ophthalmology. Retina 20230202 6
Similar Datasets
Project description:The main objective of this study is to offer and evaluate an interim triage approach for patients waiting for surveillance colonoscopies. This will reduce the waiting period and the psychological stressors for our patients and from a scientific point of view allow us to compare the yield of findings for each approach.
| 2383510 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1055 | biostudies-other
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.
| 2346925 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:ImportanceDisruptions in cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic led to widespread deferrals and cancellations, creating a surgical backlog that presents a challenge for health care institutions moving into the recovery phase of the pandemic.ObjectiveTo describe patterns in surgical volume and postoperative length of stay for major urologic cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study identified 24 001 patients 18 years or older from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council database with kidney cancer, prostate cancer, or bladder cancer who received a radical nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy, radical prostatectomy, or radical cystectomy between the first quarter (Q1) of 2016 and Q2 of 2021. Postoperative length of stay and adjusted surgical volumes were compared before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was adjusted surgical volume for radical and partial nephrectomy, radical prostatectomy, and radical cystectomy during the COVID-19 pandemic. The secondary outcome was postoperative length of stay.ResultsA total of 24 001 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.1 [9.4] years; 3522 women [15%], 19 845 White patients [83%], 17 896 living in urban areas [75%]) received major urologic cancer surgery between Q1 of 2016 and Q2 of 2021. Of these, 4896 radical nephrectomy, 3508 partial nephrectomy, 13 327 radical prostatectomy, and 2270 radical cystectomy surgical procedures were performed. There were no statistically significant differences in patient age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance status, urban or rural status, or Elixhauser Comorbidity Index scores between patients who received surgery before and patients who received surgery during the pandemic. For partial nephrectomy, a baseline of 168 surgeries per quarter decreased to 137 surgeries per quarter in Q2 and Q3 of 2020. For radical prostatectomy, a baseline of 644 surgeries per quarter decreased to 527 surgeries per quarter in Q2 and Q3 of 2020. However, the likelihood of receiving radical nephrectomy (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78-1.28), partial nephrectomy (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.77-1.27), radical prostatectomy (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.22-3.22), or radical cystectomy (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.31-1.53) was unchanged. Length of stay for partial nephrectomy decreased from baseline by a mean of 0.7 days (95% CI, -1.2 to -0.2 days) during the pandemic.Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study suggests that partial nephrectomy and radical prostatectomy surgical volume decreased during the peak waves of COVID-19, as did postoperative length of stay for partial nephrectomy.
| S-EPMC10130946 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesExperts hypothesized increased weight gain in children associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Our objective was to evaluate whether the rate of change of child body mass index (BMI) increased during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with prepandemic years.MethodsThe study population of 1996 children ages 2 to 19 years with at least 1 BMI measure before and during the COVID-19 pandemic was drawn from 38 pediatric cohorts across the United States participating in the Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes-wide cohort study. We modeled change in BMI using linear mixed models, adjusting for age, sex, race, ethnicity, maternal education, income, baseline BMI category, and type of BMI measure. Data collection and analysis were approved by the local institutional review board of each institution or by the central Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes institutional review board.ResultsBMI increased during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with previous years (0.24 higher annual gain in BMI during the pandemic compared with previous years, 95% confidence interval 0.02 to 0.45). Children with BMI in the obese range compared with the healthy weight range were at higher risk for excess BMI gain during the pandemic, whereas children in higher-income households were at decreased risk of BMI gain.ConclusionsOne effect of the COVID-19 pandemic is an increase in annual BMI gain during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the 3 previous years among children in our national cohort. This increased risk among US children may worsen a critical threat to public health and health equity.
| S-EPMC9444980 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7605199 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceStay-at-home orders, site closures, staffing shortages, and competing COVID-19 testing and treatment needs all potentially decreased primary care access and quality during the COVID-19 pandemic. These challenges may have especially affected federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), which serve patients with low income nationwide.ObjectiveTo examine changes in FQHCs' quality-of-care measures and visit volumes in 2020 to 2021 vs prepandemic.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used a census of US FQHCs to calculate changes in outcomes between 2016 and 2021 using generalized estimating equations.Main outcomes and measuresTwelve quality-of-care measures and 41 visit types based on diagnoses and services rendered, measured at the FQHC-year level.ResultsA total of 1037 FQHCs were included, representing 26.6 million patients (63% 18-64 years old; 56% female) in 2021. Despite upward trajectories for most measures prepandemic, the percentage of patients served by FQHCs receiving recommended care or achieving recommended clinical thresholds showed a statistically significant decrease between 2019 and 2020 for 10 of 12 quality measures. For example, declines were observed for cervical cancer screening (-3.8 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI, -4.3 to -3.2 pp), depression screening (-7.0 pp; 95% CI, -8.0 to -5.9 pp), and blood pressure control in patients with hypertension (-6.5 pp; 95% CI, -7.0 to -6.0 pp). By 2021, only 1 of these 10 measures returned to 2019 levels. From 2019 to 2020, 28 of 41 visit types showed a statistically significant decrease, including immunizations (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.73-0.78), oral examinations (IRR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.59-0.63), and supervision of infant or child health (IRR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.85-0.89); 11 of these 28 visits approximated or exceeded prepandemic rates by 2021, while 17 remained below prepandemic rates. Five visit types increased in 2020, including substance use disorder (IRR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.11), depression (IRR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.09), and anxiety (IRR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.14-1.19); all 5 continued to increase in 2021.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of US FQHCs, nearly all quality measures declined during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, with most declines persisting through 2021. Similarly, most visit types declined in 2020; 60% of these remained below prepandemic levels in 2021. By contrast, mental health and substance use visits increased in both years. The pandemic led to forgone care and likely exacerbated behavioral health needs. As such, FQHCs need sustained federal funding to expand service capacity, staffing, and patient outreach. Quality reporting and value-based care models must also adapt to the pandemic's influence on quality measures.
| S-EPMC10082403 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted delivery of healthcare, economic activity, and affected social interactions. Identifying and supporting those most affected by the pandemic is required. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of the pandemic on individuals with tinnitus and to identify mediating factors. Methods: This is a mixed-methods exploratory cross-sectional study, using data collected via an online survey from 3,103 individuals with tinnitus from 48 countries. The greatest representation was from North America (49%) and Europe (47%) and other countries were only marginally represented. Results: Although the study was aimed at those with pre-existing tinnitus, 7 individuals reported having COVID-19 initiated tinnitus. Having COVID-19 symptoms exacerbated tinnitus in 40% of respondents, made no change in 54%, and improved tinnitus in 6%. Other mediating factors such as the social and emotional consequences of the pandemic made pre-existing tinnitus more bothersome for 32% of the respondents, particularly for females and younger adults, better for 1%, and caused no change to tinnitus for 67%. Pre-existing tinnitus was significantly exacerbated for those self-isolating, experiencing loneliness, sleeping poorly, and with reduced levels of exercise. Increased depression, anxiety, irritability, and financial worries further significantly contributed to tinnitus being more bothersome during the pandemic period. Conclusions: These findings have implications for tinnitus management, because they highlight the diverse response both internal and external factors have on tinnitus levels. Clinical services should be mindful that tinnitus may be caused by contracting COVID-19 and pre-existing tinnitus may be exacerbated, although in the majority of respondents there was no change. Additional support should be offered where tinnitus severity has increased due to the health, social, and/or emotional effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Tinnitus may be more bothersome for those experiencing loneliness, having fewer social interactions, and who are more anxious or worried.
| S-EPMC7676491 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been accompanied by significant reductions in patient volumes for non-COVID-19-related conditions ranging from acute coronary syndrome to ischemic strokes to acute trauma. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient volumes for a broad range of orthopedic conditions remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with changes in patient volumes of 35 emergent (e.g. dislocations, open fractures), urgent (e.g. fractures), and nonurgent orthopedic conditions (e.g. osteoarthritis, sprains).MethodsA retrospective interrupted time-series analysis of patient volumes was conducted for 35 orthopedic conditions based on ICD-10 diagnosis codes. Patient hospitalizations and new problem visits were aggregated across two institutions in New York state, including one urban tertiary care orthopedic hospital, one urban academic medical center, and all state outpatient facilities affiliated with the orthopedic institution. Patient volumes in the COVID-19 peak period (03/2020-05/2020) and COVID-19 recovery period (06/2020-10/2020) were compared against pre-COVID-19 vol (01/2018-02/2020).ResultsOverall, 169,047 cases were included in the analysis across 35 conditions with 3775 emergent cases, 6376 urgent cases, and 158,896 nonurgent cases. During the COVID-19 peak period, patient caseloads for 1 out of 7 emergent conditions (p = 0.02) and 26 out of 28 urgent and nonurgent conditions (p < 0.05) were significantly reduced compared to the pre-COVID-19 period. During the COVID-19 recovery period, patient volumes in 3 out of 13 emergent and urgent conditions (p < 0.03) and 11 out of 22 nonurgent conditions (p < 0.04) were decreased compared to pre-COVID-19 vol.ConclusionsThis study found that the pandemic was associated with considerable changes in patient patterns for non-COVID-19 orthopedic conditions. The long-term effects of patient volume reductions on both patient outcomes and orthopedic health systems remain to be seen.Level of evidenceCohort study; level of evidence IV.
| S-EPMC8458105 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted healthcare delivery, including prenatal care. The study objective was to assess if timing of routine prenatal testing changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsRetrospective observational cohort study using claims data from a regional insurer (Highmark) and electronic health record data from two academic health systems (Penn Medicine and Yale New Haven) to compare prenatal testing timing in the pre-pandemic (03/10/2018-12/31/2018 and 03/10/2019-12/31/2019) and early COVID-19 pandemic (03/10/2020-12/31/2020) periods. Primary outcomes were second trimester fetal anatomy ultrasounds and gestational diabetes (GDM) testing. A secondary analysis examined first trimester ultrasounds.ResultsThe three datasets included 31,474 pregnant patients. Mean gestational age for second trimester anatomy ultrasounds increased from the pre-pandemic to COVID-19 period (Highmark 19.4 vs. 19.6 weeks; Penn: 20.1 vs. 20.4 weeks; Yale: 18.8 vs. 19.2 weeks, all p < 0.001). There was a detectable decrease in the proportion of patients who completed the anatomy survey <20 weeks' gestation across datasets, which did not persist at <23 weeks' gestation. There were no consistent changes in timing of GDM screening. There were significant reductions in the proportion of patients with first trimester ultrasounds in the academic institutions (Penn: 57.7% vs. 40.6% and Yale: 78.7% vs. 65.5%, both p < 0.001) but not Highmark. Findings were similar with multivariable adjustment.ConclusionWhile some prenatal testing happened later in pregnancy during the pandemic, pregnant patients continued to receive appropriately timed testing. Despite disruptions in care delivery, prenatal screening remained a priority for patients and providers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC9682111 | biostudies-literature