RESUMEN
Introduction The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted all aspects of clinical practice. A district general hospital's surgical department identified that ward rounds based on a paper-based handover system did not adhere to good COVID-19 pandemic infection control measures, including social distancing, reduction of footfall, and reducing contact events during documentation. Surgical E-Handover was introduced as a quality improvement project focussing on increasing efficiency and improving patient safety and compliance with COVID-19 social distancing measures. Other objectives were to reduce the risk of information governance breaches. During the COVID pandemic, there was a significant investment in digital technology, which supported rapid advancement in the use of electronic healthcare solutions to deliver new ways of working. We used the opportunity of the emergency situation to disrupt existing work patterns and introduce surgical E-Handover. Methods A quality improvement team of stakeholders was assembled, and a project to introduce E-Handover was carried out using the trust quality improvement methodology aligned to the Institute of Healthcare Improvement (IHI). Questionnaires were sent out pre- and post-implementation to evaluate the impact of using E-Handover during ward rounds. Results The efficiency of ward rounds was improved and improving compliance with COVID 19 social distancing measures was highly successful. These outcomes were achieved by reducing footfall during ward rounds, as key clinical information was available at the bedside (p<0.001). Doctors spent less time in crowded clinical multi-disciplinary team (MDT) rooms, and the integrated paper healthcare records were not accessed by multiple staff members simultaneously. The implementation of the E-Handover improved the safety and efficiency of the surgical department, particularly with reference to potential information governance breaches (p<0.001). Conclusion Surgical E-Handover, as compared to a printed patient list, significantly improved clinical efficiency and adherence to COVID-19 social distancing measures. E-Handover should be routinely used in surgical ward rounds.
RESUMEN
Introduction The global COVID-19 pandemic had a deleterious effect upon elective and emergency surgery. Focus of patient care was directed to emergency services. Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Northern Ireland guidelines advised a trend towards conservative management. Traditional surgical intervention was reserved only for selected cases only. We evaluated our emergency practice over a four-week period during the first peak of COVID-19. Methods A retrospective single-centre analysis was performed of consecutive patients seen by the emergency general and vascular surgery on-call team in a District General Hospital over a four-week period (30 March 2020-26 April 2020). Primary outcome was 30-day COVID-19 mortality. Secondary outcomes were 30-day complications, readmission rate and non-COVID-19-related mortality. Adherence to intercollegiate guidelines was also assessed. Results A total of 184 patients were assessed during the period. The median age was 55 years (interquartile range 34-75), with a male:female ratio of 1:0.7. Thirty-day COVID-19- and non-COVID-19-related mortalities were 3% and 8%, respectively. Thirteen percent of patients developed complications and 9% represented to the emergency department within 30 days. Conservative management was initially employed in 78% of patients. This had success rates in appendicitis and cholecystitis of 72% and 75%, respectively. A CT thorax was included in 89% having a CT abdomen and pelvis. Thirty-eight percent had a COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) swab test performed throughout the study period. Fifty-two percent of individuals who underwent emergency surgery had a swab performed prior to operative intervention. Conclusions Conservative management seems to be reasonably effective and may re-shape the way we treat a proportion of surgical pathologies in the future. Further long-term data are required in order to evaluate this. A paucity of PCR testing was due to nationwide capacity shortcomings. This must be addressed in future peaks with rapid testing in order to triage patients to the appropriate setting.
RESUMEN
Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the dynamics of healthcare, and the elective surgical consent process has also evolved. The Royal College of Surgeons of England published guidance on consent during COVID-19. Through this study, we aimed to assess our local consent adherence to these guidelines on the resumption of elective activity after the first wave of COVID-19. Methods This prospective review of consecutive elective surgical consent forms was conducted from 20 July 2020 to 16 August 2020 at the Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, England. The primary outcome was evidence of COVID-19 risk documentation on the consent forms. Results A total of 116 patients' consent forms were reviewed. Most patients were American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade 2 (n=70; 60.34%). Only 25 consent forms (21.55%) had COVID -19 and its associated risks documented, with registrars being the most compliant (19/46; 41.3%) followed by consultants (6/51; 11.7%). With regards to the surgical sub-specialities, general surgery, orthopaedics and ENT had the highest compliance with the guidance. Conclusions As the elective activity resumes, peri-operative risks of COVID-19 should be weighted in during the informed consent process, as mentioned in the latest international guidelines on consent to avoid litigation and negligence claims.