Severe arterial thromboembolism in patients with Covid-19.

INTRODUCTION: The novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged early December 2019 and was recently confirmed by the World Health Organization (WHO) to be a public health emergency of international concern. Earlier reports have shown coagulopathy in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). MAIN SYMPTOMS AND IMPORTANT CLINICAL FINDINGS: We present four critically ill Covid-19 patients, who were admitted to our hospital. They were treated with supportive care, oral chloroquine, and standard 2500 or 5000 International Units (IU) of dalteparine subcutaneously once daily. Two patients died during the course of their stay as a consequence of severe large vessel arterial thromboembolism. The other two patients survived but symptoms of paralysis and aphasia persisted after cerebral ischemia due to large vessel arterial thromboembolism. Patients showed no signs of overt disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) in their laboratory analysis. CONCLUSION: This case series suggest that even in absence of overt DIC, arterial thromboembolic complications occur in critically ill patients with Covid-19. Further studies are needed to determine which parameters are useful in monitoring coagulopathy and which dose of anti-thrombotic therapy in Covid-19 patients is adequate, even when overt DIC is not present.

Diagnosing internal herniation after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: usefulness of systematically reviewing CT scans using ten signs.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if systematically reviewing CT scans using ten signs leads to a better accuracy in diagnosing internal herniation (IH), compared to the original report. Also, the difference in accuracy was analysed between experience levels. METHODS: Patients were retrospectively included if they had undergone laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery between 2011 and 2014, and if additional radiological examination was performed for suspected IH between 2011 and 2016. Out of 1475 patients who had undergone laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery, 183 patients had one or more additional radiological examinations. A total of 245 CT scans were performed. All were reassessed by an abdominal radiologist, a radiology resident and intern. Assessment was done using ten signs from previous literature. Overall suspicion of IH was graded using a 5-point Likert scale. Accuracy was calculated using two-way contingency tables. Interobserver agreement was calculated using Fleiss' kappa. RESULTS: After 70 reoperations an IH was diagnosed in 48.6% (34/70). There was an increase in specificity for diagnosing IH with reoperation as reference from 52.8% (19/36; 95% CI 35.7-69.2%) in the original report to 86.1% (31/36; 95% CI 74.8-97.4%) for the radiologist (p = 0.002), 77.8% (28/36; 95% CI 64.2-91.4%) for the resident (p = 0.026) and 77.8% (28/36; 95% CI 64.2-91.4%) for the intern (p = 0.026). Interobserver agreement was good. CONCLUSIONS: Systematically reviewing CT scans using a list of ten CT signs can improve specificity and thereby reduce unnecessary reoperations, especially in a high pre-test probability population. The tool can be easily taught to less experienced readers. KEY POINTS: • Computed tomography is useful to diagnose internal herniation(IH) after gastric bypass surgery • Ten signs are described to improve CT diagnosis of IH • Systematically reviewing CT scans improves specificity • There is no difference in experience levels when using these ten signs.

The Correlation Between a Numerical Rating Scale of Patient Satisfaction With Current Management of an Upper Extremity Disorder and a General Measure of Satisfaction With the Medical Visit.

Background: Patient satisfaction is used as an indicator of quality of care, but the measures currently available are lengthy and cumbersome and may not be feasible in orthopedic surgical practices. We set out to assess the relationship between the Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale (MISS-21) and a numerical rating scale (NRS) of patient satisfaction with current management of an orthopedic upper extremity condition. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 86 patients from the practices of 2 hand surgeons were included during an initial or follow-up visit. Questionnaires assessing demographics, upper extremity specific disability, pain during rest and activity, satisfaction with the medical visits (MISS-21), and satisfaction with current management of an orthopedic upper extremity condition (NRS satisfaction) were completed. Results: Eighty-six patients completed all questionnaires. A small correlation of .21 (P = .050) was found between the MISS-21 and the NRS satisfaction. In bivariate analysis, NRS pain at rest and during activity had small correlations with the MISS-21 (-.29, P = .05 and -.23, P = .034) and with NRS satisfaction (-.27, P = .011 and -0.27, P = 0.012). Quick Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) had a small correlation with NRS satisfaction (-0.023, P ≤ 0.001), but did not correlate with MISS-21. Conclusions: Although there is small overlap about the 2 satisfaction measures, a complex patient satisfaction questionnaire consisting of multiple facets of patient satisfaction like MISS-21 is not replaceable by 1 simple NRS patient satisfaction question.

What Is the Most Useful Questionnaire for Measurement of Coping Strategies in Response to Nociception?

BACKGROUND: There are several measures of coping strategies in response to nociception. These measures all correlate highly both with each other and with symptom intensity and magnitude of disability in patients with upper limb illness. This study aims to determine if distinct measures of coping strategies in response to nociception address the same underlying aspect of human illness behavior. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Our primary study question was: is there one common aspect of human illness behavior measured by (1) the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS); (2) the Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale (PIPS); (3) the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) Computer Adaptive Test (CAT); and (4) the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)? Secondarily, we aimed to determine which of the four questionnaires is most psychometrically sound. We measured correlations among questionnaires, coverage, reliability, completion time, and collinearity of these questionnaires when entered together in a multivariable model with the shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) upper extremity disability questionnaire. METHODS: In this prospective study, 138 consecutive new or followup English-speaking patients aged 18 years or older presenting to a tertiary care referral center with traumatic and nontraumatic upper extremity conditions were invited to participate between March and May 2014. One hundred thirty-four (97%) patients agreed to participate and completed the four questionnaires in random order before their visit with the physician. We used exploratory factor analysis to assess whether there was a single common trait-an underlying aspect of human illness behavior-measured by these questionnaires. Interquestionnaire correlation was assessed using Spearman rank correlation coefficients; coverage by assessing floor and ceiling effect (proportion of scores at lower and upper limit); reliability by Cronbach's alpha measure of internal consistency; completion time in seconds using Kruskal-Wallis analysis; and collinearity statistics through a regression model with QuickDASH. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis identified a common trait measured by these four measures-coping strategies in response to nociception-indicated by a substantial correlation of every individual questionnaire with the underlying trait (PCS: 0.74, PIPS: 0.84, PROMIS-PI: 0.83, PSEQ: -0.86). All interquestionnaire correlations were also large to substantial and were highest for PROMIS-PI with PSEQ (rho = -0.84, p < 0.001) and lowest for PROMIS-PI with PCS (rho = 0.67, p < 0.001). Internal consistencies were high (PCS: 0.93, PIPS: 0.88, PSEQ: 0.92, and not determined for the PROMIS-PI as a result of its CAT administration). PROMIS-PI was the quickest to complete (30 seconds [interquartile range, 24-44]) compared with the others (PCS: 91 seconds [66-122], p < 0.001; PIPS: 105 seconds [82-141], p < 0.001; PSEQ: 78 seconds [60-101], p < 0.001). The four coping questionnaires had a low partial r(2) and a relatively high variation inflation factor, indicating multicollinearity. PROMIS-PI was found to have the strongest correlation with QuickDASH (ß coefficient: 0.63; standard error: 0.10; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that the four widely used measures of coping strategies in response to nociception address a single common aspect of human illness behavior, which negatively impacts upper extremity disability. Future studies assessing functional outcome should incorporate a measure of human illness behavior as it strongly relates to disability. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given that all of these measures address the same important aspect of human illness behavior, we recommend the PROMIS-PI CAT as the most efficient measure.