The impact of Victorian COVID-19 lockdowns on the presentation and management of acute appendicitis.

BACKGROUNDS: The COVID-19 pandemic presents ongoing challenges for healthcare. Stay at Home orders ('lockdowns') and community fears have been suggested to create reluctance to seek healthcare. We aimed to determine whether the rates of perforated appendicitis and negative appendicectomy have been affected by the pandemic, and to analyse the effect of lockdowns on the management of acute appendicitis in Victoria. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective audit of emergency appendicectomies performed under adult General Surgery units at Monash Health in Victoria from January 2019 to September 2021, including 242 days of lockdown. RESULTS: 2459 patients were included. Fewer patients had perforated appendicitis during the second lockdown (6.3% versus 10.7% baseline; p = 0.027). The rate of negative appendicectomy was reduced during the first lockdown (4.1% versus 14.9% baseline; p = 0.002) and during intervals between lockdown in 2021 (9.8%; p = 0.010). There was no difference in the rate of perforated appendicitis or negative appendicectomy at other times. Time to surgery and number of appendicectomies performed were also not significantly different. Fewer appendicectomies were performed after hours during lockdowns and in 2021 more generally compared to baseline (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The lower negative appendicectomy rate during the first lockdown may reflect increased pre-operative imaging or clinical observation for undifferentiated presentations. There was a reduction in perforated appendicitis during the second lockdown, and no significant difference at other times. Contrary to other studies, lockdowns associated with the COVID-19 pandemic may not create a reluctance to seek healthcare in all regions.

Cancer patients' perceptions of palliative care.

PURPOSE: Despite clear benefits of early integration of palliative care (PC) and oncology, concerns remain about negative perceptions of PC. Our aim was to explore current knowledge and perceptions of PC in cancer patients. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional survey. A 16-item questionnaire was distributed to all cancer patients (N = 103) upon admission to the oncology ward of an Australian tertiary academic hospital. Chi-squared test was used to examine for significant factors related to patients' perceptions. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients (93%) completed the questionnaire; 76% had metastatic cancer. We explored the following domains:Experience and knowledge: 76% had heard of PC; 21% had received PC. Self-rated PC knowledge was varied. Forty-five percent believed that PC was only associated with EOLC; those more likely to disagree had received PC services (p = 0.039).Integration of PC and oncology: Majority believed that they could receive oncology care (86%) and anti-cancer treatment (81%) whilst receiving PC. Those who had heard of PC and with better self-rated knowledge were more likely to believe that they could receive concurrent anti-cancer treatment (p = 0.005, p = 0.045, respectively).Feelings: 77% felt comforted with PC involvement; this was significantly associated with older age (p = 0.047) and understanding that oncology (p < 0.005) and anti-cancer treatment (p = 0.013) could continue. However, some felt frightened (40%) and hopeless (29%) about referral to PC. Fifty percent felt more comfortable with referral to 'supportive care' services (versus PC). CONCLUSIONS: Our survey demonstrates reasonable understanding and relatively positive feelings about PC, associated with experience and knowledge. Nonetheless, there is ongoing need for better patient and public education about PC.