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.

Rehabilitation outcomes of survivors of cardiac arrest admitted to ICUs in Australia and New Zealand (ROSC ANZ): A data linkage study.

INTRODUCTION: Rehabilitation outcomes in cardiac arrest survivors are largely unknown, with no data comparing out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrests (IHCA). This study aimed to describe and compare inpatient rehabilitation outcomes in these patients who were admitted from intensive care units (ICU). METHODS: A retrospective linkage and analysis of cardiac arrest patients in the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database and the Australasian Rehabilitation Outcomes Centre inpatient dataset discharged to inpatient rehabilitation between January 2017 and June 2018. Primary outcome was the functional improvement during rehabilitation (difference between the Functional Independence Measurement (FIM) score on admission and discharge). Multivariate regression analyses were performed to determine factors associated with functional improvement. RESULTS: In the 240 (84 OHCA and 156 IHCA) patients included, the median length of inpatient rehabilitation was 15 days [1st-3rd quartile (Q1-Q3): 9-24]. OHCA patients were more likely to be admitted to rehabilitation for neurological issues (41.7%) and IHCA for medical reasons (51.9%). Median (Q1-Q3) change in total FIM scores was similar between the two groups (24.5[10-37]) vs 21[11-31], adjusted p = 0.20), with most of the FIM change seen in the motor items, and this was only associated with a lower admission FIM score. The majority of OHCA and IHCA patients were discharged home (91.5% and 89.7%, respectively), although with an increased need for a carer at home compared to baseline (27.2% to 55.6%). CONCLUSION: Patients discharged from ICU following OHCA and IHCA achieved reasonable and similar functional improvement during inpatient rehabilitation.

Description of the effect of patient flow, junior doctor supervision and pandemic preparation on the ability of emergency physicians to provide direct patient care.

Objective A pilot study to: (1) describe the ability of emergency physicians to provide primary consults at an Australian, major metropolitan, adult emergency department (ED) during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared with historical performance; and (2) to identify the effect of system and process factors on productivity. Methods A retrospective cross-sectional description of shifts worked between 1 and 29 February 2020, while physicians were carrying out their usual supervision, flow and problem-solving duties, as well as undertaking additional COVID-19 preparation, was documented. Effect of supervisory load, years of Australian registration and departmental flow factors were evaluated. Descriptive statistical methods were used and regression analyses were performed. Results A total of 188 shifts were analysed. Productivity was 4.07 patients per 9.5-h shift (95% CI 3.56-4.58) or 0.43 patients per h, representing a 48.5% reduction from previously published data (P<0.0001). Working in a shift outside of the resuscitation area or working a day shift was associated with a reduction in individual patient load. There was a 2.2% (95% CI: 1.1-3.4, P<0.001) decrease in productivity with each year after obtaining Australian medical registration. There was a 10.6% (95% CI: 5.4-15.6, P<0.001) decrease in productivity for each junior physician supervised. Bed access had no statistically significant effect on productivity. Conclusions Emergency physicians undertake multiple duties. Their ability to manage their own patients varies depending on multiple ED operational factors, particularly their supervisory load. COVID-19 preparations reduced their ability to see their own patients by half. What is known about the topic? An understanding of emergency physician productivity is essential in planning clinical operations. Medical productivity, however, is challenging to define, and is controversial to measure. Although baseline data exist, few studies examine the effect of patient flow and supervision requirements on the emergency physician's ability to perform primary consults. No studies describe these metrics during COVID-19. What does this paper add? This pilot study provides a novel cross-sectional description of the effect of COVID-19 preparations on the ability of emergency physicians to provide direct patient care. It also examines the effect of selected system and process factors in a physician's ability to complete primary consults. What are the implications for practitioners? When managing an emergency medical workforce, the contribution of emergency physicians to the number of patients requiring consults should take into account the high volume of alternative duties required. Increasing alternative duties can decrease primary provider tasks that can be completed. COVID-19 pandemic preparation has significantly reduced the ability of emergency physicians to manage their own patients.