Perioperative Outcomes After Preoperative Epidural Analgesia in Patients with Hip Fracture Undergoing Surgical Repair: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness and safety of epidural analgesia in the presurgical period in patients with hip fracture undergoing surgical repair. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: The study protocol was registered with the PROSPERO systematic reviews registry with the (identifier CRD42019140396). Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing preoperative epidural analgesia with other forms of pain management in patients with a hip fracture. The primary outcomes included perioperative cardiac events and death. Pain, noncardiac complications, and adverse effects were also examined as secondary outcomes. The heterogeneity of the included studies was assessed with the I2 statistic, and a random-effects meta-analysis was conducted once sufficient homogeneity was demonstrated. RESULTS: Four studies, which included a total of 221 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Preoperative epidural analgesia resulted in fewer cardiac events, which was a reported outcome in two included studies (relative risk 0.30; 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.63; I2=0%). Preoperative epidural analgesia was also associated with a decreased perioperative mortality rate in a meta-analysis of two studies (relative risk 0.13; 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.98; I2 = 0%). Pain was not pooled because of variability in assessment methods, but preoperative epidural analgesia was associated with reduced pain in all four studies. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative epidural analgesia for hip fracture may reduce perioperative cardiac events and deaths, but the number of included studies in this systematic review was low. More research should be done to determine the benefit of early epidural analgesia for patients with hip fracture.

Provider attitudes and satisfaction with rapid preoperative point-of-care COVID-19 testing using ID NOW™.

PURPOSE: Healthcare workers have experienced high levels of anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly when caring for patients with unknown infection status. We trialled rapid preoperative point-of-care COVID-19 testing using the Abbott ID NOW™ COVID-19 for clinical validation in an urgent surgical population at a single centre in British Columbia, Canada. Here, we sought to determine the opinions and beliefs of operating room (OR) staff on the usefulness and effectiveness of point-of-care tests on workflow and wellbeing in the OR. METHODS: This descriptive study used a mixed-methods cross-sectional survey of all OR staff (nurses, anesthesiologists, surgeons, and ancillary staff) at a single centre after using the ID NOW for three months. Outcomes of interest included healthcare worker satisfaction with the ID NOW, effects on OR workflow, and worries about COVID-19 transmission. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 56% (n = 133), and was highest among anesthesiologists (100%, n = 38). Respondents were satisfied with the performance of the ID NOW for rapid COVID-19 testing in preoperative patients, giving it a mean (standard deviation [SD]) rate of 4.4 [1.4] on a five-point scale. Most (115/128, 90%) recommended continued use of the ID NOW on asymptomatic patients while there are active cases of COVID-19 in the community. Respondents felt that preoperative COVID-19 testing with the ID NOW made the OR safer for staff (mean [SD] rate, 4.2 [0.8]) and patients (mean [SD] rate, 4.0 [0.9]). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to maintain the physical and mental wellbeing of hospital staff. Rapid point-of-care testing increased the sense of workplace safety, improved morale, and reduced worry associated with COVID-19 without excessive disruption of OR workflow.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les travailleurs de la santé ont connu des niveaux élevés d'anxiété au cours de la pandémie de COVID-19, en particulier lorsqu'ils prenaient soin de patients dont le statut infectieux était inconnu. Nous avons testé le dépistage préopératoire rapide de la COVID-19 au point de service avec le dispositif ID NOW™ COVID-19 d'Abbott pour validation clinique auprès d'une population devant bénéficier de chirurgie urgente dans un seul centre en Colombie-Britannique, au Canada. Notre objectif était ici de déterminer les opinions et les croyances du personnel de la salle d'opération (SOP) quant à l'utilité et à l'efficacité des tests au point de service en matière de flux de travail et de bien-être en salle d'opération. MéTHODE: Cette étude descriptive a utilisé un sondage transversal à méthodes mixtes auprès de tout le personnel de la SOP (infirmières, anesthésiologistes, chirurgiens et personnel auxiliaire) dans un seul centre après avoir utilisé le système ID NOW pendant trois mois. Les issues de l'étude comprenaient la satisfaction des travailleurs de la santé à l'égard de ID NOW, les effets sur le flux de travail de la SOP et les inquiétudes concernant la transmission de la COVID-19. RéSULTATS: Le taux de réponse global a été de 56 % (n = 133), et était le plus élevé chez les anesthésiologistes (100 %, n = 38). Les répondants étaient satisfaits de la performance de ID NOW pour le dépistage rapide de la COVID-19 chez les patients préopératoires, lui accordant une note moyenne (écart type [ÉT]) de 4,4 [1,4] sur une échelle à cinq points. La plupart (115/128, 90 %) ont recommandé de continuer à utiliser ID NOW avec les patients asymptomatiques tant qu'il y a des cas actifs de COVID-19 dans la communauté. Les répondants étaient d'avis que le dépistage préopératoire de la COVID-19 avec ID NOW rendait la SOP plus sécuritaire pour le personnel (note moyenne [ÉT], 4,2 [0,8]) et les patients (note moyenne [ÉT], 4,0 [0,9]). CONCLUSION: Pendant la pandémie de COVID-19, il est important de maintenir le bien-être physique et mental du personnel hospitalier. Le dépistage rapide au point de service a accru le sentiment de sécurité au travail, amélioré le moral et réduit l'inquiétude associée à la COVID-19, sans perturbation excessive du flux de travail de la SOP.

Asymptomatic carriage and transmission of SARS-CoV-2: What do we know?

PURPOSE: Risk to healthcare workers treating asymptomatic patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the operating room depends on multiple factors. This review examines the evidence for asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic carriage of SARS-CoV-2, the risk of transmission from asymptomatic patients, and the specific risks associated with aerosol-generating procedures. Protective measures, such as minimization of aerosols and use of personal protective equipment in the setting of treating asymptomatic patients, are also reviewed. SOURCE: We examined the published literature as well as Societal guidelines. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: There is evidence that a proportion of those infected with SARS-CoV-2 have detectable viral loads prior to exhibiting symptoms, or without ever developing symptoms. The degree of risk of transmission from asymptomatic patients to healthcare providers will depend on the prevalence of disease in the population, which is difficult to assess without widespread population screening. Aerosol-generating procedures increase the odds of viral transmission from infected symptomatic patients to healthcare providers, but transmission from asymptomatic patients has not been reported. Techniques to minimize aerosolization and appropriate personal protective equipment may help reduce the risk to healthcare workers in the operating room. Some societal guidelines recommend the use of airborne precautions during aerosol-generating procedures on asymptomatic patients during the coronavirus disease pandemic, although evidence supporting this practice is limited. CONCLUSION: Viral transmission from patients exhibiting no symptoms in the operating room is plausible and efforts to reduce risk to healthcare providers include reducing aerosolization and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment, the feasibility of which will vary based on geographic risk and equipment availability.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Le risque encouru par les travailleurs de la santé traitant des patients asymptomatiques infectés par le syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère du coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) en salle d'opération dépend de plusieurs facteurs. Ce compte rendu examine les données probantes concernant la présence asymptomatique ou pré-symptomatique du SARS-CoV-2, le risque de transmission des patients asymptomatiques, et les risques spécifiques associés aux interventions générant des aérosols. Nous passons également en revue différentes mesures de protection, telles que la minimisation des aérosols et l'utilisation d'équipements de protection individuelle, dans un contexte de traitement de patients asymptomatiques. SOURCE: Nous avons examiné la littérature publiée ainsi que les directives sociétales. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Selon certaines données probantes, une proportion des personnes infectées par le SARS-CoV-2 possèdent des charges virales détectables avant la présence de symptômes, voire même sans manifestation de symptômes. Le degré de risque de transmission des patients asymptomatiques aux travailleurs de la santé dépendra de la prévalence de la maladie dans la population, une donnée difficile à évaluer sans dépistage généralisé. Les interventions générant des aérosols augmentent le risque de transmission virale des patients symptomatiques infectés aux travailleurs de la santé, mais la transmission de patients asymptomatiques n'a pas été rapportée. Les techniques visant à minimiser l'aérosolisation et les équipements de protection individuelle adaptés pourraient être utiles pour réduire le risque des travailleurs de la santé en salle d'opération. Certaines directives régionales et nationales recommandent le recours à des précautions contre la transmission par voie aérienne durant les interventions générant des aérosols pratiquées sur des patients asymptomatiques pendant la pandémie de coronavirus, bien que les données probantes appuyant cette pratique soient limitées. CONCLUSION: La transmission virale des patients asymptomatiques en salle d'opération est plausible et les efforts visant à réduire le risque pour les travailleurs de la santé comprennent la réduction de l'aérosolisation et le port d'équipements de protection individuelle adaptés, deux mesures dont la faisabilité variera en fonction du risque géographique et de la disponibilité des équipements.

The epidemiology of children hospitalized with herpes zoster in Canada: Immunization Monitoring Program, Active (IMPACT), 1991-2005.

BACKGROUND: Varicella zoster virus causes varicella (chickenpox) and can reactivate to cause herpes zoster (HZ). In Canada, live attenuated varicella vaccine was recommended for routine use among healthy susceptible children age 1 year and older, in 1999. Varicella vaccine has had a profound impact on the incidence of varicella; however the impact on HZ remains uncertain. METHODS: Surveillance for HZ admissions was conducted by the Immunization Monitoring Program, Active (IMPACT) surveillance network comprising 12 centers representing over 90% of pediatric tertiary care beds in Canada. Active surveillance for HZ was undertaken in 1991-1996 and reintroduced in 1999. A clinical diagnosis was accepted, with or without laboratory confirmation. For each case, a detailed case report form was completed. RESULTS: In total, 648 children were admitted with HZ; 342 (52.8%) were boys and the mean age was 9.9 +/- 4.4 years. Five hundred seventy-seven (89.0%) were immunocompromised and 71 immunocompetent (10.8%). Five hundred seventy-one (88.1%) had a history of varicella zoster virus infection. Varicella vaccination was documented in 4 children before admission. Most (85.5%) presented with localized disease. Immunocompetent children were more likely than immunocompromised children to be hospitalized with ophthalmic disease (odds ratio 5.1, P < 0.001) or with at least 1 complication (odds ratio 3.0, P < 0.001). Only 1 death was attributable to HZ. CONCLUSIONS: Immunocompromised children represented the overwhelming majority of IMPACT hospitalized cases. Complications directly resulting from HZ were common in immunocompetent children. As varicella vaccine use becomes more widespread, the IMPACT network will continue to play an important role in monitoring the changing epidemiology of HZ in children.

Immunologic considerations for the timing of the booster dose of 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in young children.

BACKGROUND: The booster (fourth) dose of 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) is recommended to be given at 12-15 months but in Canada it better fits the national schedule at 18 months, prompting this comparison of the safety and immunogenicity of booster immunization at 15 or 18 months. METHODS: Children who had completed a study of primary PCV7 immunization (with final serology at 7-8 months of age) were enrolled at 12 months, bled and randomly assigned to receive a PCV7 booster at age 15 or 18 months, with serologic testing before and 4 weeks afterward. Adverse events were documented for 3 days postbooster. Antibody concentrations were measured for the 7 pneumococcal serotypes and Haemophilus influenzae type b at 7-8, 12, 15 or 18 months and after boosting. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-one children were boosted, 167 at 15 months and 164 at 18 months. Pneumococcal geometric mean antibody concentrations declined by 15 months to 23.4% of peak geometric mean concentrations at age 7-8 months and to 19.8% by 18 months. Spontaneous increases in 1 or more antibody concentrations were noted in 195 subjects (61.7%), most commonly with types 6B and 19F. Antibody responses to PCV7 were similarly brisk at 15 and 18 months. Mild injection-site redness and swelling were significantly more frequent at 15 than 18 months but no other differences in reactogenicity were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Residual antibody concentrations differed minimally between 15 and 18 months. Spontaneous antibody increases often occurred before boosting, possibly from colonization. PCV7 booster vaccination at 18 months appears to be safe and provides comparable immunogenicity to 15 months vaccination.

Participant-collected, mail-delivered oral fluid specimens can replace traditional serosurveys: a demonstration-of-feasibility survey of hepatitis A virus-specific antibodies in adults.

BACKGROUND: Although population-based serosurveys offer an optimal measure of cumulative infection rates, they are seldom performed due to high cost and complex logistics. Use of participant self-collected oral fluid as a diagnostic specimen and mail for specimen delivery has the potential of generating reliable, population-representative data at limited cost. METHODS: A survey of oral fluid HAV-specific immunoglobulin G (an indicator of past HAV infection) was undertaken in a provincially representative sample of 20-39 year olds as a pilot study. A provincial administrative database served as the sampling frame. Potential participants were invited by mail to collect oral fluid and complete a questionnaire at home and return both by mail. Additional telephone prompting was directed at slow responders. Oral fluid was tested using a validated ELISA. RESULTS: From among 2,448 potential participants, contact by mail or telephone was made with 1,009 eligible subjects; 59% (585) participated. Materials withstood mailing and the quality of self-collected specimens was excellent. A positive test result was found in 22.1% overall and in 15.7% of self-reported non-vaccinated subjects. Among Canadian-born, non-vaccinated individuals, the positive test rate increased progressively from 1.2% (95% CI: 0-6.3) in 20-24 year olds to 16.4% (95% CI: 9.5-23.3) in 35-39 year olds. Antibody prevalence was higher among Canadian-born non-immunized 20-29 year olds who reported travel to developing countries (33.3%, 95% CI: 11.6-55.1) than in non-travellers (2.5%, 95% CI: 0.7-6.2). CONCLUSIONS: Mail-based population surveys of infection markers in oral fluid are feasible provided an appropriate sampling frame is used. This survey revealed a high anti-HAV antibody prevalence in young Canadian adults, increasing with age and travel to developing countries.

Effectiveness of installing overhead ceiling lifts. Reducing musculoskeletal injuries in an extended care hospital unit.

The effectiveness of replacing floor lifts with mechanical ceiling lifts was evaluated in the extended care unit of a British Columbia hospital. Sixty-five ceiling lifts were installed between April and August 1998. Injury data were abstracted from injury reports for all staff musculoskeletal injuries (MSI) occurring in the unit during a 3 year period prior to installation and a 1.5 year follow up period. Descriptive statistics were calculated for injuries pre- versus post-installation. Rates were calculated as number of injuries per 100,000 worked hours. Rates for three pre- and three post-installation intervals were compared using Poisson regression. The rate of MSI caused by lifting/transferring patients was significantly reduced (58% reduction, p = .011) after installation, but rates of all MSI and MSI caused by repositioning did not statistically decline (p > .05). Further follow up is necessary to determine whether or not ceiling lifts also can be effective for decreasing injuries related to repositioning patients on this unit.