From high volume to "zero" proctology: Italian experience in the COVID era

Use of telemedicine in the postoperative assessment of proctological patients: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Telemedicine is emerging as an easy way to communicate between patients and surgeons. Use of telemedicine increased during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. WhatsApp is one of the most common smartphone applications for user-friendly telemedicine. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient perception of health quality and positive outcomes using a diary sent by the patient to the surgeon via WhatsApp during the first post-discharge week after proctologic surgery.

METHODS

Ninety-eight patients discharged after proctologic surgery at the Israelite Hospital of Rome and the AOU Policlinico Umberto I of Rome in 1 January-31 December 2019 were divided into two groups: the WhatsApp group (group A), (n = 36) and the no WhatsApp group (group B) (n = 62). Group A patients received a protocol to follow for the day-by-day diary during the first post-discharge week and sending it by WhatsApp to the surgeon. Group B patients only received recommendations at discharge. The tool's usefulness was assessed by a questionnaire one month after the intervention.

RESULTS

The two groups were homogeneous for age, sex, schooling, employment, and proctologic pathology. Group A patients had less difficulty keeping a diary (p < 0.0001). Group A patients had the perception of better follow-up post-discharge (p = 0.002). The use of the diary sent by WhatsApp significantly improved the perception of positive post-intervention outcomes (p = 0.007). WhatsApp was the only independent predictor of perception of post-surgical positive outcomes (odds ratio = 4.06; 95% CI 1.35-12.24; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of WhatsApp in the post-discharge period improves the lifestyle quality of the patients and their perception of the safety and quality of care received.

Establishing a telemedicine program for interventional radiology: a study of patient opinion and experience

PURPOSE The COVID-19 pandemic forced healthcare officials to implement new policies, such as the use of virtual consultations over office-based medical appointments, to reduce the transmission of the virus. The purpose of this study is to quantitatively compare patients' experiences with virtual outpatient telemedicine encounters at a single academic institution in Interventional Radiology (IR) and in-person visits during the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS The TeleENT Satisfaction Questionnaire and the Medical Communication Competence Scale (MCCS) were used to survey patients' satisfaction with both in-person and virtual office visits. RESULTS Ninety respondents (38 in-person, 52 virtual) acknowledged numerous benefits of virtual visits versus in-person office visits including reductions in time, cost, and potential viral transmission risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. No statistically significant difference was noted, based on a Likert scale from 1 to 7, between in-person and virtual visits (all p > 0.05) for scheduling related factors. No statistically significant difference was noted in any of the MCCS subscales between the two cohorts in regards to medical information communication (all p > 0.05). A majority of patients with virtual encounters (82.7%) stated that it was easy to obtain an electronic device for use during the telemedicine visit, and 73.1% of patients felt that setting up the telemedicine encounter was easy. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates that telemedicine is an acceptable alternative to in-office appointments and could increase access to IR care outside of the traditional physician-patient interaction. With telemedicine visits, patients can communicate their concerns and obtain information from the doctor with noninferior communication compared to in-person visits.

The Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Healthcare Provision in Italy to non-COVID Patients: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Italy has been one of the countries most affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, and the regional healthcare system has had to quickly adapt its organization to meet the needs of infected patients. This has led to a drastic change in the routine management of non-communicable diseases with a potential long-term impact on patient health care. Therefore, we investigated the management of non-COVID-19 patients across all medical specialities in Italy.

METHODS

A PRISMA guideline-based systematic review of the literature was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, restricting the search to the main outbreak period in Italy (from February 20 to June 25 2020). We selected articles in English or Italian that detailed changes in the Italian hospital care for non-COVID-19 patients due to the pandemic. Our keywords included all medical specialities combined with our geographical focus (Italy) and COVID-19.

RESULTS

Of the 4643 potentially eligible studies identified by the search, 247 were included. A decrease in the management of emergencies in non-COVID patients was found together with an increase in mortality. Similarly, non-deferrable conditions met a tendency toward decreased diagnosis. All specialities have been affected by the re-organization of healthcare provision in the hub-and-spoke system and have benefited from telemedicine.

CONCLUSIONS

Our work highlights the changes in the Italian public healthcare system to tackle the developing health crisis due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings of our review may be useful to analyse future directions for the healthcare system in the case of new pandemic scenarios.

The Role of Telemedicine in Surgical Specialties During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review

Background

The objective of this study was to evaluate the current body of evidence on the use of telemedicine in surgical subspecialties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This was a scoping review conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). MEDLINE via Ovid, PubMed, and EMBASE were systematically searched for any reports discussing telemedicine use in surgery and surgical specialties during the first period (February 2020–August 8, 2020) and second 6-month period (August 9–March 4, 2021) of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

Of 466 articles screened through full text, 277 articles were included for possible qualitative and/or quantitative data synthesis. The majority of publications in the first 6 months were in orthopedic surgery, followed by general surgery and neurosurgery, whereas in the second 6 months of COVID-19 pandemic, urology and neurosurgery were the most productive, followed by transplant and plastic surgery. Most publications in the first 6 months were opinion papers (80%), which decreased to 33% in the second 6 months. The role of telemedicine in different aspects of surgical care and surgical education was summarized stratifying by specialty.

Conclusion

Telemedicine has increased access to care of surgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, but whether this practice will continue post-pandemic remains unknown.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00268-021-06348-1.

Telemedicine in surgery during COVID-19 pandemic: are we doing enough?

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this systematic review was to report and to analyze if there is and what is the impact of telemedicine in the surgical practice during COVID-19 pandemic. Many authors have posited that the pandemic urged a high implementation of the telemedicine service even in surgical specialties, however, the impact of this change of the clinical practice has been variably reported and its utilization in general surgery is uncertain.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

All articles from any country written in English, Italian, Spanish, or French, about the use of telemedicine for indication to surgical treatment or for 30-day postoperative follow-up in general surgery during the COVID 19 outbreak, from the March 1, 2020, to December 1, 2020, were included.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Two hundred nine articles were fully analyzed, and 207 further articles were excluded. Finally, 2 articles, both published in October 2020, were included in the present systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, the rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has forced to review the traditional methods to deliver surgical assistance and urged surgeons to find alternative methods to continue their practice. The literature about this topic is yet scarce and many questions regarding its efficacy in improving patients' health, cost-effectiveness and user satisfaction remain unsolved.

Open Hemorrhoidectomy With Ligasure™ Under Local or Spinal Anesthesia: A Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that many anorectal surgical procedures may be performed under local anesthesia. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of local anesthesia in the outpatient clinic vs spinal anesthesia in the operating room for open hemorrhoidectomy.

METHODS

Sixty-two patients with grade III or IV hemorrhoids underwent open hemorrhoidectomy with LigaSure™ between 2018 and 2020. Of them, 32 procedures were performed in the operating room under spinal anesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine and other 30 procedures were undertaken in the outpatient clinic under local anesthesia with ropivacaine.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences regarding age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and Goligher's grade in between groups. No significant differences were observed in postoperative pain score (P = .85), perioperative complications (P = .51), and reoperation rate (P = .96). No recurrences and no differences in patients' satisfaction degree (P = .76) were documented at long-term follow-up in both study groups.

DISCUSSION

Our results suggest that open hemorrhoidectomy with LigaSure™ performed in selected patients under local anesthesia in the outpatient clinic is a well-tolerated, safe, and effective procedure.

Thyroid surgery during coronavirus-19 pandemic phases I, II and III: lessons learned in China, South Korea, Iran and Italy

OBJECTIVE

We compared demographic and clinic-pathological variables related to the number of surgeries for thyroid conditions or for cancer, morbidity, and fine needle aspiration (FNA) practices among Covid19 pandemic phases I, II, III and the same seasonal periods in 2019.

METHODS

The prospective database of the Division of Thyroid Surgery, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China was used for this study. Covid19 emergency levels were stratified according to the World Health Organization: phase I (January 25-February 25, 2020), phase II (February 26-March 19), phase III (March 20-April 20).

RESULTS

There were fewer outpatient FNAs and surgeries in 2020 than in 2019. There were no thyroid surgeries during phase I. There were also fewer surgeries for cancer with a significant reduction of advanced stage cancer treatments, mainly stage T1b N1a in phase II and T3bN1b in phase III. Operative times and postoperative stays were significantly shorter during the pandemic compared to our institutional baseline. In phase III, vocal cord paralysis (VCP) increased to 4.3% of our baseline numbers (P = 0.001). There were no cases of Covid19-related complications during the perioperative period. No patients required re-admission to the hospital.

CONCLUSION

The Covid19 outbreak reduced thyroid surgery patient volumes. The decrease of Covid19 emergency plans contributed to unexpected outcomes (reduction of early stage cancer treatment, decreased operative times and hospital stays, increased VCP rate).

E-consensus on telemedicine in proctology: A RAND/UCLA-modified study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 is revolutionizing healthcare delivery. The aim of this study was to reach a consensus among experts as to the possible applications of telemedicine in the proctologic field.

METHODS

A group of 55 clinical practice recommendations was developed by a clinical guidance group based on coalescence of evidence and expert opinion. The Telemedicine in Proctology Italian Working Group included 47 Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery nominated experts evaluating the appropriateness of each clinical practice recommendations based on published RAND/UCLA methodology in 2 rounds.

RESULTS

Stakeholder median age was 53 years (interquartile range limits 40-60), and 38 (81%) were men. Nine (19%) panelists reported no experience with telemedicine before the pandemic. Agreement was obtained on a minimum of 3 to 5 years of practice in the proctologic field before starting teleconsultations, which should be regularly paid, with advice and prescriptions incorporated into a formal report sent to the patient by e-mail along with a receipt. Of the panelists, 35 of 47 (74%) agreed that teleconsultation carries the risk of misdiagnosis of cancer, thus recommending an in-person assessment before scheduling any surgery. Fifteen additional clinical practice recommendations were re-elaborated in the second round and assessed by 44 of 47 (93.6%) panelists. The application of telemedicine for the diagnosis of common proctologic conditions (eg, hemorrhoidal disease, anal abscess and fistula, anal condylomas, and anal fissure) and functional pelvic floor disorders was generally considered inappropriate. Teleconsultation was instead deemed appropriate for the diagnosis and management of pilonidal disease.

CONCLUSION

This e-consensus revealed the boundaries of telemedicine in Italy. Standardization of infrastructures, logistics, and legality remain to be better elucidated.

A worldwide survey on proctological practice during COVID-19 lockdown (ProctoLock 2020): a cross-sectional analysis

AIM

Proctology is one of the surgical specialties that has suffered the most during COVID-19 pandemic. Using a cross-sectional non-incentivised World Wide Web survey, we aimed to snapshot the current status of proctological practice in six world regions.

METHOD

Surgeons affiliated to renowned scientific societies with an interest in coloproctology were invited to join the survey. Members of the ProctoLock Working Group enhanced recruitment by direct invitation. The predictive power of respondents' and hospitals' demographics on the change of status of surgical and outpatient activities was calculated.

RESULTS

Respondents (n = 1050) were mostly men (79%), with a mean age of 46.9 years, at consultant level (79%), practising in academic hospitals (53%) offering a dedicated proctology service (68%). A total of 119 (11%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The majority (54%) came from Europe. Participants from Asia reported a higher proportion of unaltered practice (17%), while those from Europe had the highest proportion of fully stopped practice (20%). The likelihood of ongoing surgical practice was higher in men (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.13-2.09; P = 0.006), in those reporting readily availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) (OR 1.40, 1.08-1.42; P = 0.012) and in centres that were partially or not at all involved in COVID-19 care (OR 2.95, 2.14-4.09; P < 0.001). This chance decreased by 2% per year of respondent's age (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Several factors including different screening policies and resource capacity affected the current status of proctological practice. This information may help health authorities to formulate effective preventive strategies to limit curtailment of care of these patients during the pandemic.