Challenges to the orthopedic resident workforce during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learnt from a global cross-sectional survey

Responding to COVID-19: an exploration of EU country responses and directions for further research

BACKGROUND

During COVID-19, scientists advising policymakers were forced to deal with high uncertainty and risks in an environment of unknowns. Evidence on which policies and measures were effective in responding to the pandemic remains underdeveloped to answer the key question 'what worked and why?'. This study aims to provide a basis for studies to go further to answer this critical question, by starting to look efficacy or how countries ensured that health services remained available and what measures were enacted to protect and treat their populations and workers.

METHODS

We applied a three-phase sequential mixed methods design. In phase one, we started with a qualitative content analysis of the EU Country Profile reports to retrieve and analyse data on COVID-19 responses taken by 29 countries in the European region. Phase two is the step of data transformation, converting qualitative data into numerical codes that can be statistically analysed, which are then used in a quantitative cross-national comparative analysis that comprises phase three. The quantifying process resulted in a numerical indicator to measure the 'response efficacy' of the 29 countries, which is used in phase three's association of the response measure with country performance indicators that were derived from European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) COVID-19 case and death rate data.

RESULTS

Through comparing the frequency of COVID-19 measures taken, we found that many countries in the European region undertook similar actions but with differing effects. The cross-national analysis revealed an expected relationship: a lower COVID-19 response efficacy appeared to be related to a higher case and death rates. Still, marked variation for countries with similar response efficacy indicators was found, signalling that the combination and sequence of implementation of COVID-19 responses is possibly just as important as their efficacy in terms of which response measures were implemented.

CONCLUSIONS

Many European countries employed similar COVID-19 measures but still had a wide variation in their case and death rates. To unravel the question 'what worked and why?', we suggest directions from which more refined research can be designed that will eventually contribute to mitigate the impact of future pandemics and to be better prepared for their economic and human burden.

[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on urology residency training programs in Germany]

BACKGROUND

Several international medical societies reported a negative impact on urology residency training programs due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of the pandemic on urological residency in Germany.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From the 20^th of May 2020 until the 20^th of June 2020, a Germany-wide online survey on the continuing residency training was distributed via the members of the working group, social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) and the German Society of Residents in Urology (GeSRU e.V.) newsletter. The survey covered 3 topics: 1) basic characteristics of the participants, 2) general and 3) subjective influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinics and further residency training.

RESULTS

A total of 50 residents took part in the survey; 54% were women. The median age was 31 years. Most of the participants were in their 2nd (22%) and 5th (26%) year of training and worked in a university hospital (44%) or in a clinic of maximum care (30%). 38% of the respondents stated that they only served urological emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic. For 28% this meant a very large delay (80-100%) in the specialisation, while 28% stated only a minor impact. 66% documented training impairments caused by fewer operations, low patient numbers in the outpatient department (50%), congress (50%) and workshop (44%) cancellations. 46% of residents reported direct contact with COVID-19 patients while 10% were deployed on interdisciplinary IMC units. Numerous physical distancing and hygiene measures have been implemented by the clinics.

CONCLUSION

On average, around 50% of the urology residents indicated significant restrictions in training due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. The delay in training cannot currently be measured in units of time, but it can be assumed that training for residents during the pandemic is likely to be of a lower quality compared to previous generations.

Educational impact of early COVID-19 operating room restrictions on neurosurgery resident training in the United States: A multicenter study

Background

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented suspensions of neurosurgical elective surgeries, a large proportion of which involve spine procedures. The goal of this study is to report granular data on the impact of early COVID-19 pandemic operating room restrictions upon neurosurgical case volume in academic institutions, with attention to its secondary impact upon neurosurgery resident training. This is the first multicenter quantitative study examining these early effects upon neurosurgery residents caseloads.

Methods

A retrospective review of neurosurgical caseloads among seven residency programs between March 2019 and April 2020 was conducted. Cases were grouped by ACGME Neurosurgery Case Categories, subspecialty, and urgency (elective vs. emergent). Residents caseloads were stratified into junior (PGY1-3) and senior (PGY4-7) levels. Descriptive statistics are reported for individual programs and pooled across institutions.

Results

When pooling across programs, the 2019 monthly mean (SD) case volume was 214 (123) cases compared to 217 (129) in January 2020, 210 (115) in February 2020, 157 (81), in March 2020 and 82 (39) cases April 2020. There was a 60% reduction in caseload between April 2019 (207 [101]) and April 2020 (82 [39]). Adult spine cases were impacted the most in the pooled analysis, with a 66% decrease in the mean number of cases between March 2020 and April 2020. Both junior and senior residents experienced a similar steady decrease in caseloads, with the largest decreases occurring between March and April 2020 (48% downtrend).

Conclusions

Results from our multicenter study reveal considerable decreases in caseloads in the neurosurgical specialty with elective adult spine cases experiencing the most severe decline. Both junior and senior neurosurgical residents experienced dramatic decreases in case volumes during this period. With the steep decline in elective spine cases, it is possible that fellowship directors may see a disproportionate increase in spine fellowships in the coming years. In the face of the emerging Delta and Omicron variants, programs should pay attention toward identifying institution-specific deficiencies and developing plans to mitigate the negative educational effects secondary to such caseloads reduction.