Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4-1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 5-6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1 (3.3-4.8), 3.9 (2.6-5.1) and 3.6 (2.0-5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5 (0.9-2.1)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2-8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6-2.0), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay.

SARS-CoV-2 has been associated with an increased rate of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. Since surgical patients are already at higher risk of venous thromboembolism than general populations, this study aimed to determine if patients with peri-operative or prior SARS-CoV-2 were at further increased risk of venous thromboembolism. We conducted a planned sub-study and analysis from an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of elective and emergency patients undergoing surgery during October 2020. Patients from all surgical specialties were included. The primary outcome measure was venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis) within 30 days of surgery. SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was defined as peri-operative (7 days before to 30 days after surgery); recent (1-6 weeks before surgery); previous (≥7 weeks before surgery); or none. Information on prophylaxis regimens or pre-operative anti-coagulation for baseline comorbidities was not available. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rate was 0.5% (666/123,591) in patients without SARS-CoV-2; 2.2% (50/2317) in patients with peri-operative SARS-CoV-2; 1.6% (15/953) in patients with recent SARS-CoV-2; and 1.0% (11/1148) in patients with previous SARS-CoV-2. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients with peri-operative (adjusted odds ratio 1.5 (95%CI 1.1-2.0)) and recent SARS-CoV-2 (1.9 (95%CI 1.2-3.3)) remained at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, with a borderline finding in previous SARS-CoV-2 (1.7 (95%CI 0.9-3.0)). Overall, venous thromboembolism was independently associated with 30-day mortality ). In patients with SARS-CoV-2, mortality without venous thromboembolism was 7.4% (319/4342) and with venous thromboembolism was 40.8% (31/76). Patients undergoing surgery with peri-operative or recent SARS-CoV-2 appear to be at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism compared with patients with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Optimal venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment are unknown in this cohort of patients, and these data should be interpreted accordingly.

Background The COVID‐19 pandemic has led to the rapid and widespread adoption of telehealth. There is a need for more evidence regarding the appropriateness of telehealth, as well as greater understanding of barriers to its sustained use within surgery in Australia. Methods A survey weblink was sent via email to 5558 Australian Fellows of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons in August 2020. A single reminder email followed this 2 weeks later. Mixed methods analysis was performed of the survey data. Results There were 683 (12.3%) complete responses. Telehealth (telephone or video‐link) consultations were undertaken by 638 (85%) respondents as a result of the pandemic, with 583 (85%) of these expressing a desire for continued access to telehealth. Seventy‐seven percent of respondents felt that a satisfactory level of care could be delivered via telehealth in half or more consultations. However, only 38% of respondents felt that quality of care was equivalent comparing telehealth and face‐to‐face consultations, with the inability to perform a clinical examination a frequent concern. The majority agreed that telehealth was appropriate for clinical meetings and arranging investigations (91% each), whereas only 22% and 17%, respectively, felt telehealth was an appropriate means to break bad news and manage conflict. Medicolegal, technical and financial concerns were raised as prominent barriers to the sustained use of telehealth. Conclusion Surgeons show good insight into the clinical appropriateness and limitations of telehealth. Medicolegal, technical and financial barriers need to be addressed in order to fully utilize the benefits of telehealth into the future.

Introduction Prior studies of telehealth report high levels of patient satisfaction, but within carefully selected clinical scenarios. The COVID‐19 pandemic led to telehealth replacing face‐to‐face care for many surgical consultations across a variety of situations. More evidence is needed regarding patient perceptions of telehealth in surgery, in particular, exploring barriers and facilitators associated with its sustained implementation beyond the pandemic. Methods Survey invitations were emailed to a convenience sample of surgical patients by their surgeon following a telehealth consultation during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Surgeons were recruited from a sample ( n = 683) who completed a survey on telehealth (distributed via email to all Australian Fellows of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons). Mixed methods analysis was performed of the patient survey data. Results A total of 1166 consultations were captured: 50% routine reviews, 17% initial appointments and 20% post‐operative reviews. Video‐link was used in 49% of consultations. The majority of patients (94%), were satisfied with the quality of their surgical telehealth consultation and 75% felt it delivered the same level of care as face‐to‐face encounters. Telehealth was convenient to use (96%) and led to cost savings for 60% of patients. When asked about future appointment preferences after the pandemic, 41% indicated they would prefer telehealth (24% video‐link and 17% telephone) over face‐to‐face appointments. There was a perception by patients that telehealth consultation fees should be less than face‐to‐face consultation fees. Conclusion Patient satisfaction with surgical telehealth consultations is high. Barriers to more widespread implementation include financial, clinical appropriateness, technical and confidentiality concerns.