Interval from diagnosis to treatment of breast cancer within the same cancer center was longer at the CH than the UH. There was, however, no effect on overall survival. Time to treatment may not be a meaningful indicator of cancer care quality.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has had far-reaching effects on healthcare systems and society with resultant impact on trauma systems worldwide. This study evaluates the impact the pandemic has had in the Washington, DC Metropolitan Region as compared with similar months in 2019.DesignA retrospective multicenter study of all adult trauma centers in the Washington, DC region was conducted using trauma registry data between January 1, 2019 and May 31, 2020. March 1, 2020 through May 31, 2020 was defined as COVID-19, and January 1, 2019 through February 28, 2020 was defined as pre-COVID-19. Variables examined include number of trauma contacts, trauma admissions, mechanism of injury, Injury Severity Score, trauma center location (urban vs. suburban), and patient demographics.ResultsThere was a 22.4% decrease in the overall incidence of trauma during COVID-19 compared with a 3.4% increase in trauma during pre-COVID-19. Blunt mechanism of injury decreased significantly during COVID-19 (77.4% vs. 84.9%, p<0.001). There was no change in the specific mechanisms of fall from standing, blunt assault, and motor vehicle crash. The proportion of trauma evaluations for penetrating trauma increased significantly during COVID-19 (22.6% vs. 15.1%, p<0.001). Firearm-related and stabbing injury mechanisms both increased significantly during COVID-19 (11.8% vs. 6.8%, p<0.001; 9.2%, 6.9%, p=0.002, respectively).Conclusions and relevanceThe overall incidence of trauma has decreased since the arrival of COVID-19. However, there has been a significant rise in penetrating trauma. Preparation for future pandemic response should include planning for an increase in trauma center resource utilization from penetrating trauma.Level of evidenceEpidemiological, level III.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: There are no studies correlating wounding pattern or probability of death based on firearm type used in civilian public mass shooting (CPMS) events. Previous studies on non-CPMS events found that handguns are more lethal than rifles. We hypothesized that CPMS events associated with a handgun are also more lethal than those associated with a rifle. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study of autopsy reports from CPMS events was performed; CPMS was defined using the FBI and the Congressional Research Service definition. Site(s) of injury, site(s) of fatal injury, and presence of potentially preventable death (PPD) were determined independently by each author and cross-referenced to firearm type used. RESULTS: Autopsy reports of 232 victims from 23 events were reviewed. Seventy-three victims (31%) were shot by handguns, 105 (45%) by rifles, 22 (9%) by shotguns, and 32 (14%) by multiple firearms. Events using a handgun were associated with a higher percentage killed, and events using a rifle were associated with more people shot, although neither difference reached statistical significance. Victims shot by handguns had the highest percentage of having more than 1 fatal wound (26%); those shot by rifle had the lowest percentage (2%) (p ¼ 0.003). Thirty-eight victims (16%) were judged to have had a PPD. The probability of having a PPD was lowest for events involving a handgun (4%) and highest for events involving a rifle (23%) (p ¼ 0.002). Wounding with a handgun was significantly associated with brain (p ¼ 0.007) and cardiac injury (p ¼ 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Civilian public mass shooting events with a handgun are more lethal than those associated with use of a rifle.

No abstract