No abstract

No abstract

Objetivo Comparar la actividad del Servicio de Urología de un Hospital Universitario Portugués durante el estado de alarma y el periodo equivalente del año anterior. Comparamos el número de consultas electivas y pruebas diagnósticas urológicas, el número y el tipo de cirugías electivas, así como las características demográficas de los pacientes y las principales causas de ingreso al Servicio de Urgencias (SU) de Urología durante los dos periodos mencionados. Materiales y métodos Los datos de 691 pacientes que acudieron a urgencias desde el 18 de marzo de 2020 hasta el 2 de mayo de 2020 -y del mismo periodo del año anterior- se recogieron del software medico institucional. Los datos recopilados fueron edad, sexo, fecha de visita al servicio de urgencias, derivación desde otros hospitales, color del triaje, causa del ingreso, diagnóstico al alta y la necesidad de cirugía de urgencia u hospitalización. Con la intención de identificar las asociaciones entre las variables demográficas y clínicas con el hecho de haber sido sometido a una cirugía de urgencia (variable), se aplicaron modelos de regresión logística. Resultados El análisis multivariante mostró asociación entre el sexo del paciente con el hecho de ser sometido a una cirugía, con una disminución del 65,6% en las probabilidades para el género masculino. El periodo (COVID versus sin-COVID) no mostró una asociación significativa con la cirugía. Conclusión Nuestro departamento experimentó una reducción importante en la actividad. También observamos una reducción de las causas urgentes para acudir a los servicios de urgencias considerados menos graves. El porcentaje de casos que requirieron cirugía de urgencia y hospitalización fue mayor durante el periodo COVID.

Objective To compare the activity the Urology Department of a Portuguese Academic Hospital during the state of emergency and the equivalent period at the previous year. We compared the number of elective consultations and diagnostic urologic examinations, number and type of elective surgeries, as well as patients’ demographic characteristics and main causes of presentation to Urology Emergency Department (ED) during the two mentioned periods. Materials and methods Data from 691 patients coming to emergency department were collected from institutional clinical software from March 18th 2020 to May 2nd 2020—and from the same period the previous year. Data collected were age, sex, day of the presentation to Emergency Department, referral from other hospitals, triage color, reason of admission, diagnosis of discharge, and the need for emergency surgery or hospitalization. In order to identify associations between demographic and clinical variables with having been submitted to an emergency surgery (outcome), logistic regression models were applied. Results Multivariable analysis showed an association of sex with being submitted to surgery, 65.6% decrease in the odds for the male gender. The period (COVID versus non-COVID) did not show a significant association with surgery. Conclusion Our department experienced an noticeable activity reduction. We also observe a reduction in urgent causes to attend the ED considered less serious. The percentage of cases requiring emergency surgery and hospitalization was higher during COVID-period.

Purpose Multidisciplinary team (MDT) conferences are currently the standard of care in cancer patients' management. Despite evidence supporting benefits to the majority of malignancies, a paucity of data exists examining the impact in urinary and male genital cancers. This study aims to evaluate the impact of MDT conferences in urologic cancer practice. Methods Clinical plans discussed in urologic MDT conferences in Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Lisboa Central between January 2019 and December 2019 were retrospectively analysed. Clinical plans were categorized as accepted, changed, rejected (cases that had to be re-presented to the MDT because of insufficient staging or administrative issues) or no plan. MDT conferences' impact was assessed according to type of consultation, referral medical specialty and primary tumour type. Results 710 clinical plans were discussed at the MDT conferences. 61.8% were accepted, 10.6% were changed, 16.5% were rejected and 11.1% of cases referred to MDT discussion had no defined clinical plan. First consultations had a higher rate of accepted clinical plans (63.4%) versus subsequent consultations (56.4%). Referrals by the urology specialty had the highest rate of acceptances (64.3%). On the stratification by primary tumour site, testicular cancer had the highest acceptance rate (70.3%), whereas bladder cancer had the lowest (47.8%). Conclusions MDT conferences had an important impact in the management of 38.2% of cases. Therefore, all patients with urologic malignancies should be referred to MDT review to ensure optimal clinical care.