Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20–60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04384926 . Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include...

This study aims to determine the public's perception of telemedicine surgical consultations, during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Summary Background Data: With rapid expansion and uptake of telemedicine during the pandemic, many have posited that virtual visits will endure even as in-person visits are reinstated. The public's perception of telemedicine for an initial surgical consultation has not been previously studied. Methods: A 43-question survey assessed respondents' attitudes toward telemedicine for initial consultations with surgeons, both in the context of COVID-19 and during ''normal circumstances.'' Participants were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk, an online crowd-sourcing marketplace. Results: Based on 1827 analyzable responses, we found that a majority (86%) of respondents reported being satisfied (either extremely or somewhat) with telemedicine encounters. Interestingly, preference for in-person versus virtual surgical consultation reflected access to care, with preference for telemedicine decreasing from 72% to 33% when COVID-related social distancing ends. Preferences for virtual visits decreased with increasing complexity of the surgical intervention, even during the pandemic. A majority felt that ''establishing trust and comfort'' was best accomplished in person, and the vast majority felt it was important to meet their surgeons before the day of surgery. Conclusions: The public views telemedicine as an acceptable substitute for in-person visits, especially during the pandemic. However, it seems that an inperson interaction is still preferred when possible for surgical consultations. If telemedicine services are to persist beyond social distancing, further exploration of its impact on the patient-surgeon relationship will be needed.

No abstract

Antiplatelet therapy at the time of noncardiac surgery confers minimal bleeding risk with no difference in thrombotic complications. In many cases, it is safe to continue antiplatelet therapy in patients with important indications for their use.

No abstract

Purpose : To explore the methods through which physicians deliver compassionate care during end-of-life (EOL). Compassionate care provides benefits to patients and providers and is particularly important for patients with serious illnesses, yet its practice remains limited. We aim to qualitatively characterize methods utilized by physicians that facilitate the delivery of compassionate care at EOL. Methods : We conducted 13 semi-structured interviews with physicians from palliative care and medical oncology subspecialities at a rural academic medical centre in New Hampshire. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using a qualitative research design. Results : Participants described methods of compassionate care ranging from symptom control to less tangible, non-verbal methods. Primary barriers to the delivery of compassionate care were described as within the broader healthcare system and within the inherent emotional difficulty of EOL care. Physicians from both subspecialities emphasized the importance of successful inter-provider relationships. Conclusions: Methods for delivering compassionate care at EOL are wide ranging, but barriers on a systemic and individual level should be addressed to make its practice more widespread. This can be accomplished, in part, by the standardization of EOL conversations, training physicians how to have meaningful EOL conversations, and integration of such conversations into electronic medical records.

No abstract

No abstract