The COVID19 pandemic has forced the world to be closed in a shell. It has affected large population worldwide, but studies regarding its effect on children very limited. The majority of the children, who may not be able to grasp the entire emergency, are at a bigger risk with other problems lurking behind the attack of SARS-CoV-2 virus. The risk of infection in children was 1.3%, 1.5%, and 1.7 % of total confirmed COVID-19 cases in China, Italy and United States respectively which is less compared to 2003 epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), when 5-7 % of the positive cases were children, with no deaths reported while another recent multinational multicentric study from Europe which included 582 PCR (polymerase chain reaction) confirmed children of 0- 18 year of age, provide deeper and generalize incite about clinical effects of COVID19 infection in children. According to this study 25% children have some pre-existing illness and 8 % required ICU (intensive care unit) admission with 0.69% case fatality among all infected children. Common risk factor for serious illness as per this study are younger age, male sex and pre-existing underlying chronic medical condition. However, we need to be more concerned about possible implications of indirect and parallel psychosocial and mental health damage due to closure of schools, being in confinement and lack of peer interaction due to COVID19 related lockdown and other containment measures. The effects can range from mood swings, depression, anxiety symptoms to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, while no meaningful impact on COVID19 related mortality reduction is evident with school closure measures. The objective of this paper is to look at both the positive & negative effects in children due to COVID19 related indirect effects following lockdown and other containment measures. There is a need to gear up in advance with psychological strategies to deal with it post the pandemic by involving all stakeholders (parents, teachers, paediatricians, psychologists, psychiatrists, psychiatric social workers, counsellors), proposing an integrated approach to help the children to overcome the pandemic aftermath

No abstract

Background Ileus is common after elective colorectal surgery, and is associated with increased adverse events and prolonged hospital stay. The aim was to assess the role of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for reducing ileus after surgery. Methods A prospective multicentre cohort study was delivered by an international, student‐ and trainee‐led collaborative group. Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection between January and April 2018 were included. The primary outcome was time to gastrointestinal recovery, measured using a composite measure of bowel function and tolerance to oral intake. The impact of NSAIDs was explored using Cox regression analyses, including the results of a centre‐specific survey of compliance to enhanced recovery principles. Secondary safety outcomes included anastomotic leak rate and acute kidney injury. Results A total of 4164 patients were included, with a median age of 68 (i.q.r. 57–75) years (54·9 per cent men). Some 1153 (27·7 per cent) received NSAIDs on postoperative days 1–3, of whom 1061 (92·0 per cent) received non‐selective cyclo‐oxygenase inhibitors. After adjustment for baseline differences, the mean time to gastrointestinal recovery did not differ significantly between patients who received NSAIDs and those who did not (4·6 versus 4·8 days; hazard ratio 1·04, 95 per cent c.i. 0·96 to 1·12; P = 0·360). There were no significant differences in anastomotic leak rate (5·4 versus 4·6 per cent; P = 0·349) or acute kidney injury (14·3 versus 13·8 per cent; P = 0·666) between the groups. Significantly fewer patients receiving NSAIDs required strong opioid analgesia (35·3 versus 56·7 per cent; P < 0·001). Conclusion NSAIDs did not reduce the time for gastrointestinal recovery after colorectal surgery, but they were safe and associated with reduced postoperative opioid requirement.