Response to the article by Dietz et al. entitled "Recommendations for prioritization, treatment, and triage of breast cancer patients during the COVID‑19 pandemic. The COVID‑19 pandemic breast cancer consortium".
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Beitsch P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7247915 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Response to the article by Dietz et al. entitled "Recommendations for prioritization, treatment, and triage of breast cancer patients during the COVID‑19 pandemic. The COVID‑19 pandemic breast cancer consortium".
Beitsch Peter P Whitworth Pat P Patel Rakesh R
Breast cancer research and treatment 20200526 2
Similar Datasets
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic presents clinicians a unique set of challenges in managing breast cancer (BC) patients. As hospital resources and staff become more limited during the COVID-19 pandemic, it becomes critically important to define which BC patients require more urgent care and which patients can wait for treatment until the pandemic is over. In this Special Communication, we use expert opinion of representatives from multiple cancer care organizations to categorize BC patients into priority levels (A, B, C) for urgency of care across all specialties. Additionally, we provide treatment recommendations for each of these patient scenarios. Priority A patients have conditions that are immediately life threatening or symptomatic requiring urgent treatment. Priority B patients have conditions that do not require immediate treatment but should start treatment before the pandemic is over. Priority C patients have conditions that can be safely deferred until the pandemic is over. The implementation of these recommendations for patient triage, which are based on the highest level available evidence, must be adapted to current availability of hospital resources and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in each region of the country. Additionally, the risk of disease progression and worse outcomes for patients need to be weighed against the risk of patient and staff exposure to SARS CoV-2 (virus associated with the COVID-19 pandemic). Physicians should use these recommendations to prioritize care for their BC patients and adapt treatment recommendations to the local context at their hospital.
| S-EPMC7181102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, caused the COVID-19 global pandemic. In response, the Australian and New Zealand governments activated their respective emergency plans and hospital frameworks to deal with the potential increased demand on scarce resources. Surgical triage formed an important part of this response to protect the healthcare system's capacity to respond to COVID-19.MethodA rapid review methodology was adapted to search for all levels of evidence on triaging surgery during the current COVID-19 outbreak. Searches were limited to PubMed (inception to 10 April 2020) and supplemented with grey literature searches using the Google search engine. Further, relevant articles were also sourced through the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons COVID-19 Working Group. Recent government advice (May 2020) is also included.ResultsThis rapid review is a summary of advice from Australian, New Zealand and international speciality groups regarding triaging of surgical cases, as well as the peer-reviewed literature. The key theme across all jurisdictions was to not compromise clinical judgement and to enable individualized, ethical and patient-centred care. The topics reported on include implications of COVID-19 on surgical triage, competing demands on healthcare resources (surgery versus COVID-19 cases), and the low incidence of COVID-19 resulting in a possibility to increase surgical caseloads over time.ConclusionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, urgent and emergency surgery must continue. A carefully staged return of elective surgery should align with a decrease in COVID-19 caseload. Combining evidence and expert opinion, schemas and recommendations have been proposed to guide this process in Australia and New Zealand.
| S-EPMC7404945 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Covid-19 pandemic is a devastating global healthcare emergency with seismic impact on how modern surgical services function. Surgeons worry, that whilst healthcare-resources are directed against the pandemic, double effect may predict these benevolent public health efforts will cause unintended maleficent effects through delays to surgical treatment. Surgeons will make many challenging ethical judgements during this pandemic, here we conduct a narrative review of how medical ethics may help us make the best available choices. A narrative review of all the relevant papers known to the author was conducted. We discuss the key aspects of medical ethics, and how they have applied to surgeons during the Covid-19 pandemic. The four fundamental principles of medical ethics include: Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy and Justice. Surgeons will face many decisions which shall challenge those ethical principles during the pandemic, and wisdom from medical ethics can guide surgeons, to do the right thing, make best available choices, and get the best available outcome for patients during the Covid-19 pandemic. The practice of surgery is distinguished by good judgement in the face of uncertainty, we must strive to do the right thing, advocate for our patients, and be honest in the face of uncertainty. Medical Ethics can guide us to make the best available choices for our patients during the Covid-19 pandemic, afterwards, we must emerge wiser having learnt lessons and rebuilding trust in surgical care.
| S-EPMC7278633 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 exhibit diverse clinical manifestations and severity including enteric involvement. Commensal gut bacteria can contribute to defense against potential pathogens by promoting beneficial immune interactions. Interventions targeting the gut microbiome may have systemic anti-viral effects in SARS-CoV-2 infection.Scope and approachTo summarise alterations of gut microbiota in patients with COVID-19 including impact of specific bacteria on disease severity, discuss current knowledge on the role of probiotics, prebiotics and dietary approaches including vitamin D in preventing and reducing disease susceptibility and review clinical studies using probiotics to target coronavirus. A literature review on SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, gut microbiome and immunity was undertaken and relevant literature was summarised and critically examined.Key findings and conclusionsIntegrity of gut microbiome was perturbed in SARS-CoV-2 infections and associated with disease severity. Poor prognosis in SARS-CoV-2 infection was observed in subjects with underlying co-morbidities who had increased gut permeability and reduced gut microbiome diversity. Dietary microbes, including probiotics or selected prebiotics of Chinese origin, had anti-viral effects against other forms of coronavirus, and could positively impact host immune functions during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Numerous studies are investigating the role of probiotics in preventing and reducing susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers, household contacts and affected patients. An approach to strengthen intestinal barrier and lower pro-inflammatory states by adopting a more diversified diet during COVID-19 pandemic.SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with immune dysfunction and gut microbiota alterations. Delineating mechanisms of probiotics, prebiotics and diet with anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunity present opportunities for discovery of microbial therapeutics to prevent and treat COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7833886 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1055 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to health-care systems around the world. As approximately one-third of the world´s population is living under "lockdown" conditions, medical resources are being reallocated and hospital admissions are limited to emergencies. We examined the decision-making impact of these actions and their effects on access to hospital treatment in patients with neurosurgical conditions.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzes hospital admissions of two major neurosurgical services in Germany during the nationwide lockdown period (March 16th to April 16th, 2020). Spinal or cranial conditions requiring immediate hospital admission and treatment constituted emergencies.ResultsA total of 243 in-patients were treated between March 16th and April 16th 2020 (122 patients at the University Medical Center Mainz, 121 patients at the University Medical Center Göttingen). Of these, 38.0±16% qualified as emergency admission. Another 1,688 admissions were reviewed during the same periods in 2018 and 2019, providing a frame of reference. Overall, emergency admissions declined by 44.7±0.7% during lockdown. Admissions for cranial emergencies fell by 48.1±4.44%, spinal emergencies by 30.9±14.6%.ConclusionAbove findings indicate that in addition to postponing elective procedures, emergency admissions were dramatically curtailed during the COVID-19 lockdown. As this surely is unexpected and unintended, reasons are undoubtedly complex. As consequences in morbidity and mortality are still unpredictable, efforts should be made to accommodate all patients in need of hospital access going forward.
| S-EPMC7302699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A key public health question during any disease outbreak when limited vaccine is available is who should be prioritized for early vaccination. Most vaccine prioritization analyses only consider variation in risk of infection and death by a single risk factor, such as age. We provide a more granular approach with stratification by demographics, risk factors, and location. We use this approach to compare the impact of different COVID-19 vaccine prioritization strategies on COVID-19 cases, deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over the first 6 months of vaccine rollout, using California as a case example. We estimate the proportion of cases, deaths and DALYs averted relative to no vaccination for strategies prioritizing vaccination by a single risk factor and by multiple risk factors (e.g. age, location). When targeting by a single risk factor, we find that age-based targeting averts the most deaths (62% for 5 million individuals vaccinated) and DALYs (38%) and targeting essential workers averts the least deaths (31%) and DALYs (24%) over the first 6 months of rollout. However, targeting by two or more risk factors simultaneously averts up to 40% more DALYs. Our findings highlight the potential value of multiple-risk-factor targeting of vaccination against COVID-19 and other infectious diseases, but must be balanced with feasibility for policy.
| S-EPMC8866501 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7547643 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8653256 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To understand and analyse the global impact of COVID-19 on outpatient services, inpatient care, elective surgery, and perioperative colorectal cancer care, a DElayed COloRectal cancer surgery (DECOR-19) survey was conducted in collaboration with numerous international colorectal societies with the objective of obtaining several learning points from the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on our colorectal cancer patients which will assist us in the ongoing management of our colorectal cancer patients and to provide us safe oncological pathways for future outbreaks.
| 2346925 | ecrin-mdr-crc