Dataset Information

Airway recommendations for perioperative patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Numerous guideline recommendations for airway and perioperative management during the COVID-19 pandemic have been published. We identified, synthesized, and compared guidelines intended for anesthesiologists.

Source

Member society websites of the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists and the European Society of Anesthesiologists were searched. Recommendations that focused on perioperative airway management of patients with proven or potential COVID-19 were included. Accelerated screening was used; data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second. Data were organized into themes based on perioperative phase of care.

Principal findings

Thirty unique sets of recommendations were identified. None reported methods for systematically searching or selecting evidence to be included. Four were updated following initial publication. For induction and airway management, most recommended minimizing personnel and having the most experienced anesthesiologist perform tracheal intubation. Significant congruence was observed among recommendations that discussed personal protective equipment. Of those that discussed tracheal intubation methods, most (96%) recommended videolaryngoscopy, while discordance existed regarding use of flexible bronchoscopy. Intraoperatively, 23% suggested specific anesthesia techniques and most (63%) recommended a specific operating room for patients with COVID-19. Postoperatively, a minority discussed extubation procedures (33%), or care in the recovery room (40%). Non-technical considerations were discussed in 27% and psychological support for healthcare providers in 10%.

Conclusion

Recommendations for perioperative airway management of patients with COVID-19 overlap to a large extent but also show significant differences. Given the paucity of data early in the pandemic, it is not surprising that identified publications largely reflected expert opinion rather than empirical evidence. We suggest future efforts should promote coordinated responses and provide suggestions for studying and establishing best practices in perioperative patients.

Study registration

Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/a2k4u/ ); date created, 26 March 2020.

SUBMITTER: Grudzinski AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8809630 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Airway recommendations for perioperative patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

Grudzinski Alexa Lynn AL Sun Billy B Zhang MengQi M Crnic Agnes A Djokhdem Abdul H AH Hanna Mary M Montroy Joshua J Duggan Laura V LV Hamilton Gavin M GM Fergusson Dean A DA Boet Sylvain S McIsaac Daniel I DI Lalu Manoj M MM

Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie 20220202 5

<h4>Purpose</h4>Numerous guideline recommendations for airway and perioperative management during the COVID-19 pandemic have been published. We identified, synthesized, and compared guidelines intended for anesthesiologists.<h4>Source</h4>Member society websites of the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists and the European Society of Anesthesiologists were searched. Recommendations that focused on perioperative airway management of patients with proven or potential COVID-19 were inc ...[more]

PMID: 35112304

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCancer screening tests are recommended to prevent cancer-associated mortality by detecting precancerous and cancerous lesions in early stages. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the use of preventive health care services. Although there was an increase in the number of cancer screening tests beginning in late 2020, screenings remained 29% to 36% lower than in the prepandemic era.ObjectiveThe aim of this review is to assist health care providers in identifying approaches for prioritizing patients and increasing breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening during the uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe used the scoping review framework to identify articles on PubMed and EBSCO databases. A total of 403 articles were identified, and 23 articles were selected for this review. The literature review ranged from January 1, 2020, to September 30, 2021.ResultsThe articles included two primary categories of recommendations: (1) risk stratification and triage to prioritize screenings and (2) alternative methods to conduct cancer screenings. Risk stratification and triage recommendations focused on prioritizing high-risk patients with an abnormal or suspicious result on the previous screening test, patients in certain age groups and sex, patients with a personal medical or family cancer history, patients that are currently symptomatic, and patients that are predisposed to hereditary cancers and cancer-causing mutations. Other recommended strategies included identifying areas facing the most disparities, creating algorithms and using artificial intelligence to create cancer risk scores, leveraging in-person visits to assess cancer risk, and providing the option of open access screenings where patients can schedule screenings and can be assigned a priority category by health care staff. Some recommended using telemedicine to categorize patients and determine screening eligibility for patients with new complaints. Several articles noted the importance of implementing preventive measures such as COVID-19 screening prior to the procedures, maintaining hygiene measures, and social distancing in waiting rooms. Alternative screening methods that do not require an in-person clinic visit and can effectively screen patients for cancers included mailing self-collection sampling kits for cervical and colorectal cancers, and implementing or expanding mobile screening units.ConclusionsAlthough the COVID-19 pandemic had devastating effects on population health globally, it could be an opportunity to adapt and evolve cancer screening methods. Disruption often creates innovation, and focus on alternative methods for cancer screenings may help reach rural and underresourced areas after the pandemic has ended.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 spreads via aerosol droplets. The dental profession is at high risk of contracting the virus since their work includes treatment procedures that produce aerosols. Teledentistry offers an opportunity to mitigate the risk to dental personnel by allowing dentists to provide care without direct patient contact.ObjectiveThe purpose of this scoping review was to examine the implementation, challenges, strategies, and innovations related to teledentistry during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown.MethodsThis scoping review evaluated teledentistry use during the pandemic by searching for articles in PubMed and Google Scholar using the search terms teledentistry, tele-dentistry, covid-19, coronavirus, telehealth, telemedicine, and dentistry. Inclusion criteria consisted of articles published in English from March 1, 2020, to April 1, 2022, that were relevant to dentistry and its specialties, and that included some discussion of teledentistry and COVID-19. Specifically, the review sought to explore teledentistry implementation, challenges, strategies to overcome challenges, and innovative ideas that emerged during the pandemic. It followed the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). This approach is organized into 5 distinct steps: formulating a defined question, using the question to develop inclusion criteria to identify relevant studies, an approach to appraise the studies, summarizing the evidence using an explicit methodology, and interpreting the findings of the review.ResultsA total of 32 articles was included in this scoping review and summarized by article type, methodology and population, and key points about the aims; 9 articles were narrative review articles, 10 were opinion pieces, 4 were descriptive studies, 3 were surveys, 2 were integrative literature reviews, and there was 1 each of the following: observational study, systematic review, case report, and practice brief. Teledentistry was used both synchronously and asynchronously for virtual consultations, often employing commercial applications such as WhatsApp, Skype, and Zoom. Dental professionals most commonly used teledentistry for triage, to reduce in-person visits, and for scheduling and providing consultations remotely. Identified challenges included patient and clinician acceptance of teledentistry, having adequate infrastructure, reimbursement, and security concerns. Strategies to address these concerns included clinician and patient training and utilizing Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant applications. Benefits from teledentistry included providing care for patients during the pandemic and extending care to areas lacking access to dental care.ConclusionsPandemic lockdowns led to new teledentistry implementations, most commonly for triage but also for follow-up and nonprocedural care. Teledentistry reduced in-person visits and improved access to remote areas. Challenges such as technology infrastructure, provider skill level, billing issues, and privacy concerns remain.

Project description:BackgroundWith over 37.8 million cases and over 1 million deaths worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic has created a societal and economic upheaval of unparalleled magnitude. A positive transformation has been brought about by innovative solutions in the health care sector that aim to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on human health. For instance, the use of telehealth has been on the rise amidst this public health emergency.ObjectiveGiven the unprecedented scale of the pandemic with no definitive endpoint, we aimed to scope the existing telehealth-related literature during a defined period of the ongoing pandemic (ie, January to June 2020).MethodsOur scoping review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer Manual. We systematically searched PubMed and Embase databases with specific eligibility criteria. Data extracted from the shortlisted articles included first author and affiliation, journal title, publication type, terminologies used to describe telehealth and their accompanying definitions, health discipline or medical specialties and subspecialties wherein telehealth had been applied, the purpose of telehealth use, and the authors' overall sentiment on telehealth use. We collated the available information and used descriptive statistics to analyze the synthesized data.ResultsIn all, 543 articles published across 331 different journals were included in this scoping review. The Journal of Medical Internet Research and its sister journals featured the highest number of articles (25/543, 4.6%). Nearly all (533/543, 98.2%) articles were in English. The majority of the articles were opinions, commentaries, and perspectives (333/543, 61.3%). Most authors of the articles reviewed were from high-income countries (470/543, 86.6%), especially from the United States of America (237/543, 43.6%). In all, 39 different definitions were used to describe terms equivalent to telehealth. A small percentage (42/543, 7.7%) of the articles focused on the provision of COVID-19-related care. Moreover, 49.7% (270/543) of the articles primarily focused on the provision of multiple components of clinical care, and 23% (125/543) of the articles focused on various specialties and subspecialties of internal medicine. For a vast majority (461/543, 84.9%) of the articles, the authors expressed a celebratory sentiment about the use of telehealth.ConclusionsThis review identified considerable emerging literature on telehealth during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic, albeit mostly from high-income countries. There is compelling evidence to suggest that telehealth may have a significant effect on advancing health care in the future. However, the feasibility and application of telehealth in resource-limited settings and low- and middle-income countries must be established to avail its potential and transform health care for the world's population. Given the rapidity with which telehealth is advancing, a global consensus on definitions, boundaries, protocols, monitoring, evaluation, and data privacy is urgently needed.

Project description:BackgroundSince the start of the new Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak in December 2019, pharmacists worldwide are playing a key role adopting innovative strategies to minimize the adverse impact of the pandemic.ObjectivesTo identify and describe core services provided by the pharmacist during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and LILACS for studies published between December 1st, 2019 and May 20th, 2020 without language restriction. Studies that reported services provided by pharmacists during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. Two independent authors performed study selection and data extraction with a consensus process. The pharmacist's intervention identified in the included studies were described based on key domains in the DEPICT v.2.ResultsA total of 1189 records were identified, of which 11 studies fully met the eligibility criteria. Most of them were conducted in the United States of America (n = 4) and China (n = 4). The most common type of publication were letters (n = 4) describing the workplace of the pharmacist in hospitals (n = 8). These findings showed the different roles of pharmacists during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as disease prevention and infection control, adequate storage and drug supply, patient care and support for healthcare professionals. Pharmacists' interventions were mostly conducted for healthcare professionals and patients (n = 7), through one-to-one contact (n = 11), telephone (n = 6) or video conference (n = 5). The pharmacists' main responsibility was to provide drug information for healthcare professionals (n = 7) as well as patient counseling (n = 8).ConclusionsA reasonable number of studies that described the role of the pharmacists during the COVID-19 pandemic were found. All studies reported actions taken by pharmacists, although without providing a satisfactory description. Thus, future research with more detailed description as well as an evaluation of the impact of pharmacist intervention is needed in order to guide future actions in this and/or other pandemic.

Project description:IntroductionAs chest imaging is a tool for detecting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), diagnostic radiographers are a key component of the frontline workforce. Due to its unforeseen nature, COVID-19 has challenged radiographers' preparedness in combating its effects. Despite its importance, literature specifically investigating radiographers' readiness is limited. However, the documented experiences are prognostic of pandemic preparedness. Hence, this study aimed to map this literature by addressing the question: 'what does the existing literature reveal about the pandemic preparedness of diagnostic radiographers during COVID-19?'.MethodsUsing Arksey and O'Malley's framework, this scoping review searched for empirical studies in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL. Consequently, 970 studies were yielded and underwent processes of deduplication, title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and backward citation searching. Forty-four articles were deemed eligible for data extraction and analysis.ResultsFour themes that reflected pandemic preparedness were extrapolated: infection control and prevention, knowledge and education, clinical workflow, and mental health. Notably, the findings highlighted pronounced trends in adaptation of infection protocols, adequate infection knowledge, and pandemic-related fears. However, inconsistencies in the provision of personal protective equipment, training, and psychological support were revealed.ConclusionLiterature suggests that radiographers are equipped with infection knowledge, but the changing work arrangements and varied availability of training and protective equipment weakens their preparedness. The disparate access to resources facilitated uncertainty, affecting radiographers' mental health.Implications for practiceBy reiterating the current strengths and weaknesses in pandemic preparedness, the findings can guide clinical practice and future research to correct inadequacies in infrastructure, education, and mental health support for radiographers in the current and future disease outbreaks.

Dataset Information

Airway recommendations for perioperative patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

Purpose

Source

Principal findings

Conclusion

Study registration

Publications

Airway recommendations for perioperative patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets