Search

Introduction: Energy management education (EME) is a manualised, evidence-based self-management education programme developed and delivered by occupational therapists for persons living with chronic disease-related fatigue. Studies have shown that EME can positively affect self-efficacy, fatigue impact and quality of life in persons with chronic conditions, while data on persons with long COVID are lacking.The primary aim is to evaluate if adding EME to the standard care improves outcomes in persons with long COVID-related fatigue. The secondary aim is to explore the energy management behavioural strategies applied in daily routines and investigate the influencing factors of implementing behavioural changes. The third aim is to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of EME., Methods and Analysis: Using observational data, we will emulate a prospective two-parallel arms target trial to assess whether adding EME to the standard care is associated with improved outcomes in patients with long COVID-related fatigue. The estimated sample size to detect a post-intervention difference of 1.5 points in self-efficacy to implement energy conservation strategies with 90% power (0.05 alpha) is 122 people (1:1 ratio).Persons with long COVID-related fatigue who follow EME as part of their standard care will be recruited and included in the experimental group (EG), while potential participants for the control group (CG) will be recruited from a register and prospectively matched to a participant in the EG by applying the propensity score technique. The 'standard of care' of the CG will include any intervention, except occupational therapy-based EME in peer groups. The causal contrast of interest will be the per-protocol effect. Four self-reported questionnaires (fatigue impact, self-efficacy in performing energy management strategies, competency in performing daily activities, health-related quality of life) will be administered at baseline (T0; week 0), after lesson 7 (T1; week 6), post-intervention (T2; week 14) and follow-up (T3, week 24). Our main assessment will be at T2. Disease-related and productivity cost data will be collected, and a cost-effectiveness profile of the EME intervention will be compared with standard care., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from the competent Swiss ethics commission.Findings will be reported (1) to the study participants; (2) to patient organisations and hospitals supporting EMERGE; (3) to funding bodies; (4) to the national and international occupational therapy community and healthcare policy; (5) will be presented at local, national, and international conferences and (6) will be disseminated by peer-review publications., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ Group.)

Background: This review is an update of a rapid review undertaken in 2020 to identify relevant, feasible and effective communication approaches to promote acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing measures for COVID-19 prevention and control. The rapid review was published when little was known about transmission, treatment or future vaccination, and when physical distancing measures (isolation, quarantine, contact tracing, crowd avoidance, work and school measures) were the cornerstone of public health responses globally. This updated review includes more recent evidence to extend what we know about effective pandemic public health communication. This includes considerations of changes needed over time to maintain responsiveness to pandemic transmission waves, the (in)equities and variable needs of groups within communities due to the pandemic, and highlights again the critical role of effective communication as integral to the public health response., Objectives: To update the evidence on the question 'What are relevant, feasible and effective communication approaches to promote acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing measures for COVID-19 prevention and control?', our primary focus was communication approaches to promote and support acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing., Secondary Objective: to explore and identify key elements of effective communication for physical distancing measures for different (diverse) populations and groups., Search Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases from inception, with searches for this update including the period 1 January 2020 to 18 August 2021. Systematic review and study repositories and grey literature sources were searched in August 2021 and guidelines identified for the eCOVID19 Recommendations Map were screened (November 2021)., Selection Criteria: Guidelines or reviews focusing on communication (information, education, reminders, facilitating decision-making, skills acquisition, supporting behaviour change, support, involvement in decision-making) related to physical distancing measures for prevention and/or control of COVID-19 or selected other diseases (sudden acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), influenza, Ebola virus disease (EVD) or tuberculosis (TB)) were included. New evidence was added to guidelines, reviews and primary studies included in the 2020 review., Data Collection and Analysis: Methods were based on the original rapid review, using methods developed by McMaster University and informed by Cochrane rapid review guidance. Screening, data extraction, quality assessment and synthesis were conducted by one author and checked by a second author. Synthesis of results was conducted using modified framework analysis, with themes from the original review used as an initial framework., Main Results: This review update includes 68 studies, with 17 guidelines and 20 reviews added to the original 31 studies. Synthesis identified six major themes, which can be used to inform policy and decision-making related to planning and implementing communication about a public health emergency and measures to protect the community. Theme 1: Strengthening public trust and countering misinformation: essential foundations for effective public health communication Recognising the key role of public trust is essential. Working to build and maintain trust over time underpins the success of public health communications and, therefore, the effectiveness of public health prevention measures. Theme 2: Two-way communication: involving communities to improve the dissemination, accessibility and acceptability of information Two-way communication (engagement) with the public is needed over the course of a public health emergency: at first, recognition of a health threat (despite uncertainties), and regularly as public health measures are introduced or adjusted. Engagement needs to be embedded at all stages of the response and inform tailoring of communications and implementation of public health measures over time. Theme 3: Development of and preparation for public communication: target audience, equity and tailoring Communication and information must be tailored to reach all groups within populations, and explicitly consider existing inequities and the needs of disadvantaged groups, including those who are underserved, vulnerable, from diverse cultural or language groups, or who have lower educational attainment. Awareness that implementing public health measures may magnify existing or emerging inequities is also needed in response planning, enactment and adjustment over time. Theme 4: Public communication features: content, timing and duration, delivery Public communication needs to be based on clear, consistent, actionable and timely (up-to-date) information about preventive measures, including the benefits (whether for individual, social groupings or wider society), harms (likewise) and rationale for use, and include information about supports available to help follow recommended measures. Communication needs to occur through multiple channels and/or formats to build public trust and reach more of the community. Theme 5: Supporting behaviour change at individual and population levels Supporting implementation of public health measures with practical supports and services (e.g. essential supplies, financial support) is critical. Information about available supports must be widely disseminated and well understood. Supports and communication related to them require flexibility and tailoring to explicitly consider community needs, including those of vulnerable groups. Proactively monitoring and countering stigma related to preventive measures (e.g. quarantine) is also necessary to support adherence. Theme 6: Fostering and sustaining receptiveness and responsiveness to public health communication Efforts to foster and sustain public receptiveness and responsiveness to public health communication are needed throughout a public health emergency. Trust, acceptance and behaviours change over time, and communication needs to be adaptive and responsive to these changing needs. Ongoing community engagement efforts should inform communication and public health response measures., Authors' Conclusions: Implications for practice Evidence highlights the critical role of communication throughout a public health emergency. Like any intervention, communication can be done well or poorly, but the consequences of poor communication during a pandemic may mean the difference between life and death. The approaches to effective communication identified in this review can be used by policymakers and decision-makers, working closely with communication teams, to plan, implement and adjust public communications over the course of a public health emergency like the COVID-19 pandemic. Implications for research Despite massive growth in research during the COVID-19 period, gaps in the evidence persist and require high-quality, meaningful research. This includes investigating the experiences of people at heightened COVID-19 risk, and identifying barriers to implementing public communication and protective health measures particular to lower- and middle-income countries, and how to overcome these., (Copyright © 2023 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Introduction: The extensive spread of COVID-19 meant action to address the pandemic took precedence over routine service delivery, thus impacting access to care for many health conditions, including the effects of snakebite., Method: We prospectively collected facility-level data from several health facilities in India, including number of snakebite admissions and snakebite envenoming admissions on modality of transport to reach the health facility. To analyse the effect of a health facility being in cluster-containment zone, we used negative binomial regression analysis., Results: Our findings suggest that that health facilities located within a COVID containment zone saw a significant decrease in total snakebite admissions (incidence rate ratio 0.64 (0.43-0.94), standard error 0.13, p≤0.02)) and envenoming snakebite admissions (incidence rate ratio 0.43 (0.23-0.81), standard error 0.14, p≤0.01) compared to when health facilities were not within a COVID containment zone. There was no statistically significant difference in non-envenoming admissions and modalities of transport used to reach health facilities., Conclusion: This article provides the first quantitative estimate of the impact of COVID-19 containment measures on access to snakebite care. More research is needed to understand how containment measures altered care-seeking pathways and the nature of snake-human-environment conflict. Primary healthcare systems need to be safeguarded for snakebite care to mitigate effects of cluster-containment measures.

Background: Preoperative criteria to establish the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission after major liver surgery have not been yet precisely defined and are often left to the anesthesiologist's judgment. The ICU bed shortage during the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged healthcare systems around the world. We sought to determine its impact on early outcomes of elective major liver surgery., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing major oncological liver surgery from a single institution. Two time periods were compared considering a complete ban on ICU beds during the pandemic (index period, from November 2020 to May 2021), and the smoothly running ICU facility before the pandemic (control period, from November 2018 to October 2020). The main outcomes were 30-day morbidity and mortality, length-of-stay, and 30-day readmission rates., Results: Overall, 57 consecutive patients were identified, of whom 18 (32%) in the index period, and 39 (68%) in the control period, with 24 (62%) patients in the latter group admitted to ICU. No significant differences were found in terms of ASA Score, P-POSSUM morbidity and mortality, operative times, and red blood cells transfusions between groups. The morbidity rate, as classified by the Clavien-Dindo system, was also similar. A slightly longer length-of-stay has been observed in the index period (mean difference of 1.12 [95% CI, -9.19;11.42] days; P=0.829) after controlling for age, gender, ASA Score, and P-POSSUM. The 30-day readmission rate was comparable between the index and control periods (5.0% vs. 4.8%, respectively)., Conclusions: The ICU bed shortage in response to the COVID-19 emergency did not negatively impact on the early postoperative outcomes of major liver surgery.

BACKGROUND: Optimal thromboprophylaxis for hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is uncertain. METHODS: In an open-label, adaptive platform trial, we randomly assigned hospitalized adults with Covid-19 to low-dose low-molecular-weight heparin thromboprophylaxis or intermediate-dose or low-dose plus aspirin. In response to external evidence, the aspirin intervention was discontinued and a therapeutic-dose arm added. The primary end point was death or the requirement for new organ support by day 28, analyzed with a Bayesian logistic model. Enrolment was closed as a result of operational constraints. RESULTS: Between February 2021 and March 2022, 1574 patients were randomly assigned. Among 1526 participants included in the analysis (India, n=1273; Australia and New Zealand, n=138; and Nepal, n=115), the primary outcome occurred in 35 (5.9%) of 596 in low-dose, 25 (4.2%) of 601 in intermediate-dose, 20 (7.2%) of 279 in low-dose plus aspirin, and 7 (14%) of 50 in therapeutic-dose anticoagulation. Compared with low-dose thromboprophylaxis, the median adjusted odds ratio for the primary outcome for intermediate-dose was 0.74 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.43 to 1.27; posterior probability of effectiveness [adjusted odds ratio<1; Pr], 86%), for low-dose plus aspirin 0.88 (95% CrI, 0.47 to 1.64; Pr, 65%), and for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation 2.22 (95% CrI, 0.77 to 6.20; Pr, 7%). Overall thrombotic and bleeding rates were 0.8% and 0.4%, respectively. There were 10 serious adverse reactions related to anticoagulation strategy, of which nine were grade 1 or 2 across study interventions and one grade 4 episode of retroperitoneal hematoma in a patient receiving intermediate-dose anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized non–critically ill adults with Covid-19, compared with low-dose, there was an 86% posterior probability that intermediate-dose, 65% posterior probability that low-dose plus aspirin, and a 7% posterior probability that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation reduced the odds of death or requirement for organ support. No treatment strategy met prespecified stopping criteria before trial closure, precluding definitive conclusions. (Funded by Australian National Health and Medical Research Council or Medical Research Future Fund Investigator and Practitioner Grants and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04483960.)

Background Published randomized controlled trials are underpowered for binary clinical end points to assess the safety and efficacy of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in adults with COVID-19. We therefore performed a meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of RASi in adults with COVID-19. Methods and Results MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register were searched for randomized controlled trials that randomly assigned patients with COVID-19 to RASi continuation/commencement versus no RASi therapy. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at ≤30 days. A total of 14 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled 1838 participants (aged 59 years, 58% men, mean follow-up 26 days). Of the trials, 11 contributed data. We found no effect of RASi versus control on all-cause mortality (7.2% versus 7.5%; relative risk [RR], 0.95; [95% CI, 0.69-1.30]) either overall or in subgroups defined by COVID-19 severity or trial type. Network meta-analysis identified no difference between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin II receptor blockers. RASi users had a nonsignificant reduction in acute myocardial infarction (2.1% versus 3.6%; RR, 0.59; [95% CI, 0.33-1.06]), but increased risk of acute kidney injury (7.0% versus 3.6%; RR, 1.82; [95% CI, 1.05-3.16]), in trials that initiated and continued RASi. There was no increase in need for dialysis or differences in congestive cardiac failure, cerebrovascular events, venous thromboembolism, hospitalization, intensive care admission, inotropes, or mechanical ventilation. Conclusions This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers versus control in patients with COVID-19 found no difference in all-cause mortality, a borderline decrease in myocardial infarction, and an increased risk of acute kidney injury with RASi. Our findings provide strong evidence that RASi can be used safely in patients with COVID-19.

Objective: As COVID-19 spreads across the world, there are concerns that people with asthma are at a higher risk of acquiring the disease, or of poorer outcomes. This systematic review aimed to summarize evidence on the risk of infection, severe illness and death from COVID-19 in people with asthma., Data Sources and Study Selection: A comprehensive search of electronic databases including preprint repositories and WHO COVID-19 database was conducted (until 26 May 2020). Studies reporting COVID-19 in people with asthma were included. For binary outcomes, we performed Sidik-Jonkman random effects meta-analysis. We explored quantitative heterogeneity by subgroup analyses, meta regression and evaluating the I 2 statistic., Results: Fifty-seven studies with an overall sample size of 587 280 were included. The prevalence of asthma among those infected with COVID-19 was 7.46% (95% CI = 6.25-8.67). Non-severe asthma was more common than severe asthma (9.61% vs. 4.13%). Pooled analysis showed a 14% risk ratio reduction in acquiring COVID-19 (95% CI = 0.80-0.94; p  < 0.0001) and 13% reduction in hospitalization with COVID-19 (95% CI = 0.77-0.99, p  = 0.03) for people with asthma compared with those without. There was no significant difference in the combined risk of requiring admission to ICU and/or receiving mechanical ventilation for people with asthma (RR = 0.87 95% CI = 0.94-1.37; p  = 0.19) and risk of death from COVID-19 (RR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.68-1.10; p  = 0.25)., Conclusion: The findings from this study suggest that the prevalence of people with asthma among COVID-19 patients is similar to the global prevalence of asthma. The overall findings suggest that people with asthma have a lower risk than those without asthma for acquiring COVID-19 and have similar clinical outcomes.

Background: Individual case series and cohort studies have reported conflicting results in people with asthma on the vulnerability to and risk of mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)., Research Question: Are people with asthma at a higher risk of being infected or hospitalised or poorer clinical outcomes from COVID-19?, Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on five main databases including the World Health Organization COVID-19 database between 1 December 2019 and 11 July 2021 on studies with a control (non-asthma) group was conducted. Prevalence and risk ratios were pooled using Sidik-Jonkman random-effects meta-analyses., Findings: 51 studies with an 8.08% (95% CI 6.87-9.30%) pooled prevalence of people with asthma among COVID-19 positive cases. The risk ratios were 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.95, p=0.01) for acquiring COVID-19; 1.18 (95% CI 0.98-1.42, p=0.08) for hospitalisation; 1.21 (95% CI 0.97-1.51, p=0.09) for intensive care unit (ICU) admission; 1.06 (95% CI 0.82-1.36, p=0.65) for ventilator use; and 0.94 (95% CI 0.76-1.17, p=0.58) for mortality for people with asthma. Subgroup analyses by continent revealed a significant difference in risk of acquiring COVID-19, ICU admission, ventilator use and death between the continents., Interpretation: The risk of being infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was reduced compared to the non-asthma group. No statistically significant differences in hospitalisation, ICU admission and ventilator use were found between groups. Subgroup analyses showed significant differences in outcomes from COVID-19 between America, Europe and Asia. Additional studies are required to confirm this risk profile, particularly in Africa and South America, where few studies originate., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: A.P. Sunjaya has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S.M. Allida has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: G.L. Di Tanna has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: C.R. Jenkins has nothing to disclose., (Copyright ©The authors 2022.)

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is revolutionizing healthcare delivery. The aim of the study was to reach consensus among experts on the possible applications of telemedicine in colorectal surgery. A group of 48 clinical practice recommendations (CPRs) was developed by a clinical guidance group based on coalescence of evidence and expert opinion. The Telemedicine in Colorectal Surgery Italian Working Group included 54 colorectal surgeons affiliated to the Italian Society of Colo-Rectal Surgery (SICCR) who were involved in the evaluation of the appropriateness of each CPR, based on published RAND/UCLA methodology, in two rounds. Stakeholders' median age was 44.5 (IQR 36-60) years, and 44 (81%) were males. Agreement was obtained on the applicability of telemonitoring and telemedicine for multidisciplinary pre-operative evaluation. The panel voted against the use of telemedicine for a first consultation. 15/48 statements deemed uncertain on round 1 and were re-elaborated and assessed by 51/54 (94%) panelists on round 2. Consensus was achieved in all but one statement concerning the cost of a teleconsultation. There was strong agreement on the usefulness of teleconsultation during follow-up of patients with diverticular disease after an in-person visit. This e-consensus provides the boundaries of telemedicine in colorectal surgery in Italy. Standardization of infrastructures and costs remains to be better elucidated., (© 2021. Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).)

Background: The implications of city lockdown on vital signs during the COVID-19 outbreak are unknown., Objective: We longitudinally tracked vital signs using data from wearable sensors and determined associations with anxiety and depression., Methods: We selected all participants in the HUAWEI Heart Study from Wuhan and four nearby large provincial capital cities (Guangzhou, Chongqing, Hangzhou, Zhengzhou) and extracted all data from 26 December 2019 (one month before city lockdown) to 21 February 2020. Sleep duration and quality, daily steps, oxygen saturation and heart rate were collected on a daily basis. We compared the vital signs before and after the lockdown using segmented regression analysis of the interrupted time series. The depression and anxiety cases were defined as scores ≥8 on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression and anxiety subscales [HADS-D and HADS-A] in 727 participants who finished the survey., Results: We included 19,960 participants (mean age 36 yrs, 90% men). Compared with pre-lockdown, resting heart rate dropped immediately by 1.1 bpm after city lockdown (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.8, -0.4). Sleep duration increased by 0.5 hour (95% CI: 0.3, 0.8) but deep sleep ratio decreased by 0.9% (95% CI: -1.2, -0.6). Daily steps decreased by 3352 steps (95% CI: -4333, -2370). Anxiety and depression existed in 26% and 17% among 727 available participants, respectively, and associated with longer sleep duration (0.2 and 0.1 hour, both p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Lockdown of Wuhan in China was associated with an adverse vital signs profile (reduced physical activity, heart rate, and sleep quality, but increased sleep duration). Wearable devices in combination with mobile-based apps may be useful to monitor both physical and mental health., Clinical Trial Registration: The trial is registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) website (ChiCTR-OOC-17014138)., Competing Interests: J.L. held an International Postdoctoral Exchange Fellowship Program China (20170103) during the course of this work. G. Tao have no disclosures. A.E. Schutte received speaker honoraria from Omron Healthcare, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Servier, and serves on research advisory board for Abbott. She is President of the International Society of Hypertension, 2018–2020. G.L. Di Tanna has no disclosures. B. Neal is supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Principal Research Fellowship; holds a research grant for this study from Janssen; and has held research grants for other large-scale cardiovascular outcome trials from Roche, Servier, and Merck Schering Plough; and his institution has received consultancy, honoraria, or travel support for contributions he has made to advisory boards and/or the continuing medical education programs of Abbott, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Servier. Y. Chen have no disclosures., (Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s).)

Background: The widespread nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been unprecedented. We sought to analyze its global impact with a survey on colorectal cancer care during the pandemic., Methods: The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on preoperative assessment, elective surgery, and postoperative management of colorectal cancer patients was explored by a 35-item survey, which was distributed worldwide to members of surgical societies with an interest in colorectal cancer care. Respondents were divided into 2 comparator groups: (1) "delay" group: colorectal cancer care affected by the pandemic and (2) "no delay" group: unaltered colorectal cancer practice., Results: A total of 1,051 respondents from 84 countries completed the survey. No substantial differences in demographics were found between the delay (745, 70.9%) and no delay (306, 29.1%) groups. Suspension of multidisciplinary team meetings, staff members quarantined or relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units, units fully dedicated to coronavirus disease 2019 care, and personal protective equipment not readily available were factors significantly associated to delays in endoscopy, radiology, surgery, histopathology, and prolonged chemoradiation therapy-to-surgery intervals. In the delay group, 48.9% of respondents reported a change in the initial surgical plan, and 26.3% reported a shift from elective to urgent operations. Recovery of colorectal cancer care was associated with the status of the outbreak. Practicing in coronavirus disease-free units, no change in operative slots and staff members not relocated to coronavirus disease 2019 units were statistically associated with unaltered colorectal cancer care in the no delay group, while the geographic distribution was not., Conclusion: Global changes in diagnostic and therapeutic colorectal cancer practices were evident. Changes were associated with differences in health care delivery systems, hospital's preparedness, resource availability, and local coronavirus disease 2019 prevalence rather than geographic factors. Strategic planning is required to optimize colorectal cancer care., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Proctology is one of the surgical specialties that has suffered the most during COVID-19 pandemic. Using a cross-sectional non-incentivised World Wide Web survey, we aimed to snapshot the current status of proctological practice in six world regions., Method: Surgeons affiliated to renowned scientific societies with an interest in coloproctology were invited to join the survey. Members of the ProctoLock Working Group enhanced recruitment by direct invitation. The predictive power of respondents' and hospitals' demographics on the change of status of surgical and outpatient activities was calculated., Results: Respondents (n = 1050) were mostly men (79%), with a mean age of 46.9 years, at consultant level (79%), practising in academic hospitals (53%) offering a dedicated proctology service (68%). A total of 119 (11%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The majority (54%) came from Europe. Participants from Asia reported a higher proportion of unaltered practice (17%), while those from Europe had the highest proportion of fully stopped practice (20%). The likelihood of ongoing surgical practice was higher in men (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.13-2.09; P = 0.006), in those reporting readily availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) (OR 1.40, 1.08-1.42; P = 0.012) and in centres that were partially or not at all involved in COVID-19 care (OR 2.95, 2.14-4.09; P < 0.001). This chance decreased by 2% per year of respondent's age (P = 0.001)., Conclusion: Several factors including different screening policies and resource capacity affected the current status of proctological practice. This information may help health authorities to formulate effective preventive strategies to limit curtailment of care of these patients during the pandemic., (© 2020 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Proctology is one of the surgical specialties that suffered the most during COVID-19 pandemic. Using data from a cross-sectional worldwide web survey, we aimed to snapshot the current status of proctologic practice in Italy with differences between three macro areas (North, Centre, South). Specialists affiliated to renowned scientific societies with an interest in coloproctology were invited to join a 27-item survey. Predictive power of respondents' and hospitals' demographics on the change of status of surgical activities was calculated. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04392245). Of 299 respondents from Italy, 94 (40%) practiced in the North, 60 (25%) in the Centrer and 82 (35%) in the South and Islands. The majority were men (79%), at consultant level (70%), with a mean age of 46.5 years, practicing in academic hospitals (39%), where a dedicated proctologist was readily available (68%). Southern respondents were more at risk of infection compared to those from the Center (OR, 3.30; 95%CI 1.46; 7.47, P = 0.004), as were males (OR, 2.64; 95%CI 1.09; 6.37, P = 0.031) and those who routinely tested patients prior to surgery (OR, 3.02; 95%CI 1.39; 6.53, P = 0.005). The likelihood of ongoing surgical practice was higher in the South (OR 1.36, 95%CI 0.75; 2.46, P = 0.304) and in centers that were not fully dedicated to COVID-19 care (OR 4.00, 95%CI 1.88; 8.50, P < 0.001). The results of this survey highlight important factors contributing to the deadlock of proctologic practice in Italy and may inform the development of future management strategies.