Search

Background: From 10 March up until 3 May 2020 in Northern Italy, the SARS-CoV-2 spread was not contained; disaster triage was adopted. The aim of the present study is to assess the impact of the COVID-19-pandemic on the Orthopedic and Trauma departments, focusing on: hospital reorganization (flexibility, workload, prevalence of COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2, standards of care); effects on staff; subjective orthopedic perception of the pandemic. Material and Methods: Data regarding 1390 patients and 323 surgeons were retrieved from a retrospective multicentric database, involving 14 major hospitals. The subjective directors’ viewpoints regarding the economic consequences, communication with the government, hospital administration and other departments were collected. Results: Surgical procedures dropped by 73%, compared to 2019, elective surgery was interrupted. Forty percent of patients were screened for SARS-CoV-2: 7% with positive results. Seven percent of the patients received medical therapy for COVID-19, and only 48% of these treated patients had positive swab tests. Eleven percent of surgeons developed COVID19 and 6% were contaminated. Fourteen percent of the staff were redirected daily to COVID units. Communication with the Government was perceived as adequate, whilst communication with medical Authorities was considered barely sufficient. Conclusions: Activity reduction was mandatory; the screening of carriers did not seem to be reliable and urgent activities were performed with a shortage of workers and a slower workflow. A trauma network and dedicated in hospital paths for COVID-19-patients were created. This experience provided evidence for coordinated responses in order to avoid the propagation of errors.

Background: Treatment of hip fractures during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unique challenges for the management of COVID-19-infected patients and the maintenance of standards of care. The primary endpoint of this study is to compare the mortality rate at 1 month after surgery in symptomatic COVID-positive patients with that of asymptomatic patients. A secondary endpoint of the study is to evaluate, in the two groups of patients, mortality at 1 month on the basis of type of fracture and type of surgical treatment. Materials and methods: For this retrospective multicentre study, we reviewed the medical records of patients hospitalised for proximal femur fracture at 14 hospitals in Northern Italy. Two groups were formed: COVID-19-positive patients (C+ group) presented symptoms, had a positive swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and received treatment for COVID-19; COVID-19-negative patients (C− group) were asymptomatic and tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. The two groups were compared for differences in time to surgery, survival rate and complications rate. The follow-up period was 1 month. Results: Of the 1390 patients admitted for acute care for any reason, 477 had a proximal femur fracture; 53 were C+ but only 12/53 were diagnosed as such at admission. The mean age was > 80 years, and the mean American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score was 3 in both groups. There was no substantial difference in time to surgery (on average, 2.3 days for the C+ group and 2.8 for the C− group). As expected, a higher mortality rate was recorded for the C+ group but not associated with the type of hip fracture or treatment. No correlation was found between early treatment (< 48 h to surgery) and better outcome in the C+ group. Conclusions: Hip fracture in COVID-19-positive patients accounted for 11% of the total. On average, the time to surgery was > 48 h, which reflects the

Background: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) are a growing matter for orthopaedic surgeons, and patients with PPFs may represent a frail target in the case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether hospital reorganisations during the most severe phase of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic affected standards of care and early outcomes of patients treated for PPFs in Northern Italy. Materials and methods: Data were retrieved from a multicentre retrospective orthopaedics and traumatology database, including 14 hospitals. The following parameters were studied: demographics, results of nasopharyngeal swabs, prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), comorbidities, general health status (EQ-5D-5L Score), frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale, CFS), pain (visual analogue scale, VAS), anaesthesiologic risk (American Society of Anaesthesiology Score, ASA Score), classification (unified classification system, UCS), type of operation and anaesthesia, in-hospital and early complications (Clavien–Dindo Classification, CDC), and length of stay (LOS). Data were analysed by means of descriptive statistics. Out of 1390 patients treated for any reason, 38 PPFs were included. Results: Median age was 81 years (range 70–96 years). Twenty-three patients (60.5%) were swabbed on admission, and two of them (5.3%) tested positive; in three patients (7.9%), the diagnosis of COVID-19 was established on a clinical and radiological basis. Two more patients tested positive post-operatively, and one of them died due to COVID-19. Thirty-three patients (86.8%) presented a proximal femoral PPF. Median ASA Score was 3 (range, 1–4), median VAS score on admission was 3 (range, 0–6), median CFS was 4 (range, 1–8), median EQ-5D-5L Score was 3 in each one of the categories (range, 1–5). Twenty-three patients (60.5%) developed post-operative complications, and median CDC grade was 3 (range, 1–5). The median LOS was 12.8&nbs