ObjectivesTo determine the indirect consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on paediatric healthcare utilisation and severe disease at a national level following lockdown on 23 March 2020.DesignNational retrospective cohort study.SettingEmergency childhood primary and secondary care providers across Scotland; two national paediatric intensive care units (PICUs); statutory death records.Participants273 455 unscheduled primary care attendances; 462 437 emergency department attendances; 54 076 emergency hospital admissions; 413 PICU unplanned emergency admissions requiring invasive mechanical ventilation; and 415 deaths during the lockdown study period and equivalent dates in previous years.Main outcome measuresRates of emergency care consultations, attendances and admissions; clinical severity scores on presentation to PICU; rates and causes of childhood death. For all data sets, rates during the lockdown period were compared with mean or aggregated rates for the equivalent dates in 2016–2019.ResultsThe rates of emergency presentations to primary and secondary care fell during lockdown in comparison to previous years. Emergency PICU admissions for children requiring invasive mechanical ventilation also fell as a proportion of cases for the entire population, with an OR of 0.52 for likelihood of admission during lockdown (95% CI 0.37 to 0.73), compared with the equivalent period in previous years. Clinical severity scores did not suggest children were presenting with more advanced disease. The greatest reduction in PICU admissions was for diseases of the respiratory system; those for injury, poisoning or other external causes were equivalent to previous years. Mortality during lockdown did not change significantly compared with 2016–2019.ConclusionsNational lockdown led to a reduction in paediatric emergency care utilisation, without associated evidence of severe harm.

In a porcine hemorrhagic shock model, P-REBOA resulted in more physiologically tolerable hemodynamic and ischemic changes compared with C-REBOA. Additional work is needed to determine whether the benefits associated with P-REBOA can both extend the duration of intervention and increase survival.

† Damage control strategies prioritize physiological and biochemical stabilization over the full anatomical repair of all injuries. † Damage control strategies are useful for a subset of trauma patients and are not appropriate in all cases. † Selection criteria for damage control management include the mechanism of injury and the degree of physiological derangement. Damage control surgery (DCS) is a concept of abbreviated laparotomy, designed to prioritize short-term physiological recovery over anatomical reconstruction in the seriously injured and compromised patient. Over the last 10 yr, a new addition to the damage control paradigm has emerged, referred to as damage control resuscitation (DCR). This focuses on initial hypotensive resuscitation and early use of blood products to prevent the lethal triad of acidosis, coagulopathy, and hypothermia. This review aims to present the evidence behind DCR and its current application, and also to present a strategy of overall damage control to include DCR and DCS in conjunction. The use of DCR and DCS have been associated with improved outcomes for the severely injured and wider adoption of these principles where appropriate may allow this trend of improved survival to continue. In particular, DCR may allow borderline patients, who would previously have required DCS, to undergo early definitive surgery as their physiological derangement is corrected earlier.