a b s t r a c tBackground: Cryotherapy is used in various clinical and sporting settings to reduce odema, decrease nerve conduction velocity, decrease tissue metabolism and to facilitate recovery after exercise induced muscle damage. The basic premise of cryotherapy is to cool tissue temperature and various modalities of cryotherapy such as whole body cryotherapy, cold spray, cryotherapy cuffs, frozen peas, cold water immersion, ice, and cold packs are currently being used to achieve this. However, despite its widespread use, little is known regarding the effectiveness of different cryotherapy modalities to reduce skin temperature. Objectives: To provide a synopsis of the use of thermal imaging as a method of assessing skin temperature following cryotherapy and to report the magnitude of skin temperature reductions associated with various modalities of cooling. Design: Structured narrative review. Methods: Three electronic databases were searched using keywords and MESH headings related to the use of thermal imaging in the assessment of skin temperature following cryotherapy. A hand-search of reference lists and relevant journals and text books complemented the electronic search. Summary: Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria. A skin temperature reduction of 5-15 1C, in accordance with the recent PRICE (Protection, Rest, Ice, Compression and Elevation) guidelines, were achieved using cold air, ice massage, crushed ice, cryotherapy cuffs, ice pack, and cold water immersion. There is evidence supporting the use and effectiveness of thermal imaging in order to access skin temperature following the application of cryotherapy. Conclusions: Thermal imaging is a safe and non-invasive method of collecting skin temperature. Although further research is required, in terms of structuring specific guidelines and protocols, thermal imaging appears to be an accurate and reliable method of collecting skin temperature data following cryotherapy. Currently there is ambiguity regarding the optimal skin temperature reductions in a medical or sporting setting. However, this review highlights the ability of several different modalities of cryotherapy to reduce skin temperature.

IntroductionThis paper presents a mixed-methods study protocol that will be used to evaluate a recent implementation of a real-time, centralised hospital command centre in the UK. The command centre represents a complex intervention within a complex adaptive system. It could support better operational decision-making and facilitate identification and mitigation of threats to patient safety. There is, however, limited research on the impact of such complex health information technology on patient safety, reliability and operational efficiency of healthcare delivery and this study aims to help address that gap.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a longitudinal mixed-method evaluation that will be informed by public-and-patient involvement and engagement. Interviews and ethnographic observations will inform iterations with quantitative analysis that will sensitise further qualitative work. Quantitative work will take an iterative approach to identify relevant outcome measures from both the literature and pragmatically from datasets of routinely collected electronic health records.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol has been approved by the University of Leeds Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Ethics Committee (#MEEC 20-016) and the National Health Service Health Research Authority (IRAS No.: 285933). Our results will be communicated through peer-reviewed publications in international journals and conferences. We will provide ongoing feedback as part of our engagement work with local trust stakeholders.

Surgical decision-making after SARS-CoV-2 infection is influenced by the presence of comorbidity, infection severity and whether the surgical problem is time-sensitive. Contemporary surgical policy to delay surgery is informed by highly heterogeneous country-specific guidance. We evaluated surgical provision in England during the COVID-19 pandemic to assess real-world practice and whether deferral remains necessary. Using the OpenSAFELY platform, we adapted the COVIDSurg protocol for a service evaluation of surgical procedures that took place within the English NHS from 17 March 2018 to 17 March 2022. We assessed whether hospitals adhered to guidance not to operate on patients within 7 weeks of an indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additional outcomes were postoperative all-cause mortality (30 days, 6 months) and complications (pulmonary, cardiac, cerebrovascular). The exposure was the interval between the most recent indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent surgery. In any 6-month window, < 3% of surgical procedures were conducted within 7 weeks of an indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Mortality for surgery conducted within 2 weeks of a positive test in the era since widespread SARS-CoV-2 vaccine availability was 1.1%, declining to 0.3% by 4 weeks. Compared with the COVIDSurg study cohort, outcomes for patients in the English NHS cohort were better during the COVIDSurg data collection period and the pandemic era before vaccines became available. Clinicians within the English NHS followed national guidance by operating on very few patients within 7 weeks of a positive indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In England, surgical patients' overall risk following an indication of SARS-CoV-2 infection is lower than previously thought.