Background: Surgeons urgently need guidance on how to deliver surgical services safely and effectively during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim was to identify the key domains that should be considered when developing pandemic preparedness plans for surgical services. Methods: A scoping search was conducted to identify published articles relating to management of surgical patients during pandemics. Key informant interviews were conducted with surgeons and anaesthetists with direct experience of working during infectious disease outbreaks, in order to identify key challenges and solutions to delivering effective surgical services during the COVID-19 pandemic.Results: Thirteen articles were identified from the scoping search, and surgeons and anaesthetists representing 11 territories were interviewed. To mount an effective response to COVID-19, a pandemic response plan for surgical services should be developed in advance. Key domains that should be included are: provision of staff training (such as patient transfers, donning and doffing personal protection equipment, recognizing and managing COVID-19 infection); support for the overall hospital response to COVID-19 (reduction in non-urgent activities such as clinics, endoscopy, non-urgent elective surgery); establishment of a team-based approach for running emergency services; and recognition and management of COVID-19 infection in patients treated as an emergency and those who have had surgery. A backlog of procedures after the end of the COVID-19 pandemic is inevitable, and hospitals should plan how to address this effectively to ensure that patients having elective treatment have the best possible outcomes.

Among adults admitted for trauma in Washington State, 3-year cumulative mortality was 16% despite a decline in in-hospital deaths. Discharge to a skilled nursing facility at any age following trauma admission was associated with a higher risk of subsequent mortality.

Study objective Randomized trials suggest that nonoperative treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics-first is safe. No trial has evaluated outpatient treatment and no US randomized trial has been conducted, to our knowledge. This pilot study assessed feasibility of a multicenter US study comparing antibiotics-first, including outpatient management, with appendectomy. Methods Patients aged 5 years or older with uncomplicated appendicitis at 1 US hospital were randomized to appendectomy or intravenous ertapenem greater than or equal to 48 hours and oral cefdinir and metronidazole. Stable antibiotics-first-treated participants older than 13 years could be discharged after greater than or equal to 6-hour emergency department (ED) observation with next-day follow-up. Outcomes included 1-month major complication rate (primary) and hospital duration, pain, disability, quality of life, and hospital charges, and antibiotics-first appendectomy rate. Results Of 48 eligible patients, 30 (62.5%) consented, of whom 16 (53.3%) were randomized to antibiotics-first and 14 (46.7%) to appendectomy. Median age was 33 years (range 9 to 73 years), median WBC count was 15,000/μL (range 6,200 to 23,100/μL), and median computed tomography appendiceal diameter was 10 mm (range 7 to 18 mm). Of 15 antibiotic-treated adults, 14 (93.3%) were discharged from the ED and all had symptom resolution. At 1 month, major complications occurred in 2 appendectomy participants (14.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8% to 42.8%) and 1 antibiotics-first participant (6.3%; 95% CI 0.2% to 30.2%). Antibiotics-first participants had less total hospital time than appendectomy participants, 16.2 versus 42.1 hours, respectively. Antibiotics-first-treated participants had less pain and disability. During median 12-month follow-up, 2 of 15 antibiotics-first-treated participants (13.3%; 95% CI 3.7% to 37.9%) developed appendicitis and 1 was treated successfully with antibiotics; 1 had appendectomy. No more major complications occurred in either group. Conclusion A multicenter US trial comparing antibiotics-first to appendectomy, including outpatient management, is feasible to evaluate efficacy and safety.