Objectives: No single universal definition of emergency department (ED) overcrowding exists. The authors hypothesize that a previously developed site-sampling form for academic ED overcrowding is a valid model to quantify overcrowding in academic institutions and can be used to develop a validated short form that correlates with overcrowding. Methods: A 23-question site-sampling form was designed based on input from academic physicians at eight medical schools representative of academic EDs nationwide. A total of 336 site-samplings at eight academic medical centers were conducted at 42 computer-generated random times over a three-week period by independent observers at each site. These sampling times ranged from very slow to severely overcrowded. The outcome variable was the degree of overcrowding as assessed by the charge nurse and ED physicians. The full model consisted of objective data that were obtained by counting the number of patients, determining patients' waiting times, and obtaining information from registration, triage, and ancillary services. Specific objective data were indexed to site-specific demographics.

No abstract

Overcrowding varied widely between academic centers during the study period. Results of a five-question reduced model are valid and accurate in predicting the degree of overcrowding in academic centers.

Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20–60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04384926 . Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include...

Endoscopic hernia repair methods have become increasingly popular over the past 15 years. The postulated main advantages of the endoscopic technique are less postoperative pain, early recovery and lower recurrence rates. Fixation of the endoscopic mesh seems to be necessary to minimize the risk of recurrence. Stapling has been implicated to cause chronic inguinal pain syndromes. We performed a retrospective study on male patients who were endoscopically operated on primary inguinal hernias. Our aim was to clarify whether mesh fixation using a fibrin sealant is as safe and reliable as conventional stapling. Additionally, we compared the prevalence of chronic inguinal pain. A standardized population of 133 male patients (mean age 55.9 years) with 186 (80 unilateral; 53 bilateral) consecutive primary laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repairs was assigned to two groups, depending on whether stapling or a fibrin sealant had been used for mesh fixation. A retrospective case control study was performed to conduct statistical analysis based on the following parameters: recurrence, complications, chronic inguinal pain, foreign body sensation and numbness. Hernia repairs numbering 173 (staples n=87; fibrin n=86) were followed up for a mean duration of 23.7 (11-47) months. The prevalence of chronic inguinal pain was significantly (P=0.002; Fisher exact test) higher in the stapled group-20.7% than in the fibrin sealant group with a prevalence of 4.7%. In terms of recurrence rate, complications and foreign body sensation, fewer patients were affected in the fibrin group than in the reference population, although the differences were not statistically significant. There were no major complications in either of the groups. The mean postoperative stay in hospital was 1.4 days. Fibrin sealing is as effective as stapling in providing secure mesh fixation. The fibrin group displayed a statistically significant lower prevalence of chronic pain syndromes. Mesh sealing provides adequate fixation and reduces the risk of chronic inguinal pain as a complication of the intervention.