Testing recommendation for COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) in patients planned for surgery - continuing the service and ‘suppressing’ the pandemic

Al‐Muharraqi, Mohammed A

doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2020.04.014

Cited by 97 publications

(91 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While some institutions might have availability to perform 2 COVID-19 tests for high-risk cases, others might not have the same capacity. 39 Therefore, it is imperative that resources are adequately used to avoid scarcity and be able to provide adequate patient care in all circumstances while protecting healthcare workers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 Infection and Its Influence in Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery

Parilli-Troconis

Baptista

Marcano-Lozada³

et al. 2020

Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The novel coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has rapidly spread worldwide, challenging healthcare resources and communities to an unprecedent degree. Simultaneously, the amount of clinical and scientific information released has overwhelmed journal platforms. Objectives This review aims to summarize the available diagnostic tools and current guidelines to safely assist patients while limiting the exposure of otolaryngologists during this pandemic. Data Synthesis Key articles were retrieved from the following databases: PubMed, Lancet, Springer Nature, BioMed Central, JAMA network and MEDLINE, as well as updated documents from the Spanish Ministry of Health, World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Spanish Association of Surgeons, ENT-UK, American College of Surgeons, and American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. The terms used for the search were: COVID-19, Test COVID, Surgery in COVID, 2019-nCoV, ‘coronavirus’, and SARS-CoV-2. A total of 10,245 papers were retrieved. The inclusion criteria for the review included: COVID-19 testing (n = 531), society guidelines for otolaryngology-head and neck surgery patient care in the outpatient clinic (n = 10) and surgical (n = 18) settings. Studies not related to COVID-19 diagnosis were excluded. Conclusion Healthcare institutions around the world are outlining their own protocols regarding laboratory testing and personnel protective equipment usage based upon medical societies recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic. We have summarized the available laboratory tests and their respective sensitivity and specificity. Moreover, clinical guidelines from different societies were reviewed and summarized to facilitate guidance for otolaryngologists in the operating room and in the clinical settings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 Infection and Its Influence in Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery

Parilli-Troconis

Baptista

Marcano-Lozada³

et al. 2020

Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the UK's National Health Service, (NHS) testing priority was given to 1) patients with suspected COVID-19 in intensive care units (ICU), 2) patients with severe respiratory illness including pneumonia, 3) isolated cluster outbreaks such as care homes, and 4) random testing for surveillance purposes carried out by over 100 general practices [15,16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study in the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil and Haiti

Yoo

Dutra

Fanfan

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background On January 30, 2020, the WHO declared the outbreak of COVID-19 a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. Within only a few weeks, the outbreak took on pandemic proportions, affecting over 100 countries. This rapid increase in confirmed cases made the prevention and control of COVID-19 critical on both national and global scales in order to prevent the healthcare systems from being overwhelmed. Government guidelines provide a fundamental resource for communities, as they guide citizens on how to protect themselves against COVID-19, however, they also provide critical guidance for policy makers and healthcare professionals for taking action to slow the spread of COVID-19. Objective We aimed to identify the differences and similarities between six different countries' (U.S., China, South Korea, UK, Brazil and Haiti) government provided community and healthcare system guidelines, and to explore the relationship between guideline issue dates and the prevalence/incidence of COVID-19 cases. Research design and Methods: To make these comparisons, this exploratory qualitative study used document analysis of government guidelines issued to the general public and to healthcare professionals. Results The major differences in the evaluation and testing criteria in the guidelines across the six countries centered around the priority of testing for COVID-19 in the general population, which was strongly dependent on each country’s healthcare capacity. However, the most similar guidelines pertained to the clinical signs and symptoms of COVID-19, and methods to prevent its contraction. Conclusion In the initial stages of the outbreak, certain strategies were universally employed to control the deadly virus’s spread, including quarantining the sick, contact tracing, and social distancing. However, each country dealt with differing healthcare capacities, risks, threats, political and socioeconomic challenges, and distinct healthcare systems and infrastructure. Acknowledging these differences highlights the importance of examining the various countries’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic with a nuanced view, as each of these factors shaped the government guidelines distributed to each country’s communities and healthcare systems.

show abstract

“…He suggested that to monitor patients admitted for non-COVID emergency surgeries, such as head and neck cancers, and to prevent postponing them. Even while keeping in mind the various paraphernalia of antibody detection, he recommended the use of this kind of test owing to its affordability and rapidity to monitor patients [ 141 ]. The same application can be extended to mass containment zones such as dormitories or hospices.…”

Section: Development and Status Of Immunoglobulin-based Rapid Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid Antibody-Based COVID-19 Mass Surveillance: Relevance, Challenges, and Prospects in a Pandemic and Post-Pandemic World

Augustine

Das

Hasan

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aggressive outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) as COVID-19 (coronavirus disease-2019) pandemic demands rapid and simplified testing tools for its effective management. Increased mass testing and surveillance are crucial for controlling the disease spread, obtaining better pandemic statistics, and developing realistic epidemiological models. Despite the advantages of nucleic acid- and antigen-based tests such as accuracy, specificity, and non-invasive approaches of sample collection, they can only detect active infections. Antibodies (immunoglobulins) are produced by the host immune system within a few days after infection and persist in the blood for at least several weeks after infection resolution. Antibody-based tests have provided a substitute and effective method of ultra-rapid detection for multiple contagious disease outbreaks in the past, including viral diseases such as SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) and MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome). Thus, although not highly suitable for early diagnosis, antibody-based methods can be utilized to detect past infections hidden in the population, including asymptomatic ones. In an active community spread scenario of a disease that can provide a bigger window for mass detections and a practical approach for continuous surveillance. These factors encouraged researchers to investigate means of improving antibody-based rapid tests and employ them as reliable, reproducible, sensitive, specific, and economic tools for COVID-19 mass testing and surveillance. The development and integration of such immunoglobulin-based tests can transform the pandemic diagnosis by moving the same out of the clinics and laboratories into community testing sites and homes. This review discusses the principle, technology, and strategies being used in antibody-based testing at present. It also underlines the immense prospect of immunoglobulin-based testing and the efficacy of repeated planned deployment in pandemic management and post-pandemic sustainable screenings globally.

show abstract

Testing recommendation for COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) in patients planned for surgery - continuing the service and ‘suppressing’ the pandemic

Cited by 97 publications

References 4 publications

COVID-19 Infection and Its Influence in Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery

COVID-19 Infection and Its Influence in Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery

Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study in the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil and Haiti

Rapid Antibody-Based COVID-19 Mass Surveillance: Relevance, Challenges, and Prospects in a Pandemic and Post-Pandemic World

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About