Recognition of COVID-19 with occupational origin: a comparison between European countries

Objectives: This study aims to present an overview of the formal recognition of COVID-19 as occupational disease (OD) or injury (OI) across Europe. Methods: A COVID-19 questionnaire was designed by a task group within COST-funded OMEGA-NET and sent to occupational health experts of 37 countries in WHO European region, with a last update in April 2022. Results: The questionnaire was filled out by experts from 35 countries. There are large differences between national systems regarding the recognition of OD and OI: 40% of countries have a list system, 57% a mixed system and one country an open system. In most countries, COVID-19 can be recognised as an OD (57%). In four countries, COVID-19 can be recognised as OI (11%) and in seven countries as either OD or OI (20%). In two countries, there is no recognition possible to date. Thirty-two countries (91%) recognise COVID-19 as OD/OI among healthcare workers. Working in certain jobs is considered proof of occupational exposure in 25 countries, contact with a colleague with confirmed infection in 19 countries, and contact with clients with confirmed infection in 21 countries. In most countries (57%), a positive PCR test is considered proof of disease. The three most common compensation benefits for COVID-19 as OI/OD are disability pension, treatment and rehabilitation. Long COVID is included in 26 countries. Conclusions: COVID-19 can be recognised as OD or OI in 94% of the European countries completing this survey, across different social security and embedded occupational health systems

Intraoperative transfusion practices in Europe

Transfusion of allogeneic blood influences outcome after surgery. Despite widespread availability of transfusion guidelines, transfusion practices might vary among physicians, departments, hospitals and countries. Our aim was to determine the amount of packed red blood cells (pRBC) and blood products transfused intraoperatively, and to describe factors determining transfusion throughout Europe. We did a prospective observational cohort study enrolling 5803 patients in 126 European centres that received at least one pRBC unit intraoperatively, during a continuous three month period in 2013. The overall intraoperative transfusion rate was 1.8%; 59% of transfusions were at least partially initiated as a result of a physiological transfusion trigger- mostly because of hypotension (55.4%) and/or tachycardia (30.7%). Haemoglobin (Hb)- based transfusion trigger alone initiated only 8.5% of transfusions. The Hb concentration [mean (sd)] just before transfusion was 8.1 (1.7) g dl and increased to 9.8 (1.8) g dl after transfusion. The mean number of intraoperatively transfused pRBC units was 2.5 (2.7) units (median 2). Although European Society of Anaesthesiology transfusion guidelines are moderately implemented in Europe with respect to Hb threshold for transfusion (7-9 g dl), there is still an urgent need for further educational efforts that focus on the number of pRBC units to be transfused at this threshold

Intraoperative transfusion practices and perioperative outcome in the European elderly: A secondary analysis of the observational ETPOS study

The demographic development suggests a dramatic growth in the number of elderly patients undergoing surgery in Europe. Most red blood cell transfusions (RBCT) are administered to older people, but little is known about perioperative transfusion practices in this population. In this secondary analysis of the prospective observational multicentre European Transfusion Practice and Outcome Study (ETPOS), we specifically evaluated intraoperative transfusion practices and the related outcomes of 3149 patients aged 65 years and older. Enrolled patients underwent elective surgery in 123 European hospitals, received at least one RBCT intraoperatively and were followed up for 30 days maximum. The mean haemoglobin value at the beginning of surgery was 108 (21) g/l, 84 (15) g/l before transfusion and 101 (16) g/l at the end of surgery. A median of 2 [1–2] units of RBCT were administered. Mostly, more than one transfusion trigger was present, with physiological triggers being preeminent. We revealed a descriptive association between each intraoperatively administered RBCT and mortality and discharge respectively, within the first 10 postoperative days but not thereafter. In our unadjusted model the hazard ratio (HR) for mortality was 1.11 (95% CI: 1.08–1.15) and the HR for discharge was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74–0.83). After adjustment for several variables, such as age, preoperative haemoglobin and blood loss, the HR for mortality was 1.10 (95% CI: 1.05–1.15) and HR for discharge was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78–0.87). Preoperative anaemia in European elderly surgical patients is undertreated. Various triggers seem to support the decision for RBCT. A closer monitoring of elderly patients receiving intraoperative RBCT for the first 10 postoperative days might be justifiable. Further research on the causal relationship between RBCT and outcomes and on optimal transfusion strategies in the elderly population is warranted. A thorough analysis of different time periods within the first 30 postoperative days is recommended

Intraoperative transfusion practices in Europe

© 2016 The Author. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia.Background: Transfusion of allogeneic blood influences outcome after surgery. Despite widespread availability of transfusion guidelines, transfusion practices might vary among physicians, departments, hospitals and countries. Our aim was to determine the amount of packed red blood cells (pRBC) and blood products transfused intraoperatively, and to describe factors determining transfusion throughout Europe. Methods: We did a prospective observational cohort study enrolling 5803 patients in 126 European centres that received at least one pRBC unit intraoperatively, during a continuous three month period in 2013. Results: The overall intraoperative transfusion rate was 1.8%; 59% of transfusions were at least partially initiated as a result of a physiological transfusion trigger- mostly because of hypotension (55.4%) and/or tachycardia (30.7%). Haemoglobin (Hb)- based transfusion trigger alone initiated only 8.5% of transfusions. The Hb concentration [mean (sd)] just before transfusion was 8.1 (1.7) g dl-1 and increased to 9.8 (1.8) g dl-1 after transfusion. The mean number of intraoperatively transfused pRBC units was 2.5 (2.7) units (median 2). Conclusions: Although European Society of Anaesthesiology transfusion guidelines are moderately implemented in Europe with respect to Hb threshold for transfusion (7-9 g dl-1), there is still an urgent need for further educational efforts that focus on the number of pRBC units to be transfused at this threshold

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination modelling for safe surgery to save lives: data from an international prospective cohort study

Background Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could support safer elective surgery. Vaccine numbers are limited so this study aimed to inform their prioritization by modelling. Methods The primary outcome was the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-related death in 1 year. NNVs were based on postoperative SARS-CoV-2 rates and mortality in an international cohort study (surgical patients), and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence and case fatality data (general population). NNV estimates were stratified by age (18-49, 50-69, 70 or more years) and type of surgery. Best- and worst-case scenarios were used to describe uncertainty. Results NNVs were more favourable in surgical patients than the general population. The most favourable NNVs were in patients aged 70 years or more needing cancer surgery (351; best case 196, worst case 816) or non-cancer surgery (733; best case 407, worst case 1664). Both exceeded the NNV in the general population (1840; best case 1196, worst case 3066). NNVs for surgical patients remained favourable at a range of SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates in sensitivity analysis modelling. Globally, prioritizing preoperative vaccination of patients needing elective surgery ahead of the general population could prevent an additional 58 687 (best case 115 007, worst case 20 177) COVID-19-related deaths in 1 year. Conclusion As global roll out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination proceeds, patients needing elective surgery should be prioritized ahead of the general population.The aim of this study was to inform vaccination prioritization by modelling the impact of vaccination on elective inpatient surgery. The study found that patients aged at least 70 years needing elective surgery should be prioritized alongside other high-risk groups during early vaccination programmes. Once vaccines are rolled out to younger populations, prioritizing surgical patients is advantageous