Validity of the Postoperative Morbidity Survey after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair—a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no standardised tool used to capture morbidity following abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. The aim of this prospective observational study was to validate the Postoperative Morbidity Survey (POMS) according to its two guiding principles: to only capture morbidity substantial enough to delay discharge from hospital and to be a rapid, simple screening tool. METHODS: A total of 64 adult patients undergoing elective infrarenal AAA repair participated in the study. Following surgery, the POMS was recorded daily, by trained research staff with the clinical teams blinded, until hospital discharge or death. We modelled the data using Cox regression, accounting for the competing risk of death, with POMS as a binary time-dependent (repeated measures) internal covariate. For each day for each patient, ‘discharged’ (yes/no) was the event, with the elapsed number of days post-surgery as the time variable. We derived the hazard ratio for any POMS morbidity (score 1–9) vs. no morbidity (zero), adjusted for type of repair (endovascular versus open), age and aneurysm size. RESULTS: The hazard ratio for alive discharge with any POMS-recorded morbidity versus no morbidity was 0.130 (95 % confidence interval 0.070 to 0.243). The median time-to-discharge was 13 days after recording any POMS morbidity vs. 2 days after scoring zero for POMS morbidity. Compliance with POMS completion was 99.5 %. CONCLUSIONS: The POMS is a valid tool for capturing short-term postoperative morbidity following elective infrarenal AAA repair that is substantial enough to delay discharge from hospital. Daily POMS measurement is recommended to fully capture morbidity and allow robust analysis. The survey could be a valuable outcome measure for use in quality improvement programmes and future research

Documenting the Recovery of Vascular Services in European Centres Following the Initial COVID-19 Pandemic Peak: Results from a Multicentre Collaborative Study

Objective: To document the recovery of vascular services in Europe following the first COVID-19 pandemic peak. Methods: An online structured vascular service survey with repeated data entry between 23 March and 9 August 2020 was carried out. Unit level data were collected using repeated questionnaires addressing modifications to vascular services during the first peak (March – May 2020, “period 1”), and then again between May and June (“period 2”) and June and July 2020 (“period 3”). The duration of each period was similar. From 2 June, as reductions in cases began to be reported, centres were first asked if they were in a region still affected by rising cases, or if they had passed the peak of the first wave. These centres were asked additional questions about adaptations made to their standard pathways to permit elective surgery to resume. Results: The impact of the pandemic continued to be felt well after countries’ first peak was thought to have passed in 2020. Aneurysm screening had not returned to normal in 21.7% of centres. Carotid surgery was still offered on a case by case basis in 33.8% of centres, and only 52.9% of centres had returned to their normal aneurysm threshold for surgery. Half of centres (49.4%) believed their management of lower limb ischaemia continued to be negatively affected by the pandemic. Reduced operating theatre capacity continued in 45.5% of centres. Twenty per cent of responding centres documented a backlog of at least 20 aortic repairs. At least one negative swab and 14 days of isolation were the most common strategies used for permitting safe elective surgery to recommence. Conclusion: Centres reported a broad return of services approaching pre-pandemic “normal” by July 2020. Many introduced protocols to manage peri-operative COVID-19 risk. Backlogs in cases were reported for all major vascular surgeries

Practices of Sickle Cell Disease Genetic Screening and Testing in the Prenatal Population

BACKGROUND: Genetic screening and testing are technologies historically underutilized in Black populations despite predicting diseases like sickle cell disease (SCD), which is predominantly found in Blacks. We surveyed prenatal patients to understand choices, beliefs and experiences surrounding genetic screening and testing, specifically for SCD. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed 322 women during prenatal visits. Responses were analyzed to identify barriers to care and education about testing and screening for SCD. Patients rated whether they agreed or disagreed with statements regarding sickle cell health behaviors. We used χ 2 tests to compare categorical variables by self-reported race. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the odds ratios and confidence intervals for each outcome. RESULTS: Women were a mean (SD) age of 33.3 (6.1). 42.9% of patients self-identified as White while 41.3% of patients self- identified as Black. Screening questions were adjusted for differences in race, insurance, and education levels to show significant differences in responses between Blacks and Whites for screening for SCD (p = 0.047, OR 95% CI = 0.455 [0.210-0.989]) and plans to meet with genetic counselors (p = 0.049, OR 95% CI = 0.299 [0.090-0.993]). The statements if sickle cell is not in their family, then it is likely not in themselves or their children, was significantly different between Black and White populations (p = 0.011, OR 95% CI = 0.207 [0.081-0.526]). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest gaps in screening, testing, education, and pregnancy management choices between Black and White patients. Research should focus on decreasing these healthcare gaps and improving education that address concerns about SCD for relevant populations

Practices of sickle cell disease genetic screening and testing in the prenatal population

BACKGROUND: Genetic screening and testing are technologies historically underutilized in Black populations despite predicting diseases like sickle cell disease (SCD), which is predominantly found in Blacks. We surveyed prenatal patients to understand choices, beliefs and experiences surrounding genetic screening and testing, specifically for SCD. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed 322 women during prenatal visits. Responses were analyzed to identify barriers to care and education about testing and screening for SCD. Patients rated whether they agreed or disagreed with statements regarding sickle cell health behaviors. We used χ 2 tests to compare categorical variables by self-reported race. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the odds ratios and confidence intervals for each outcome. RESULTS: Women were a mean (SD) age of 33.3 (6.1). 42.9% of patients self-identified as White while 41.3% of patients self- identified as Black. Screening questions were adjusted for differences in race, insurance, and education levels to show significant differences in responses between Blacks and Whites for screening for SCD (p = 0.047, OR 95% CI = 0.455 [0.210-0.989]) and plans to meet with genetic counselors (p = 0.049, OR 95% CI = 0.299 [0.090-0.993]). The statements if sickle cell is not in their family, then it is likely not in themselves or their children, was significantly different between Black and White populations (p = 0.011, OR 95% CI = 0.207 [0.081-0.526]). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest gaps in screening, testing, education, and pregnancy management choices between Black and White patients. Research should focus on decreasing these healthcare gaps and improving education that address concerns about SCD for relevant populations

Global impact of the first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic wave on vascular services

This online structured survey has demonstrated the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vascular services. The majority of centres have documented marked reductions in operating and services provided to vascular patients. In the months during recovery from the resource restrictions imposed during the pandemic peaks, there will be a significant vascular disease burden awaiting surgeons. One of the most affected specialtie