MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4200177470 · doi:10.1093/bjs/znab404

Impact of COVID-19 on scheduled lower extremity revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia

2021· letter· en· W4200177470 sur OpenAlexafffundabout
Ayşegül Erman, Lauren Ramsay, Beate Sander, Wissam Haj-Ali, Deanna Wu, Mike Setterfield, Mirna Rahal, Graham Woodward, Mohammed Al‐Omran, Charles de Mestral

Notice bibliographique

RevueBritish journal of surgery · 2021
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Établissements canadiensSt. Michael's HospitalInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Organismes subventionnairesCorHealth Ontario
Mots-clésMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Limb ischemiaRevascularization2019-20 coronavirus outbreakIschemiaSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Critical limb ischemiaCardiologyInternal medicineSurgeryVirologyDiseaseMyocardial infarction

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Dear Editor In many jurisdictions internationally, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic brought about unprecedented stay-at-home orders, restrictions to non-essential in-person health services, and unprecedented emergency department avoidance. These factors contributed to steep but temporary declines in both scheduled and unscheduled invasive procedures1,2. For patients developing chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (CLTI) during the pandemic, delays in scheduled revascularization may have resulted in higher rates of amputation, reduced quality of life, and excess mortality. For a healthcare system, excess amputations would further strain hospital resources, given the high average length of stay among people requiring a leg amputation. In Ontario, Canada, during the first and third COVID-19 waves, hospitals were mandated (on 16 March 2020 and 20 April 2021 respectively) to postpone all scheduled procedures to reserve resources for the rising number of patients with COVID-19. However, given the aforementioned considerations, revascularization for limb-threatening ischaemia remained a relative priority among essential hospital services during periods of restricted care3. Throughout the pandemic, decision analytical modelling has been an essential tool for resource planning to guide health policy under conditions of uncertainty4,5. With a lag in availability of real-world data, modelling offers the ability to explore and quantify the impact of care delays on patients with CLTI. A model-based approach was used to predict the consequences of COVID-19-related delays in lower extremity revascularization (fully endovascular, open or hybrid) for CLTI over the first three waves of the COVID-19 pandemic (18 March 2020 to 16 June 2021), relative to a non-COVID-19 scenario. A microsimulation model with parallel trials simulated the flow of patients with CLTI through the Ontario hospital system for the COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 scenarios, and projected short- and long-term health outcomes including major (above-ankle) amputation, mortality, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The model was informed by real-world revascularization volumes, waiting times, and clinical outcome data for the province of Ontario, supplemented with additional data inputs from published literature (Appendix S1 - Supplemental Methods). Important limitations of the data inputs were that revascularization volumes from January to June 2021 were extrapolated from data accrued earlier in the pandemic, and that long-term outcome probabilities, accruable QALYs, and CLTI-related amputation among those not undergoing revascularization were not estimated directly from an Ontario CLTI population (Appendix S1 - Supplemental Methods). In recognition of these limitations, the effect of changes to key model assumptions were explored in a set of sensitivity analyses: increasing the probability of needing urgent surgery (amputation or urgent vascularization) while awaiting scheduled revascularization; increasing the probability of progressing to a non-salvageable limb while awaiting scheduled revascularization; and increasing the severity of ramp-down in scheduled CLTI revascularizations during the third most severe wave. The model suggested that delays in CLTI revascularizations in Ontario during the pandemic resulted in 21 additional major amputations (316 versus 295), and 32 additional deaths (475 versus 443) at 90 days after the index CLTI hospitalization compared with the non-COVID-19 scenario (Table 1). The excess amputation range (21–33) and excess death range (32–47) at 90 days varied by the probability of needing urgent surgery, the probability of progressing to a non-salvageable limb, and the level of ramp-down implemented during the third wave (Table 1). Moreover, compared with a non-COVID-19 situation, patients who sought care for CLTI during COVID-19 in Ontario incurred an excess mean loss of between 0.07 and 0.11 QALYs over their lifetime (837–1110 total QALYs lost) (Table 1). These differences were the downstream effects of: scheduled revascularization for CLTI during COVID-19 being delayed between 6 and 10 additional days on average relative to the non-COVID-19 scenario, and a larger proportion of CLTI revascularizations occurring on an urgent, rather than scheduled, basis (41–52 per cent versus 45–56 per cent scheduled in COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 scenarios respectively). Summary of results Values in parentheses are numbers of patients unless indicated otherwise; *values are mean with total in parentheses. Results for the scenario analyses are based on an average of 500 runs of the model over the lifetime of simulated patients during the COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 scenarios. CLTI, chronic limb-threatening ischaemia; QALY, quality-adjusted life-year. Summary of results Values in parentheses are numbers of patients unless indicated otherwise; *values are mean with total in parentheses. Results for the scenario analyses are based on an average of 500 runs of the model over the lifetime of simulated patients during the COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 scenarios. CLTI, chronic limb-threatening ischaemia; QALY, quality-adjusted life-year. In conclusion, modelling suggests that Ontario has seen a rise in adverse outcomes among the CLTI population requiring revascularization during the course of the pandemic. More generally, the results support the importance of efforts to maintain timely revascularization for patients with CLTI in future situations of hospital care restrictions. CorHealth Ontario provided funding for this work. B.S. is supported by a Canada Research Chair in Economics of Infectious Diseases (CRC-950-232429). C.M. is the recipient of an Ontario Early Researcher Award supporting amputation prevention research in Ontario. Disclosure. The authors declare no conflict of interest. Supplementary material is available at BJS online.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Intégrité de la recherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,211
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,011
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,003
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,110
Tête enseignante GPT0,382
Écart entre enseignants0,272 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2021
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBritish journal of surgeryMême sujetCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsTravaux en français237 207