Documenting COVID-19 screening before surgery during lockdown (COVID Screen): an audit with routinely collected health data
David Story A B C D , Elizabeth Coyle B , Abarna Devapalasundaram B , Sofia Sidiropoulos A C , Bobby Ou Yang C and Tim Coulson A CA Centre for Integrated Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, 151 Barry Street, Carlton, Vic. 3010, Australia. Email: sofia.sidiropoulos@unimelb.edu.au
B St Vincent’s Hospital Melbourne, 41 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Vic. 3065, Australia. Email: elizabeth.coyle@svha.org.au; abarna.devapalasundaram@svha.org.au
C Department of Anaesthesia, Austin Health, Melbourne, Studley Road, Heidelberg, Vic. 3084, Australia. Email: bobby.ouyang@austin.org.au; tim.coulson@austin.org.au
D Corresponding author. Email: dastory@unimelb.edu.au
Australian Health Review 44(5) 723-727 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH20169
Submitted: 6 July 2020 Accepted: 3 September 2020 Published: 23 September 2020
Journal Compilation © AHHA 2020 Open Access CC BY
Abstract
Objective This study analysed screening for COVID-19 before surgery and outcomes of any perioperative testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection during pandemic-restricted surgery.
Methods An audit was conducted with routinely collected health data before both elective and non-elective surgery at two large Melbourne hospitals during April and early May 2020. We looked for documented systematic screening for COVID-19 disease and fever (>38°C) and results of SARS-COV-2 testing, and proposed a minimum acceptable documenting rate of 85%.
Results The study included 2197 consecutive patients (1279 (58%) undergoing elective surgery, 917 (42%) undergoing non-elective surgery) across most specialities. Although 926 (72%) patients undergoing elective surgery had both systematic screening and temperature documented, approximately half that percentage undergoing non-elective surgery (n = 347; 38%) had both documented. However, 871 (95%) of non-elective surgery patients had temperature documented. Acknowledging limited screening, 85 (9.3%) non-elective surgery patients had positive screening, compared with 39 (3.0%) elective surgery patients. All 152 (7%) patients who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 were negative, and no cases were reported from external contact tracing.
Conclusions Although ‘not documented’ does not necessarily equal ‘not done’, we found that documenting of COVID-19 screening could be improved. Better understanding of implementing screening practices in pandemics and other crises, particularly for non-elective surgery patients, is warranted.
What is known about the topic? Little is known about routine screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection among surgical patients. However, it is well established that implementing effective uptake of safety and quality initiatives can be difficult.
What does this paper add? We found that although most patients had documented temperature, fewer than 75% had a documented systematic questionnaire screen for COVID, particularly patients undergoing non-elective surgery.
What are the implications for practitioners? Clear documenting is important in managing patients. Pandemics and other crises can require rapid changes in practice. Implementing such measures may be less complete than anticipated and may require greater use of evidence-based implementation strategies, particularly in the less predictable care of non-elective surgery patients.
References
[1] John Hopkins University. COVID-19 dashboard by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University. 2020. Available at: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html [verified 9 August 2020].[2] The Department of Health. Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC). 2020. Available at: https://www.health.gov.au/committees-and-groups/australian-health-protection-principal-committee-ahppc [verified 9 August 2020].
[3] Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC). COVID-19: elective surgery and infection prevention and control precautions. Canberra: ACSQHC; 2020.
[4] Myles PS, Maswime S. Mitigating the risks of surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet 2020; 396 2–3.
| Mitigating the risks of surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32479826PubMed |
[5] Communicable Diseases Network Australia (CDNA). Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): CDNA national guidelines for public health units. Version 3.4, 01 July 2020. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia; 2020.
[6] Watson J, Whiting PF, Brush JE. Interpreting a covid-19 test result. BMJ 2020; 369 m1808
| 32398230PubMed |
[7] National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) Project Team. Fifth patient report of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit. London: Royal College of Anaesthetists; 2019.
[8] Benchimol EI, Smeeth L, Guttmann A, Harron K, Moher D, Petersen I, Sørensen HT, von Elm E, Langan SM, RECORD Working Committee The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement. PLoS Med 2015; 12 e1001885
| The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26440803PubMed |
[9] Ogrinc G, Davies L, Goodman D, Batalden P, Davidoff F, Stevens D. SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process. BMJ Qual Saf 2016; 25 986–92.
| SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26369893PubMed |
[10] COVIDSurg Collaborative Global guidance for surgical care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Br J Surg 2020;
| Global guidance for surgical care during the COVID-19 pandemic.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32956502PubMed |
[11] COVIDSurg Collaborative Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study. Lancet 2020; 396 27–38.
| Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 32479829PubMed |
[12] Story DA, Leslie K, Myles PS, Fink M, Poustie SJ, Forbes A, Yap S, Beavis V, Kerridge R, on behalf of the REASON Investigators, Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists Trials Group Complications and mortality in older surgical patients in Australia and New Zealand (the REASON study): a multicentre, prospective, observational study. Anaesthesia 2010; 65 1022–30.
| Complications and mortality in older surgical patients in Australia and New Zealand (the REASON study): a multicentre, prospective, observational study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20731639PubMed |
[13] Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA). Latest PPE statement available: ANZCA statement on personal protection equipment during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (15 May 2020). 2020. Available at: https://www.anzca.edu.au/news/covid-19-news/new-ppe-statement-released [verified 15 September 2020].
[14] Scott IA, Kallie J, Gavrilidis A. Achieving greater clinician engagement and impact in health care improvement: a neglected imperative. Med J Aust 2020; 212 5–7.e1.
| Achieving greater clinician engagement and impact in health care improvement: a neglected imperative.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 31793698PubMed |
