In Case You Missed It: COVID

Theme
medstat_covid
icymicov
Main menu
ICYMI Covid Main
Unpublish
Altmetric
Click for Credit Button Label
Click For Credit
DSM Affiliated
Display in offset block
Enable Disqus
Display Author and Disclosure Link
Publication Type
News
Slot System
Featured Buckets
Disable Sticky Ads
Disable Ad Block Mitigation
Featured Buckets Admin
Show Ads on this Publication's Homepage
Consolidated Pub
Show Article Page Numbers on TOC
Use larger logo size
Off
publication_blueconic_enabled
Off
Show More Destinations Menu
Disable Adhesion on Publication
Off
Restore Menu Label on Mobile Navigation
Disable Facebook Pixel from Publication
Exclude this publication from publication selection on articles and quiz
Gating Strategy
First Page Free
Challenge Center
Disable Inline Native ads
Supporter Name /ID
COVID Vaccine [ 5979 ]
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
320629.4
Activity ID
80531
Product Name
Clinical Briefings ICYMI
Product ID
112

Hand Hygiene in Preventing COVID-19 Transmission

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Hand Hygiene in Preventing COVID-19 Transmission

 

Handwashing with antimicrobial soaps or alcohol-based sanitizers is an effective measure in preventing microbial disease transmission. In the context of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevention, the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have recommended handwashing with soap and water after coughing/sneezing, visiting a public place, touching surfaces outside the home, and taking care of a sick person(s), as well as before and after eating. When soap and water are not available, alcohol-based sanitizers may be used.1,2

Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) is most commonly associated with wet work and is frequently seen in health care workers in relation to hand hygiene, with survey-based studies reporting 25% to 55% of nurses affected.3-5 In a prospective study (N=102), health care workers who washed their hands more than 10 times per day were55% more likely to develop hand dermatitis.6 Frequent ICD of the hands has been reported in Chinese health care workers in association with COVID-19.7 Handwashing and/or glove wearing may be newly prioritized by workers who handle frequently touched goods and surfaces, such as flight attendants (Figure). Patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder may be another vulnerable population.8

A 62-year-old flight attendant with irritant contact hand dermatitis who reported frequent use of hand wipes due to fear of contracting coronavirus disease 2019. A skin fissure was noted on the right thumb.


Alcohol-based sanitizers and detergents or antimicrobials in soaps may cause ICD of the hands by denaturation of stratum corneum proteins, depletion of intercellular lipids, and decreased corneocyte cohesion. These agents alter the skin flora, with increased colonization by staphylococci and gram-negative bacilli.9 Clinical findings include xerosis, scaling, fissuring, and bleeding. Physicians may evaluate severity of ICD of the hands using the hand eczema severity index, with scores ranging from 0 to 360 based on involvement in 5 different hand zones.10

Cleansing the hands with alcohol-based sanitizers has consistently shown equivalent or greater efficacy than antimicrobial soaps for eradication of most microbes, with exception of bacterial spores and protozoan oocysts.11 In an in vivo experiment, 70% ethanol solution was more effective in eradicating rotavirus from the fingerpads of adults than 10% povidone-iodine solution, nonmedicated soaps, and soaps containing chloroxylenol 4.8% or chlorhexidine gluconate 4%.12 Coronavirus disease 2019 is a lipophilic enveloped virus. The lipid-dissolving effects of alcohol-based sanitizers is especially effective against these kinds of viruses. An in vitro experiment showed that alcohol solutions are effective against enveloped viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, Ebola virus, and Zika virus.13 There are limited data for the virucidal efficacy of non–alcohol-based sanitizers containing quaternary ammonium compounds (most commonly benzalkonium chloride) and therefore they are not recommended for protection against COVID-19. Handwashing is preferred over alcohol-based solutions when hands are visibly dirty.

Alcohol-based sanitizers typically are less likely to cause ICD than handwashing with detergent-based or antimicrobial soaps. Antimicrobial ingredients in soaps such as chlorhexidine, chloroxylenol, and triclosan are frequent culprits.11 Detergents in soap such as sodium laureth sulfate cause more skin irritation and transepidermal water loss than alcohol14; however, among health care workers, alcohol-based sanitizers often are perceived as more damaging to the skin.15 During the 2014 Ebola outbreak, use of alcohol-based sanitizers vs handwashing resulted in lower hand eczema severity index scores (n=108).16



Propensity for ICD is a limiting factor in hand hygiene adherence.17 In a double-blind randomized trial (N=54), scheduled use of an oil-containing lotion was shown to increase compliance with hand hygiene protocols in health care workers by preventing cracks, scaling, and pain.18 Using sanitizers containing humectants (eg, aloe vera gel) or moisturizers with petrolatum, liquid paraffin, glycerin, or mineral oil have all been shown to decrease the incidence of ICD in frequent handwashers.19,20 Thorough hand drying also is important in preventing dermatitis. Drying with disposable paper towels is preferred over automated air dryers to prevent aerosolization of microbes.21 Because latex has been implicated in development of ICD, use of latex-free gloves is recommended.22

Alcohol-based sanitizer is not only an effective virucidal agent but also is less likely to cause ICD, therefore promoting hand hygiene adherence. Handwashing with soap still is necessary when hands are visibly dirty but should be performed less frequently if feasible. Hand hygiene and emollient usage education is important for physicians and patients alike, particularly during the COVID-19 crisis.

References
  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Coronavirus disease 2019. how to protect yourself & others. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prepare/prevention.html. Updated April 13, 2020. Accessed April 21, 2020.
  2. World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) advice for the public. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public. Updated March 31, 2020. Accessed April 21, 2020.
  3. Carøe TK, Ebbehøj NE, Bonde JPE, et al. Hand eczema and wet work: dose-response relationship and effect of leaving the profession. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78:341-347.
  4. Larson E, Friedman C, Cohran J, et al. Prevalence and correlates of skin damage on the hands of nurses. Heart Lung. 1997;26:404-412.
  5. Lampel HP, Patel N, Boyse K, et al. Prevalence of hand dermatitis in inpatient nurses at a United States hospital. Dermatitis. 2007;18:140-142.
  6. Callahan A, Baron E, Fekedulegn D, et al. Winter season, frequent hand washing, and irritant patch test reactions to detergents are associated with hand dermatitis in health care workers. Dermatitis. 2013;24:170-175.
  7. Lan J, Song Z, Miao X, et al. Skin damage among healthcare workers managing coronavirus disease-2019 [published online March 18, 2020]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1215-1216.
  8. Katz RJ, Landau P, DeVeaugh-Geiss J, et al. Pharmacological responsiveness of dermatitis secondary to compulsive washing. Psychiatry Res. 1990;34:223-226.
  9. Larson EL, Hughes CA, Pyrek JD, et al. Changes in bacterial flora associated with skin damage on hands of health care personnel. Am J Infect Control. 1998;26:513-521.
  10. Held E, Skoet R, Johansen JD, et al. The hand eczema severity index (HECSI): a scoring system for clinical assessment of hand eczema. a study of inter- and intraobserver reliability. Br J Dermatol. 2005;152:302-307.
  11. Boyce JM, Pittet D, Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, et al. Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings. Recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HIPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force. Am J Infect Control. 2002;30:S1-S46.
  12. Ansari SA, Sattar SA, Springthorpe VS, et al. Invivo protocol for testing efficacy of hand-washing agents against viruses and bacteria—experiments with rotavirus and Escherichi coli. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1989;55:3113-3118.
  13. Siddharta A, Pfaender S, Vielle NJ, et al. virucidal activity of world health organization-recommended formulations against enveloped viruses, including Zika, Ebola, and emerging coronaviruses. J Infect Dis. 2017;215:902-906.
  14. Pedersen LK, Held E, Johansen JD, et al. Less skin irritation from alcohol-based disinfectant than from detergent used for hand disinfection. Br J Dermatol. 2005;153:1142-1146.
  15. Stutz N, Becker D, Jappe U, et al. Nurses’ perceptions of the benefits and adverse effects of hand disinfection: alcohol-based hand rubs vs. hygienic handwashing: a multicentre questionnaire study with additional patch testing by the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group. Br J Dermatol. 2009;160:565-572.
  16. Wolfe MK, Wells E, Mitro B, et al. Seeking clearer recommendations for hand hygiene in communities facing Ebola: a randomized trial investigating the impact of six handwashing methods on skin irritation and dermatitis. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0167378.
  17. Pittet D, Allegranzi B, Storr J. The WHO Clean Care is Safer Care programme: field-testing to enhance sustainability and spread of hand hygiene improvements. J Infect Public Health. 2008;1:4-10.
  18. McCormick RD, Buchman TL, Maki DG. Double-blind, randomized trial of scheduled use of a novel barrier cream and an oil-containing lotion for protecting the hands of health care workers. Am J Infect Control. 2000;28:302-310.
  19. Berndt U, Wigger-Alberti W, Gabard B, et al. Efficacy of a barrier cream and its vehicle as protective measures against occupational irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:77-80.
  20. Kampf G, Ennen J. Regular use of a hand cream can attenuate skin dryness and roughness caused by frequent hand washing. BMC Dermatol. 2006;6:1.
  21. Gammon J, Hunt J. The neglected element of hand hygiene - significance of hand drying, efficiency of different methods, and clinical implication: a review. J Infect Prev. 2019;20:66-74.
  22. Elston DM. Letter from the editor: occupational skin disease among healthcare workers during the coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic [published online March 18, 2020]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1085-1086.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Mr. Gupta is from SUNY Downstate College of Medicine, Brooklyn. Dr. Lipner is from the Department of Dermatology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Shari R. Lipner, MD, PhD, 1305 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 (shl9032@med.cornell.edu).

Issue
Cutis - 105(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
233-234
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Mr. Gupta is from SUNY Downstate College of Medicine, Brooklyn. Dr. Lipner is from the Department of Dermatology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Shari R. Lipner, MD, PhD, 1305 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 (shl9032@med.cornell.edu).

Author and Disclosure Information

Mr. Gupta is from SUNY Downstate College of Medicine, Brooklyn. Dr. Lipner is from the Department of Dermatology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Shari R. Lipner, MD, PhD, 1305 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 (shl9032@med.cornell.edu).

Article PDF
Article PDF

 

Handwashing with antimicrobial soaps or alcohol-based sanitizers is an effective measure in preventing microbial disease transmission. In the context of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevention, the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have recommended handwashing with soap and water after coughing/sneezing, visiting a public place, touching surfaces outside the home, and taking care of a sick person(s), as well as before and after eating. When soap and water are not available, alcohol-based sanitizers may be used.1,2

Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) is most commonly associated with wet work and is frequently seen in health care workers in relation to hand hygiene, with survey-based studies reporting 25% to 55% of nurses affected.3-5 In a prospective study (N=102), health care workers who washed their hands more than 10 times per day were55% more likely to develop hand dermatitis.6 Frequent ICD of the hands has been reported in Chinese health care workers in association with COVID-19.7 Handwashing and/or glove wearing may be newly prioritized by workers who handle frequently touched goods and surfaces, such as flight attendants (Figure). Patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder may be another vulnerable population.8

A 62-year-old flight attendant with irritant contact hand dermatitis who reported frequent use of hand wipes due to fear of contracting coronavirus disease 2019. A skin fissure was noted on the right thumb.


Alcohol-based sanitizers and detergents or antimicrobials in soaps may cause ICD of the hands by denaturation of stratum corneum proteins, depletion of intercellular lipids, and decreased corneocyte cohesion. These agents alter the skin flora, with increased colonization by staphylococci and gram-negative bacilli.9 Clinical findings include xerosis, scaling, fissuring, and bleeding. Physicians may evaluate severity of ICD of the hands using the hand eczema severity index, with scores ranging from 0 to 360 based on involvement in 5 different hand zones.10

Cleansing the hands with alcohol-based sanitizers has consistently shown equivalent or greater efficacy than antimicrobial soaps for eradication of most microbes, with exception of bacterial spores and protozoan oocysts.11 In an in vivo experiment, 70% ethanol solution was more effective in eradicating rotavirus from the fingerpads of adults than 10% povidone-iodine solution, nonmedicated soaps, and soaps containing chloroxylenol 4.8% or chlorhexidine gluconate 4%.12 Coronavirus disease 2019 is a lipophilic enveloped virus. The lipid-dissolving effects of alcohol-based sanitizers is especially effective against these kinds of viruses. An in vitro experiment showed that alcohol solutions are effective against enveloped viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, Ebola virus, and Zika virus.13 There are limited data for the virucidal efficacy of non–alcohol-based sanitizers containing quaternary ammonium compounds (most commonly benzalkonium chloride) and therefore they are not recommended for protection against COVID-19. Handwashing is preferred over alcohol-based solutions when hands are visibly dirty.

Alcohol-based sanitizers typically are less likely to cause ICD than handwashing with detergent-based or antimicrobial soaps. Antimicrobial ingredients in soaps such as chlorhexidine, chloroxylenol, and triclosan are frequent culprits.11 Detergents in soap such as sodium laureth sulfate cause more skin irritation and transepidermal water loss than alcohol14; however, among health care workers, alcohol-based sanitizers often are perceived as more damaging to the skin.15 During the 2014 Ebola outbreak, use of alcohol-based sanitizers vs handwashing resulted in lower hand eczema severity index scores (n=108).16



Propensity for ICD is a limiting factor in hand hygiene adherence.17 In a double-blind randomized trial (N=54), scheduled use of an oil-containing lotion was shown to increase compliance with hand hygiene protocols in health care workers by preventing cracks, scaling, and pain.18 Using sanitizers containing humectants (eg, aloe vera gel) or moisturizers with petrolatum, liquid paraffin, glycerin, or mineral oil have all been shown to decrease the incidence of ICD in frequent handwashers.19,20 Thorough hand drying also is important in preventing dermatitis. Drying with disposable paper towels is preferred over automated air dryers to prevent aerosolization of microbes.21 Because latex has been implicated in development of ICD, use of latex-free gloves is recommended.22

Alcohol-based sanitizer is not only an effective virucidal agent but also is less likely to cause ICD, therefore promoting hand hygiene adherence. Handwashing with soap still is necessary when hands are visibly dirty but should be performed less frequently if feasible. Hand hygiene and emollient usage education is important for physicians and patients alike, particularly during the COVID-19 crisis.

 

Handwashing with antimicrobial soaps or alcohol-based sanitizers is an effective measure in preventing microbial disease transmission. In the context of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevention, the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have recommended handwashing with soap and water after coughing/sneezing, visiting a public place, touching surfaces outside the home, and taking care of a sick person(s), as well as before and after eating. When soap and water are not available, alcohol-based sanitizers may be used.1,2

Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) is most commonly associated with wet work and is frequently seen in health care workers in relation to hand hygiene, with survey-based studies reporting 25% to 55% of nurses affected.3-5 In a prospective study (N=102), health care workers who washed their hands more than 10 times per day were55% more likely to develop hand dermatitis.6 Frequent ICD of the hands has been reported in Chinese health care workers in association with COVID-19.7 Handwashing and/or glove wearing may be newly prioritized by workers who handle frequently touched goods and surfaces, such as flight attendants (Figure). Patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder may be another vulnerable population.8

A 62-year-old flight attendant with irritant contact hand dermatitis who reported frequent use of hand wipes due to fear of contracting coronavirus disease 2019. A skin fissure was noted on the right thumb.


Alcohol-based sanitizers and detergents or antimicrobials in soaps may cause ICD of the hands by denaturation of stratum corneum proteins, depletion of intercellular lipids, and decreased corneocyte cohesion. These agents alter the skin flora, with increased colonization by staphylococci and gram-negative bacilli.9 Clinical findings include xerosis, scaling, fissuring, and bleeding. Physicians may evaluate severity of ICD of the hands using the hand eczema severity index, with scores ranging from 0 to 360 based on involvement in 5 different hand zones.10

Cleansing the hands with alcohol-based sanitizers has consistently shown equivalent or greater efficacy than antimicrobial soaps for eradication of most microbes, with exception of bacterial spores and protozoan oocysts.11 In an in vivo experiment, 70% ethanol solution was more effective in eradicating rotavirus from the fingerpads of adults than 10% povidone-iodine solution, nonmedicated soaps, and soaps containing chloroxylenol 4.8% or chlorhexidine gluconate 4%.12 Coronavirus disease 2019 is a lipophilic enveloped virus. The lipid-dissolving effects of alcohol-based sanitizers is especially effective against these kinds of viruses. An in vitro experiment showed that alcohol solutions are effective against enveloped viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, Ebola virus, and Zika virus.13 There are limited data for the virucidal efficacy of non–alcohol-based sanitizers containing quaternary ammonium compounds (most commonly benzalkonium chloride) and therefore they are not recommended for protection against COVID-19. Handwashing is preferred over alcohol-based solutions when hands are visibly dirty.

Alcohol-based sanitizers typically are less likely to cause ICD than handwashing with detergent-based or antimicrobial soaps. Antimicrobial ingredients in soaps such as chlorhexidine, chloroxylenol, and triclosan are frequent culprits.11 Detergents in soap such as sodium laureth sulfate cause more skin irritation and transepidermal water loss than alcohol14; however, among health care workers, alcohol-based sanitizers often are perceived as more damaging to the skin.15 During the 2014 Ebola outbreak, use of alcohol-based sanitizers vs handwashing resulted in lower hand eczema severity index scores (n=108).16



Propensity for ICD is a limiting factor in hand hygiene adherence.17 In a double-blind randomized trial (N=54), scheduled use of an oil-containing lotion was shown to increase compliance with hand hygiene protocols in health care workers by preventing cracks, scaling, and pain.18 Using sanitizers containing humectants (eg, aloe vera gel) or moisturizers with petrolatum, liquid paraffin, glycerin, or mineral oil have all been shown to decrease the incidence of ICD in frequent handwashers.19,20 Thorough hand drying also is important in preventing dermatitis. Drying with disposable paper towels is preferred over automated air dryers to prevent aerosolization of microbes.21 Because latex has been implicated in development of ICD, use of latex-free gloves is recommended.22

Alcohol-based sanitizer is not only an effective virucidal agent but also is less likely to cause ICD, therefore promoting hand hygiene adherence. Handwashing with soap still is necessary when hands are visibly dirty but should be performed less frequently if feasible. Hand hygiene and emollient usage education is important for physicians and patients alike, particularly during the COVID-19 crisis.

References
  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Coronavirus disease 2019. how to protect yourself & others. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prepare/prevention.html. Updated April 13, 2020. Accessed April 21, 2020.
  2. World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) advice for the public. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public. Updated March 31, 2020. Accessed April 21, 2020.
  3. Carøe TK, Ebbehøj NE, Bonde JPE, et al. Hand eczema and wet work: dose-response relationship and effect of leaving the profession. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78:341-347.
  4. Larson E, Friedman C, Cohran J, et al. Prevalence and correlates of skin damage on the hands of nurses. Heart Lung. 1997;26:404-412.
  5. Lampel HP, Patel N, Boyse K, et al. Prevalence of hand dermatitis in inpatient nurses at a United States hospital. Dermatitis. 2007;18:140-142.
  6. Callahan A, Baron E, Fekedulegn D, et al. Winter season, frequent hand washing, and irritant patch test reactions to detergents are associated with hand dermatitis in health care workers. Dermatitis. 2013;24:170-175.
  7. Lan J, Song Z, Miao X, et al. Skin damage among healthcare workers managing coronavirus disease-2019 [published online March 18, 2020]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1215-1216.
  8. Katz RJ, Landau P, DeVeaugh-Geiss J, et al. Pharmacological responsiveness of dermatitis secondary to compulsive washing. Psychiatry Res. 1990;34:223-226.
  9. Larson EL, Hughes CA, Pyrek JD, et al. Changes in bacterial flora associated with skin damage on hands of health care personnel. Am J Infect Control. 1998;26:513-521.
  10. Held E, Skoet R, Johansen JD, et al. The hand eczema severity index (HECSI): a scoring system for clinical assessment of hand eczema. a study of inter- and intraobserver reliability. Br J Dermatol. 2005;152:302-307.
  11. Boyce JM, Pittet D, Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, et al. Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings. Recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HIPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force. Am J Infect Control. 2002;30:S1-S46.
  12. Ansari SA, Sattar SA, Springthorpe VS, et al. Invivo protocol for testing efficacy of hand-washing agents against viruses and bacteria—experiments with rotavirus and Escherichi coli. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1989;55:3113-3118.
  13. Siddharta A, Pfaender S, Vielle NJ, et al. virucidal activity of world health organization-recommended formulations against enveloped viruses, including Zika, Ebola, and emerging coronaviruses. J Infect Dis. 2017;215:902-906.
  14. Pedersen LK, Held E, Johansen JD, et al. Less skin irritation from alcohol-based disinfectant than from detergent used for hand disinfection. Br J Dermatol. 2005;153:1142-1146.
  15. Stutz N, Becker D, Jappe U, et al. Nurses’ perceptions of the benefits and adverse effects of hand disinfection: alcohol-based hand rubs vs. hygienic handwashing: a multicentre questionnaire study with additional patch testing by the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group. Br J Dermatol. 2009;160:565-572.
  16. Wolfe MK, Wells E, Mitro B, et al. Seeking clearer recommendations for hand hygiene in communities facing Ebola: a randomized trial investigating the impact of six handwashing methods on skin irritation and dermatitis. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0167378.
  17. Pittet D, Allegranzi B, Storr J. The WHO Clean Care is Safer Care programme: field-testing to enhance sustainability and spread of hand hygiene improvements. J Infect Public Health. 2008;1:4-10.
  18. McCormick RD, Buchman TL, Maki DG. Double-blind, randomized trial of scheduled use of a novel barrier cream and an oil-containing lotion for protecting the hands of health care workers. Am J Infect Control. 2000;28:302-310.
  19. Berndt U, Wigger-Alberti W, Gabard B, et al. Efficacy of a barrier cream and its vehicle as protective measures against occupational irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:77-80.
  20. Kampf G, Ennen J. Regular use of a hand cream can attenuate skin dryness and roughness caused by frequent hand washing. BMC Dermatol. 2006;6:1.
  21. Gammon J, Hunt J. The neglected element of hand hygiene - significance of hand drying, efficiency of different methods, and clinical implication: a review. J Infect Prev. 2019;20:66-74.
  22. Elston DM. Letter from the editor: occupational skin disease among healthcare workers during the coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic [published online March 18, 2020]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1085-1086.
References
  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Coronavirus disease 2019. how to protect yourself & others. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prepare/prevention.html. Updated April 13, 2020. Accessed April 21, 2020.
  2. World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) advice for the public. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public. Updated March 31, 2020. Accessed April 21, 2020.
  3. Carøe TK, Ebbehøj NE, Bonde JPE, et al. Hand eczema and wet work: dose-response relationship and effect of leaving the profession. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78:341-347.
  4. Larson E, Friedman C, Cohran J, et al. Prevalence and correlates of skin damage on the hands of nurses. Heart Lung. 1997;26:404-412.
  5. Lampel HP, Patel N, Boyse K, et al. Prevalence of hand dermatitis in inpatient nurses at a United States hospital. Dermatitis. 2007;18:140-142.
  6. Callahan A, Baron E, Fekedulegn D, et al. Winter season, frequent hand washing, and irritant patch test reactions to detergents are associated with hand dermatitis in health care workers. Dermatitis. 2013;24:170-175.
  7. Lan J, Song Z, Miao X, et al. Skin damage among healthcare workers managing coronavirus disease-2019 [published online March 18, 2020]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1215-1216.
  8. Katz RJ, Landau P, DeVeaugh-Geiss J, et al. Pharmacological responsiveness of dermatitis secondary to compulsive washing. Psychiatry Res. 1990;34:223-226.
  9. Larson EL, Hughes CA, Pyrek JD, et al. Changes in bacterial flora associated with skin damage on hands of health care personnel. Am J Infect Control. 1998;26:513-521.
  10. Held E, Skoet R, Johansen JD, et al. The hand eczema severity index (HECSI): a scoring system for clinical assessment of hand eczema. a study of inter- and intraobserver reliability. Br J Dermatol. 2005;152:302-307.
  11. Boyce JM, Pittet D, Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, et al. Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings. Recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HIPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force. Am J Infect Control. 2002;30:S1-S46.
  12. Ansari SA, Sattar SA, Springthorpe VS, et al. Invivo protocol for testing efficacy of hand-washing agents against viruses and bacteria—experiments with rotavirus and Escherichi coli. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1989;55:3113-3118.
  13. Siddharta A, Pfaender S, Vielle NJ, et al. virucidal activity of world health organization-recommended formulations against enveloped viruses, including Zika, Ebola, and emerging coronaviruses. J Infect Dis. 2017;215:902-906.
  14. Pedersen LK, Held E, Johansen JD, et al. Less skin irritation from alcohol-based disinfectant than from detergent used for hand disinfection. Br J Dermatol. 2005;153:1142-1146.
  15. Stutz N, Becker D, Jappe U, et al. Nurses’ perceptions of the benefits and adverse effects of hand disinfection: alcohol-based hand rubs vs. hygienic handwashing: a multicentre questionnaire study with additional patch testing by the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group. Br J Dermatol. 2009;160:565-572.
  16. Wolfe MK, Wells E, Mitro B, et al. Seeking clearer recommendations for hand hygiene in communities facing Ebola: a randomized trial investigating the impact of six handwashing methods on skin irritation and dermatitis. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0167378.
  17. Pittet D, Allegranzi B, Storr J. The WHO Clean Care is Safer Care programme: field-testing to enhance sustainability and spread of hand hygiene improvements. J Infect Public Health. 2008;1:4-10.
  18. McCormick RD, Buchman TL, Maki DG. Double-blind, randomized trial of scheduled use of a novel barrier cream and an oil-containing lotion for protecting the hands of health care workers. Am J Infect Control. 2000;28:302-310.
  19. Berndt U, Wigger-Alberti W, Gabard B, et al. Efficacy of a barrier cream and its vehicle as protective measures against occupational irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:77-80.
  20. Kampf G, Ennen J. Regular use of a hand cream can attenuate skin dryness and roughness caused by frequent hand washing. BMC Dermatol. 2006;6:1.
  21. Gammon J, Hunt J. The neglected element of hand hygiene - significance of hand drying, efficiency of different methods, and clinical implication: a review. J Infect Prev. 2019;20:66-74.
  22. Elston DM. Letter from the editor: occupational skin disease among healthcare workers during the coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic [published online March 18, 2020]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1085-1086.
Issue
Cutis - 105(5)
Issue
Cutis - 105(5)
Page Number
233-234
Page Number
233-234
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Hand Hygiene in Preventing COVID-19 Transmission
Display Headline
Hand Hygiene in Preventing COVID-19 Transmission
Sections
Inside the Article

Practice Points

  • Alcohol-based sanitizers are as or even more effective as handwashing with soap and water for preventing disease transmission of enveloped viruses such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus.
  • Although perceived as more irritating, alcohol-based sanitizers are less likely to cause irritant contact dermatitis of the hands than handwashing with soap and water.
  • Use of humectants, moisturizers, and/or emollients in combination with alcohol-based sanitizers allows for effective hand hygiene without irritating the skin.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Article PDF Media

Multisociety roadmap eyes restarting elective cardiac cases

Article Type
Changed

As COVID-19 case levels plateau in some regions, 16 North American cardiovascular societies have released a framework for reintroducing cardiovascular services disrupted by the pandemic.

The consensus document outlines a phased approach to restarting invasive cardiovascular (CV) procedures and diagnostic tests that aims to reduce patient and health care provider exposure to the coronavirus and still provide essential care. It also emphasizes some of the ethical considerations in patient selection and the need for a collaborative approach.

“The key message in our document is we need a new unprecedented collaboration with public health officials so that we can carefully monitor the situation and we’re aware of what’s happening with the penetrance of the pandemic in the community, but they’re aware of the morbidity and mortality that’s occurring on our ever-growing waiting list,” lead author David A. Wood, MD, told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology.

The recommendations were jointly published May 4 in the Canadian Journal of Cardiology , the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, and The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, and are endorsed by, among others, the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology (ACC), and Canadian Cardiovascular Society.

The guidance comes as hospitals are facing revenue shortfalls because of canceled elective procedures and resource-intensive COVID-19 cases, prompting some healthcare systems to furlough, lay off, or even fire staff.

“It’s obvious that volumes are down between 40% and 60%,” said Wood, director of the cardiac catheterization laboratory at Vancouver General Hospital and professor of medicine at the University of British Columbia, Canada. “Part of that is that some areas have restricted case volumes totally appropriately and it’s partly because patients are very afraid of coming to the hospital and, unfortunately, are having bad events at home. And some are dying.”

The new report features a detailed table outlining three different response levels: reintroduction of some services (level 2); reintroduction of most services (level 1); and regular services (level 0). It covers a range of services from transthoracic echocardiography and exercise testing with imaging to care for acute coronary syndrome and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

“We’ve learned that we can very quickly turn off the tap and go to doing only 10% of our normal volumes, whether that’s surgery, cath lab, EP, diagnostic tests,” Wood said. “It’s much more difficult to thoughtfully turn the tap part way back on or restart the engine … you don’t just go from 0 to 100 [mph]. You go from 0 to 30 to 60 then maybe to 80 [mph].”

The document also includes eight guiding principles such as:
 

  • The expectation that response levels will be different between regions, and even within a given region.
  • A “transparent collaborative plan” for COVID-19 testing and personal protective equipment (PPE) must be in place before restarting cases.
  • A less invasive test or alternate imaging modality should be considered, if both tests have similar efficacy.
  • In general, a minimally invasive procedure with a shorter length of stay is preferable, if both strategies have similar efficacy and safety.
 

 

Although previous reports on cath lab considerations during the pandemic or restarting elective surgeries peg various actions to specific thresholds or time intervals, the language here is noticeably and intentionally broad.

Instead of stating when cardiovascular services should resume, for example, the experts say it’s appropriate to put the guidance document into place if there’s a “sustained reduction” in the rate of new COVID-19 admissions and deaths in the relevant geographic region for a “prespecified time interval.”

As for when or how frequently patients and healthcare providers should be tested for COVID-19, the document encourages “routine screening of all patients prior to any cardiovascular procedure or test.”

Overly prescriptive language in previous documents wasn’t felt to be that helpful, whereas language like “selective” cases and “some” or “most” cardiovascular procedures gives clinicians, health systems, and policy makers flexibility when moving between response levels, Wood explained.

“Different regions might be at different levels based on principles of public health as far as the penetrance of the pandemic in that community, as well as how can you actually do the physical distancing in your hospital or ambulatory clinic. Because, I tell you, that is the Achilles heel,” he said. “Our run rates are going to be determined by testing, the availability of PPE, but also how we’re going to use our existing infrastructure and maintain physical distancing.”

That may mean using telehealth for initial visits, having clinics open earlier in the morning or on weekends, or doing partial volumes for surgery or in the cath lab so patients can be staggered and recover at different times and in different areas of the hospital. “These are very granular, specific infrastructure things that we’ve never really had to consider before,” Wood observed.



The document also had to be flexible and nimble enough to respond to a potential rebound of COVID-19 cases, which in newly released models are projected to rise sharply to 200,000 cases a day and be accompanied by some 3,000 deaths each day by June 1.

“This is my own personal opinion but I think it’s foolish to think that we are going to be able to come back to 100% of the cases we were doing before, even with testing, PPE, and all of that until we have a vaccine,” he said.

Similar to decisions made in preparation for the initial COVID-19 surge, the consensus document outlines the need for ethical considerations when turning the tap back on. This means prioritizing procedures and tests that are likely to benefit more people and to a greater degree, and ensuring that patients are treated fairly and consistently, regardless of their ethnicity, perceived social worth, or ability to pay, said coauthor and ACC President Athena Poppas, MD, Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, Rhode Island.

“It’s an ethical tenet that exists in a lot of places but it’s usually not overtly called out,” Poppas told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology. “It’s not rationing care; I think people jump to that but it’s actually the opposite of rationing care. It’s about being thoughtful about prioritizing patients.”

“There’s a variety of data that should help in the prioritization, not only how much hospital resources are utilized, that’s on one side, but there’s also the patient risk of delaying or doing a procedure, and then the societal risk,” she said.

Susheel Kodali, MD, of New York–Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Irving Medical Center, who recently published recommendations on restructuring structural heart disease practice during the pandemic, said the document is timely as centers, including his own, are trying to restart some outpatient visits, as early as next week.

“They made a point about talking about cohesive partnerships with regional public health officials and I think that’s great. The question is how does that happen,” he told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology. “In New York, we’re not allowed to do elective cases but what’s considered elective is not so clearly defined. An AS [aortic stenosis] patient that had a syncopal episode 2 weeks ago, is that considered elective or is that semi-urgent? I think that’s one of the challenges and that’s where these partnerships would be useful.”

Other challenges include the need for regional partnerships to better align hospitals, which in the New York area means half a dozen large healthcare systems, and to coordinate care between hospital departments – all of which will be scheduling imaging and OR time for their own backlog of hernia, knee, or hip surgeries.

Finally, there’s the need for a lot of conversation with the patient and their family about returning to a hospital amid a deadly pandemic.

“I had a patient today and the daughter was very concerned about bringing her in,” Kodali said. “She’s in class IV heart failure but her [daughter’s] big concern was: who is she going to be exposed to when she gets the echo? What kind of protection is there for her? Is the tech wearing a mask?

“It’s not just the health care providers that have to have the comfort, but it’s the patients and their families who have to feel comfortable bringing their loved ones here for treatment,” he said. “Because everyone is concerned about the environment.”

Wood reports receiving unrestricted grant support from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott Vascular and serving as a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. Poppas reports no relevant conflicts of interest. Kodali reports consultant (honoraria) from Admedus, Meril Life Sciences, JenaValve, and Abbott Vascular; SAB (equity) from Dura Biotech, MicroInterventional Devices, Thubrikar Aortic Valve, Supira, and Admedus; and institutional funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and JenaValve.

This article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Topics
Sections

As COVID-19 case levels plateau in some regions, 16 North American cardiovascular societies have released a framework for reintroducing cardiovascular services disrupted by the pandemic.

The consensus document outlines a phased approach to restarting invasive cardiovascular (CV) procedures and diagnostic tests that aims to reduce patient and health care provider exposure to the coronavirus and still provide essential care. It also emphasizes some of the ethical considerations in patient selection and the need for a collaborative approach.

“The key message in our document is we need a new unprecedented collaboration with public health officials so that we can carefully monitor the situation and we’re aware of what’s happening with the penetrance of the pandemic in the community, but they’re aware of the morbidity and mortality that’s occurring on our ever-growing waiting list,” lead author David A. Wood, MD, told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology.

The recommendations were jointly published May 4 in the Canadian Journal of Cardiology , the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, and The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, and are endorsed by, among others, the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology (ACC), and Canadian Cardiovascular Society.

The guidance comes as hospitals are facing revenue shortfalls because of canceled elective procedures and resource-intensive COVID-19 cases, prompting some healthcare systems to furlough, lay off, or even fire staff.

“It’s obvious that volumes are down between 40% and 60%,” said Wood, director of the cardiac catheterization laboratory at Vancouver General Hospital and professor of medicine at the University of British Columbia, Canada. “Part of that is that some areas have restricted case volumes totally appropriately and it’s partly because patients are very afraid of coming to the hospital and, unfortunately, are having bad events at home. And some are dying.”

The new report features a detailed table outlining three different response levels: reintroduction of some services (level 2); reintroduction of most services (level 1); and regular services (level 0). It covers a range of services from transthoracic echocardiography and exercise testing with imaging to care for acute coronary syndrome and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

“We’ve learned that we can very quickly turn off the tap and go to doing only 10% of our normal volumes, whether that’s surgery, cath lab, EP, diagnostic tests,” Wood said. “It’s much more difficult to thoughtfully turn the tap part way back on or restart the engine … you don’t just go from 0 to 100 [mph]. You go from 0 to 30 to 60 then maybe to 80 [mph].”

The document also includes eight guiding principles such as:
 

  • The expectation that response levels will be different between regions, and even within a given region.
  • A “transparent collaborative plan” for COVID-19 testing and personal protective equipment (PPE) must be in place before restarting cases.
  • A less invasive test or alternate imaging modality should be considered, if both tests have similar efficacy.
  • In general, a minimally invasive procedure with a shorter length of stay is preferable, if both strategies have similar efficacy and safety.
 

 

Although previous reports on cath lab considerations during the pandemic or restarting elective surgeries peg various actions to specific thresholds or time intervals, the language here is noticeably and intentionally broad.

Instead of stating when cardiovascular services should resume, for example, the experts say it’s appropriate to put the guidance document into place if there’s a “sustained reduction” in the rate of new COVID-19 admissions and deaths in the relevant geographic region for a “prespecified time interval.”

As for when or how frequently patients and healthcare providers should be tested for COVID-19, the document encourages “routine screening of all patients prior to any cardiovascular procedure or test.”

Overly prescriptive language in previous documents wasn’t felt to be that helpful, whereas language like “selective” cases and “some” or “most” cardiovascular procedures gives clinicians, health systems, and policy makers flexibility when moving between response levels, Wood explained.

“Different regions might be at different levels based on principles of public health as far as the penetrance of the pandemic in that community, as well as how can you actually do the physical distancing in your hospital or ambulatory clinic. Because, I tell you, that is the Achilles heel,” he said. “Our run rates are going to be determined by testing, the availability of PPE, but also how we’re going to use our existing infrastructure and maintain physical distancing.”

That may mean using telehealth for initial visits, having clinics open earlier in the morning or on weekends, or doing partial volumes for surgery or in the cath lab so patients can be staggered and recover at different times and in different areas of the hospital. “These are very granular, specific infrastructure things that we’ve never really had to consider before,” Wood observed.



The document also had to be flexible and nimble enough to respond to a potential rebound of COVID-19 cases, which in newly released models are projected to rise sharply to 200,000 cases a day and be accompanied by some 3,000 deaths each day by June 1.

“This is my own personal opinion but I think it’s foolish to think that we are going to be able to come back to 100% of the cases we were doing before, even with testing, PPE, and all of that until we have a vaccine,” he said.

Similar to decisions made in preparation for the initial COVID-19 surge, the consensus document outlines the need for ethical considerations when turning the tap back on. This means prioritizing procedures and tests that are likely to benefit more people and to a greater degree, and ensuring that patients are treated fairly and consistently, regardless of their ethnicity, perceived social worth, or ability to pay, said coauthor and ACC President Athena Poppas, MD, Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, Rhode Island.

“It’s an ethical tenet that exists in a lot of places but it’s usually not overtly called out,” Poppas told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology. “It’s not rationing care; I think people jump to that but it’s actually the opposite of rationing care. It’s about being thoughtful about prioritizing patients.”

“There’s a variety of data that should help in the prioritization, not only how much hospital resources are utilized, that’s on one side, but there’s also the patient risk of delaying or doing a procedure, and then the societal risk,” she said.

Susheel Kodali, MD, of New York–Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Irving Medical Center, who recently published recommendations on restructuring structural heart disease practice during the pandemic, said the document is timely as centers, including his own, are trying to restart some outpatient visits, as early as next week.

“They made a point about talking about cohesive partnerships with regional public health officials and I think that’s great. The question is how does that happen,” he told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology. “In New York, we’re not allowed to do elective cases but what’s considered elective is not so clearly defined. An AS [aortic stenosis] patient that had a syncopal episode 2 weeks ago, is that considered elective or is that semi-urgent? I think that’s one of the challenges and that’s where these partnerships would be useful.”

Other challenges include the need for regional partnerships to better align hospitals, which in the New York area means half a dozen large healthcare systems, and to coordinate care between hospital departments – all of which will be scheduling imaging and OR time for their own backlog of hernia, knee, or hip surgeries.

Finally, there’s the need for a lot of conversation with the patient and their family about returning to a hospital amid a deadly pandemic.

“I had a patient today and the daughter was very concerned about bringing her in,” Kodali said. “She’s in class IV heart failure but her [daughter’s] big concern was: who is she going to be exposed to when she gets the echo? What kind of protection is there for her? Is the tech wearing a mask?

“It’s not just the health care providers that have to have the comfort, but it’s the patients and their families who have to feel comfortable bringing their loved ones here for treatment,” he said. “Because everyone is concerned about the environment.”

Wood reports receiving unrestricted grant support from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott Vascular and serving as a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. Poppas reports no relevant conflicts of interest. Kodali reports consultant (honoraria) from Admedus, Meril Life Sciences, JenaValve, and Abbott Vascular; SAB (equity) from Dura Biotech, MicroInterventional Devices, Thubrikar Aortic Valve, Supira, and Admedus; and institutional funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and JenaValve.

This article first appeared on Medscape.com.

As COVID-19 case levels plateau in some regions, 16 North American cardiovascular societies have released a framework for reintroducing cardiovascular services disrupted by the pandemic.

The consensus document outlines a phased approach to restarting invasive cardiovascular (CV) procedures and diagnostic tests that aims to reduce patient and health care provider exposure to the coronavirus and still provide essential care. It also emphasizes some of the ethical considerations in patient selection and the need for a collaborative approach.

“The key message in our document is we need a new unprecedented collaboration with public health officials so that we can carefully monitor the situation and we’re aware of what’s happening with the penetrance of the pandemic in the community, but they’re aware of the morbidity and mortality that’s occurring on our ever-growing waiting list,” lead author David A. Wood, MD, told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology.

The recommendations were jointly published May 4 in the Canadian Journal of Cardiology , the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, and The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, and are endorsed by, among others, the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology (ACC), and Canadian Cardiovascular Society.

The guidance comes as hospitals are facing revenue shortfalls because of canceled elective procedures and resource-intensive COVID-19 cases, prompting some healthcare systems to furlough, lay off, or even fire staff.

“It’s obvious that volumes are down between 40% and 60%,” said Wood, director of the cardiac catheterization laboratory at Vancouver General Hospital and professor of medicine at the University of British Columbia, Canada. “Part of that is that some areas have restricted case volumes totally appropriately and it’s partly because patients are very afraid of coming to the hospital and, unfortunately, are having bad events at home. And some are dying.”

The new report features a detailed table outlining three different response levels: reintroduction of some services (level 2); reintroduction of most services (level 1); and regular services (level 0). It covers a range of services from transthoracic echocardiography and exercise testing with imaging to care for acute coronary syndrome and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

“We’ve learned that we can very quickly turn off the tap and go to doing only 10% of our normal volumes, whether that’s surgery, cath lab, EP, diagnostic tests,” Wood said. “It’s much more difficult to thoughtfully turn the tap part way back on or restart the engine … you don’t just go from 0 to 100 [mph]. You go from 0 to 30 to 60 then maybe to 80 [mph].”

The document also includes eight guiding principles such as:
 

  • The expectation that response levels will be different between regions, and even within a given region.
  • A “transparent collaborative plan” for COVID-19 testing and personal protective equipment (PPE) must be in place before restarting cases.
  • A less invasive test or alternate imaging modality should be considered, if both tests have similar efficacy.
  • In general, a minimally invasive procedure with a shorter length of stay is preferable, if both strategies have similar efficacy and safety.
 

 

Although previous reports on cath lab considerations during the pandemic or restarting elective surgeries peg various actions to specific thresholds or time intervals, the language here is noticeably and intentionally broad.

Instead of stating when cardiovascular services should resume, for example, the experts say it’s appropriate to put the guidance document into place if there’s a “sustained reduction” in the rate of new COVID-19 admissions and deaths in the relevant geographic region for a “prespecified time interval.”

As for when or how frequently patients and healthcare providers should be tested for COVID-19, the document encourages “routine screening of all patients prior to any cardiovascular procedure or test.”

Overly prescriptive language in previous documents wasn’t felt to be that helpful, whereas language like “selective” cases and “some” or “most” cardiovascular procedures gives clinicians, health systems, and policy makers flexibility when moving between response levels, Wood explained.

“Different regions might be at different levels based on principles of public health as far as the penetrance of the pandemic in that community, as well as how can you actually do the physical distancing in your hospital or ambulatory clinic. Because, I tell you, that is the Achilles heel,” he said. “Our run rates are going to be determined by testing, the availability of PPE, but also how we’re going to use our existing infrastructure and maintain physical distancing.”

That may mean using telehealth for initial visits, having clinics open earlier in the morning or on weekends, or doing partial volumes for surgery or in the cath lab so patients can be staggered and recover at different times and in different areas of the hospital. “These are very granular, specific infrastructure things that we’ve never really had to consider before,” Wood observed.



The document also had to be flexible and nimble enough to respond to a potential rebound of COVID-19 cases, which in newly released models are projected to rise sharply to 200,000 cases a day and be accompanied by some 3,000 deaths each day by June 1.

“This is my own personal opinion but I think it’s foolish to think that we are going to be able to come back to 100% of the cases we were doing before, even with testing, PPE, and all of that until we have a vaccine,” he said.

Similar to decisions made in preparation for the initial COVID-19 surge, the consensus document outlines the need for ethical considerations when turning the tap back on. This means prioritizing procedures and tests that are likely to benefit more people and to a greater degree, and ensuring that patients are treated fairly and consistently, regardless of their ethnicity, perceived social worth, or ability to pay, said coauthor and ACC President Athena Poppas, MD, Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, Rhode Island.

“It’s an ethical tenet that exists in a lot of places but it’s usually not overtly called out,” Poppas told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology. “It’s not rationing care; I think people jump to that but it’s actually the opposite of rationing care. It’s about being thoughtful about prioritizing patients.”

“There’s a variety of data that should help in the prioritization, not only how much hospital resources are utilized, that’s on one side, but there’s also the patient risk of delaying or doing a procedure, and then the societal risk,” she said.

Susheel Kodali, MD, of New York–Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Irving Medical Center, who recently published recommendations on restructuring structural heart disease practice during the pandemic, said the document is timely as centers, including his own, are trying to restart some outpatient visits, as early as next week.

“They made a point about talking about cohesive partnerships with regional public health officials and I think that’s great. The question is how does that happen,” he told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology. “In New York, we’re not allowed to do elective cases but what’s considered elective is not so clearly defined. An AS [aortic stenosis] patient that had a syncopal episode 2 weeks ago, is that considered elective or is that semi-urgent? I think that’s one of the challenges and that’s where these partnerships would be useful.”

Other challenges include the need for regional partnerships to better align hospitals, which in the New York area means half a dozen large healthcare systems, and to coordinate care between hospital departments – all of which will be scheduling imaging and OR time for their own backlog of hernia, knee, or hip surgeries.

Finally, there’s the need for a lot of conversation with the patient and their family about returning to a hospital amid a deadly pandemic.

“I had a patient today and the daughter was very concerned about bringing her in,” Kodali said. “She’s in class IV heart failure but her [daughter’s] big concern was: who is she going to be exposed to when she gets the echo? What kind of protection is there for her? Is the tech wearing a mask?

“It’s not just the health care providers that have to have the comfort, but it’s the patients and their families who have to feel comfortable bringing their loved ones here for treatment,” he said. “Because everyone is concerned about the environment.”

Wood reports receiving unrestricted grant support from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott Vascular and serving as a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. Poppas reports no relevant conflicts of interest. Kodali reports consultant (honoraria) from Admedus, Meril Life Sciences, JenaValve, and Abbott Vascular; SAB (equity) from Dura Biotech, MicroInterventional Devices, Thubrikar Aortic Valve, Supira, and Admedus; and institutional funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and JenaValve.

This article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Medscape Article

Triage, L&D, postpartum care during the COVID-19 pandemic

Article Type
Changed

The meteoric rise in the number of test-positive and clinical cases of COVID-19 because of infection with the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in states and cities across the United States has added urgency to the efforts to develop protocols for hospital triage, admission, labor and delivery management, and other aspects of obstetrical care.

Dr. Ray Bahado-Singh

Emerging data suggest that, while SARS-CoV-2 is less lethal overall than the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) proved to be, it is significantly more contagious. Although a severe disease, the limited worldwide data so far available (as of early May) do not indicate that pregnant women are at greater risk of severe disease, compared with the general population. However, there remains a critical need for data on maternal and perinatal outcomes in women infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Multiple physiological changes in pregnancy, from reduced cell-based immune competence to changes in respiratory tract and pulmonary function – e.g., edema of the respiratory tract, increases in secretions and oxygen consumption, elevation of the diaphragm, and decrease in functional residual capacity – have historically contributed to worse obstetric outcomes in pregnant women who have had viral pneumonias. Furthermore, limited published experience with COVID-19 in China suggests worse perinatal outcomes in some affected pregnancies, including prematurity and perinatal death.

With evolution of the pandemic and accumulation of experience, it is expected that data-driven guidelines on assessment and management of infected pregnant women will contribute to improved maternal and perinatal outcomes. What is clear now, however, is that, without protecting the health of obstetricians and other health care workers, urgently needed gains in patient outcomes will not be realized.

Here are my recommendations, based on a currently limited body of literature on COVID-19 and other communicable viral respiratory disorders, as well my experience in the greater Detroit area, a COVID-19 hot spot.
 

Preparing for hospital evaluation and admission

The obstetric triage or labor and delivery (L&D) unit should be notified prior to the arrival of a patient suspected of or known to be infected with the virus. This will minimize staff exposure and allow sufficient time to prepare appropriate accommodations, equipment, and supplies for the patient’s care. Hospital infection control should be promptly notified by L&D of the expected arrival of such a patient. Placement ideally should be in a negative-pressure room, which allows outside air to flow into the room but prevents contaminated air from escaping. In the absence of a negative-pressure room, an infection isolation area should be utilized.

The patient and one accompanying support individual should wear either medical-grade masks brought from home or supplied upon entry to the hospital or homemade masks or bandanas. This will reduce the risk of viral transmission to hospital workers and other individuals encountered in the hospital prior to arriving in L&D. An ideal setup is to have separate entry areas, access corridors, and elevators for patients known or suspected to have COVID-19 infection. The patient and visitor should be expeditiously escorted to the prepared area for evaluation. Patients who are not known or suspected to be infected ideally should be tested.
 

 

 

Screening of patients & support individuals

Proper screening of patients and support individuals is critical to protecting both patients and staff in the L&D unit. This should include an expanded questionnaire that asks about disturbances of smell and taste and GI symptoms like loss of appetite – not only the more commonly queried symptoms of fever, shortness of breath, coughing, and exposure to someone who may have been ill.

Recent studies regarding presenting symptoms cast significant doubt, in fact, on the validity of patients with “asymptomatic COVID-19.” Over 15% of patients with confirmed infection in one published case series had solely GI symptoms and almost all had some digestive symptoms, for example, and almost 90% in another study had absent or reduced sense of smell and/or taste.1,2 In fact, the use of the term “paucisymptomatic” rather than “asymptomatic” may be most appropriate.

Support individuals also should undergo temperature screening, ideally with laser noncontact thermometers on entry to the hospital or triage.
 

Visitor policy

The number of visitors/support individuals should be kept to a minimum to reduce transmission risk. The actual number will be determined by hospital or state policy, but up to one visitor in the labor room appears reasonable. Very strong individual justification should be required to exceed this threshold! The visitor should not only be screened for an expanded list of symptoms, but they also should be queried for underlying illnesses (e.g., diabetes, cardiovascular disease, significant lung disease, undergoing cancer therapy) as well as for age over 65 years, each of which increase the chances of severe COVID-19 disease should infection occur. The visitor should be informed of such risks and, especially when accompanying a patient with known or suspected COVID-19, provided the option of voluntarily revoking their visitor status. A visitor with known or suspected COVID-19 infection based on testing or screening should not be allowed into the L&D unit.

In addition, institutions may be considered to have obligations to the visitor/support person beyond screening. These include instructions in proper mask usage, hand washing, and limiting the touching of surfaces to lower infection risk.

“Visitor relays” where one visitor replaces another should be strongly discouraged. Visitors should similarly not be allowed to wander around the hospital (to use phones, for instance); transiting back and forth to obtain food and coffee should be kept to a strict minimum. For visitors accompanying COVID-19–-infected women, “visitor’s plates” provided by the hospital at reasonable cost is a much-preferred arrangement for obtaining meals during the course of the hospital stay. In addition, visitors should be sent out of the room during the performance of aerosolizing procedures.
 

Labor and delivery management

The successful management of patients with COVID-19 requires a rigorous infection control protocol informed by guidelines from national entities, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and by state health departments when available.

Strict limits on the number of obstetricians and other health care workers (HCWs) entering the patient’s room should be enforced and documented to minimize risk to the HCWs attending to patients who have a positive diagnosis or who are under investigation. Only in cases of demonstrable clinical benefit should repeat visits by the same or additional HCWs be permitted. Conventional and electronic tablets present an excellent opportunity for patient follow-up visits without room entry. In our institution, this has been successfully piloted in nonpregnant patients. Obstetricians and others caring for obstetrical patients – especially those who are infected or under investigation for infection – should always wear a properly fitted N95 mask.

Because patients with COVID-19 may have or go on to develop a constellation of organ abnormalities (e.g., cardiovascular, renal, pulmonary), it is vital that a standardized panel of baseline laboratory studies be developed for pregnant patients. This will minimize the need for repeated blood draws and other testing which may increase HCW exposure.

A negative screen based on nonreport of symptoms, lack of temperature elevation, and reported nonexposure to individuals with COVID-19 symptoms still has limitations in terms of disease detection. A recent report from a tertiary care hospital in New York City found that close to one-third of pregnant patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted over a 2-week period had no viral symptoms or instructive history on initial admission.3 This is consistent with our clinical experience. Most importantly, therefore, routine quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing should be performed on all patients admitted to the L&D unit.

Given the reported variability in the accuracy of polymerase chain reaction testing induced by variable effectiveness of sampling techniques, stage of infection, and inherent test accuracy issues, symptomatic patients with a negative test should first obtain clearance from infectious disease specialists before isolation precautions are discontinued. Repeat testing in 24 hours, including testing of multiple sites, may subsequently yield a positive result in persistently symptomatic patients.
 

 

 

Intrapartum management

As much as possible, standard obstetric indications should guide the timing and route of delivery. In the case of a COVID-19–positive patient or a patient under investigation, nonobstetric factors may bear heavily on decision making, and management flexibility is of great value. For example, in cases of severe or critical disease status, evidence suggests that early delivery regardless of gestational age can improve maternal oxygenation; this supports the liberal use of C-sections in these circumstances. In addition, shortening labor length as well as duration of hospitalization may be expected to reduce the risk of transmission to HCWs, other staff, and other patients.

High rates of cesarean delivery unsurprisingly have been reported thus far: One review of 108 case reports and series of test-positive COVID-19 pregnancies found a 92% C-section rate, and another review and meta-analysis of studies of SARS, MERS, and COVID-19 during pregnancy similarly found that the majority of patients – 84% across all coronavirus infections and 91% in COVID-19 pregnancies – were delivered by C-section.4,5 Given these high rates of cesarean deliveries, the early placement of neuraxial anesthesia while the patient is stable appears to be prudent and obviates the need for intubation, the latter of which is associated with increased aerosol generation and increased virus transmission risk.

Strict protocols for the optimal protection of staff should be observed, including proper personal protective equipment (PPE) protection. Protocols have been detailed in various guidelines and publications; they include the wearing of shoe covers, gowns, N95 masks, goggles, face shields, and two layers of gloves.

For institutions that currently do not offer routine COVID-19 testing to pregnant patients – especially those in areas of outbreaks – N95 masks and eye protection should still be provided to all HCWs involved in the intrapartum management of untested asymptomatic patients, particularly those in the active phase of labor. This protection is justified given the limitations of symptom- and history-based screening and the not-uncommon experience of the patient with a negative screen who subsequently develops the clinical syndrome.

Obstetric management of labor requires close patient contact that potentially elevates the risk of contamination and infection. During the active stage of labor, patient shouting, rapid mouth breathing, and other behaviors inherent to labor all increase the risk of aerosolization of oronasal secretions. In addition, nasal-prong oxygen administration is believed to independently increase the risk of aerosolization of secretions. The casual practice of nasal oxygen application should thus be discontinued and, where felt to be absolutely necessary, a mask should be worn on top of the prongs.

Regarding operative delivery, each participating obstetric surgeon should observe guidelines and recommendations of governing national organizations and professional groups – including the American College of Surgeons – regarding the safe conduct of operations on patients with COVID-19. Written guidelines should be tailored as needed to the performance of C-sections and readily available in L&D. Drills and simulations are generally valuable, and expertise and support should always be available in the labor room to assist with donning and doffing of PPE.
 

 

 

Postpartum care

Expeditious separation of the COVID-19–positive mother from her infant is recommended, including avoidance of delayed cord clamping because of insufficient evidence of benefit to the infant. Insufficient evidence exists to support vertical transmission, but the possibility of maternal-infant transmission is clinically accepted based on small case reports of infection in a neonate at 30 hours of life and in infants of mothers with suspected or confirmed COVID-19.6,7 Accordingly, it is recommended that the benefit of early infant separation should be discussed with the mother. If approved, the infant should be kept in a separate isolation area and observed.

There is no evidence of breast milk transmission of the virus. For those electing to breastfeed, the patient should be provided with a breast pump to express and store the milk for subsequent bottle feeding. For mothers who elect to room in with the infant, a separation distance of 6 feet is recommended with an intervening barrier curtain. For COVID-19–positive mothers who elect breastfeeding, meticulous hand and face washing, continuous wearing of a mask, and cleansing of the breast prior to feeding needs to be maintained.

Restrictive visiting policies of no more than one visitor should be maintained. For severely or critically ill patients with COVID-19, it has been suggested that no visitors be allowed. As with other hospitalizations of COVID-19 patients, the HCW contact should be kept at a justifiable minimum to reduce the risk of transmission.
 

Protecting the obstetrician and other HCWs

Protecting the health of obstetricians and other HCWs is central to any successful strategy to fight the COVID-19 epidemic. For the individual obstetrician, careful attention to national and local hospital guidelines is required as these are rapidly evolving.

Physicians and their leadership must maintain an ongoing dialogue with hospital leadership to continually upgrade and optimize infection prevention and control measures, and to uphold best practices. The experience in Wuhan, China, illustrates the effectiveness of the proper use of PPE along with population control measures to reduce infections in HCWs. Prior to understanding the mechanism of virus transmission and using protective equipment, infection rates of 3%-29% were reported among HCWs. With the meticulous utilization of mitigation strategies and population control measures – including consistent use of PPE – the rate of infection of HCWs reportedly fell to zero.

In outpatient offices, all staff and HCWs should wear masks at all times and engage in social distancing and in frequent hand sanitization. Patients should be strongly encouraged to wear masks during office visits and on all other occasions when they will be in physical proximity to other individuals outside of the home.

Reports from epidemic areas describe transmission from household sources as a significant cause of HCW infection. The information emphasizes the need for ongoing vigilance and attention to sanitization measures even when at home with one’s family. An additional benefit is reduced risk of transmission from HCWs to family members.

Dr. Bahado-Singh is professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Oakland University, Rochester, Mich., and health system chair for obstetrics and gynecology at Beaumont Health System.

References

1. Luo S et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Mar 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.03.043.

2. Lechien JR et al. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Apr 6. doi: 10.1007/s00405-020-05965-1.

3. Breslin N et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 Apr 9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100118.

4. Zaigham M, Andersson O. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020 Apr 7. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13867.

5. Di Mascio D et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 Mar 25. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100107.

6. Ital J. Pediatr 2020;46(1) doi: 10.1186/s13052-020-0820-x

7. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;149(2):130-6. 

*This article was updated 5/6/2020. 

Publications
Topics
Sections

The meteoric rise in the number of test-positive and clinical cases of COVID-19 because of infection with the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in states and cities across the United States has added urgency to the efforts to develop protocols for hospital triage, admission, labor and delivery management, and other aspects of obstetrical care.

Dr. Ray Bahado-Singh

Emerging data suggest that, while SARS-CoV-2 is less lethal overall than the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) proved to be, it is significantly more contagious. Although a severe disease, the limited worldwide data so far available (as of early May) do not indicate that pregnant women are at greater risk of severe disease, compared with the general population. However, there remains a critical need for data on maternal and perinatal outcomes in women infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Multiple physiological changes in pregnancy, from reduced cell-based immune competence to changes in respiratory tract and pulmonary function – e.g., edema of the respiratory tract, increases in secretions and oxygen consumption, elevation of the diaphragm, and decrease in functional residual capacity – have historically contributed to worse obstetric outcomes in pregnant women who have had viral pneumonias. Furthermore, limited published experience with COVID-19 in China suggests worse perinatal outcomes in some affected pregnancies, including prematurity and perinatal death.

With evolution of the pandemic and accumulation of experience, it is expected that data-driven guidelines on assessment and management of infected pregnant women will contribute to improved maternal and perinatal outcomes. What is clear now, however, is that, without protecting the health of obstetricians and other health care workers, urgently needed gains in patient outcomes will not be realized.

Here are my recommendations, based on a currently limited body of literature on COVID-19 and other communicable viral respiratory disorders, as well my experience in the greater Detroit area, a COVID-19 hot spot.
 

Preparing for hospital evaluation and admission

The obstetric triage or labor and delivery (L&D) unit should be notified prior to the arrival of a patient suspected of or known to be infected with the virus. This will minimize staff exposure and allow sufficient time to prepare appropriate accommodations, equipment, and supplies for the patient’s care. Hospital infection control should be promptly notified by L&D of the expected arrival of such a patient. Placement ideally should be in a negative-pressure room, which allows outside air to flow into the room but prevents contaminated air from escaping. In the absence of a negative-pressure room, an infection isolation area should be utilized.

The patient and one accompanying support individual should wear either medical-grade masks brought from home or supplied upon entry to the hospital or homemade masks or bandanas. This will reduce the risk of viral transmission to hospital workers and other individuals encountered in the hospital prior to arriving in L&D. An ideal setup is to have separate entry areas, access corridors, and elevators for patients known or suspected to have COVID-19 infection. The patient and visitor should be expeditiously escorted to the prepared area for evaluation. Patients who are not known or suspected to be infected ideally should be tested.
 

 

 

Screening of patients & support individuals

Proper screening of patients and support individuals is critical to protecting both patients and staff in the L&D unit. This should include an expanded questionnaire that asks about disturbances of smell and taste and GI symptoms like loss of appetite – not only the more commonly queried symptoms of fever, shortness of breath, coughing, and exposure to someone who may have been ill.

Recent studies regarding presenting symptoms cast significant doubt, in fact, on the validity of patients with “asymptomatic COVID-19.” Over 15% of patients with confirmed infection in one published case series had solely GI symptoms and almost all had some digestive symptoms, for example, and almost 90% in another study had absent or reduced sense of smell and/or taste.1,2 In fact, the use of the term “paucisymptomatic” rather than “asymptomatic” may be most appropriate.

Support individuals also should undergo temperature screening, ideally with laser noncontact thermometers on entry to the hospital or triage.
 

Visitor policy

The number of visitors/support individuals should be kept to a minimum to reduce transmission risk. The actual number will be determined by hospital or state policy, but up to one visitor in the labor room appears reasonable. Very strong individual justification should be required to exceed this threshold! The visitor should not only be screened for an expanded list of symptoms, but they also should be queried for underlying illnesses (e.g., diabetes, cardiovascular disease, significant lung disease, undergoing cancer therapy) as well as for age over 65 years, each of which increase the chances of severe COVID-19 disease should infection occur. The visitor should be informed of such risks and, especially when accompanying a patient with known or suspected COVID-19, provided the option of voluntarily revoking their visitor status. A visitor with known or suspected COVID-19 infection based on testing or screening should not be allowed into the L&D unit.

In addition, institutions may be considered to have obligations to the visitor/support person beyond screening. These include instructions in proper mask usage, hand washing, and limiting the touching of surfaces to lower infection risk.

“Visitor relays” where one visitor replaces another should be strongly discouraged. Visitors should similarly not be allowed to wander around the hospital (to use phones, for instance); transiting back and forth to obtain food and coffee should be kept to a strict minimum. For visitors accompanying COVID-19–-infected women, “visitor’s plates” provided by the hospital at reasonable cost is a much-preferred arrangement for obtaining meals during the course of the hospital stay. In addition, visitors should be sent out of the room during the performance of aerosolizing procedures.
 

Labor and delivery management

The successful management of patients with COVID-19 requires a rigorous infection control protocol informed by guidelines from national entities, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and by state health departments when available.

Strict limits on the number of obstetricians and other health care workers (HCWs) entering the patient’s room should be enforced and documented to minimize risk to the HCWs attending to patients who have a positive diagnosis or who are under investigation. Only in cases of demonstrable clinical benefit should repeat visits by the same or additional HCWs be permitted. Conventional and electronic tablets present an excellent opportunity for patient follow-up visits without room entry. In our institution, this has been successfully piloted in nonpregnant patients. Obstetricians and others caring for obstetrical patients – especially those who are infected or under investigation for infection – should always wear a properly fitted N95 mask.

Because patients with COVID-19 may have or go on to develop a constellation of organ abnormalities (e.g., cardiovascular, renal, pulmonary), it is vital that a standardized panel of baseline laboratory studies be developed for pregnant patients. This will minimize the need for repeated blood draws and other testing which may increase HCW exposure.

A negative screen based on nonreport of symptoms, lack of temperature elevation, and reported nonexposure to individuals with COVID-19 symptoms still has limitations in terms of disease detection. A recent report from a tertiary care hospital in New York City found that close to one-third of pregnant patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted over a 2-week period had no viral symptoms or instructive history on initial admission.3 This is consistent with our clinical experience. Most importantly, therefore, routine quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing should be performed on all patients admitted to the L&D unit.

Given the reported variability in the accuracy of polymerase chain reaction testing induced by variable effectiveness of sampling techniques, stage of infection, and inherent test accuracy issues, symptomatic patients with a negative test should first obtain clearance from infectious disease specialists before isolation precautions are discontinued. Repeat testing in 24 hours, including testing of multiple sites, may subsequently yield a positive result in persistently symptomatic patients.
 

 

 

Intrapartum management

As much as possible, standard obstetric indications should guide the timing and route of delivery. In the case of a COVID-19–positive patient or a patient under investigation, nonobstetric factors may bear heavily on decision making, and management flexibility is of great value. For example, in cases of severe or critical disease status, evidence suggests that early delivery regardless of gestational age can improve maternal oxygenation; this supports the liberal use of C-sections in these circumstances. In addition, shortening labor length as well as duration of hospitalization may be expected to reduce the risk of transmission to HCWs, other staff, and other patients.

High rates of cesarean delivery unsurprisingly have been reported thus far: One review of 108 case reports and series of test-positive COVID-19 pregnancies found a 92% C-section rate, and another review and meta-analysis of studies of SARS, MERS, and COVID-19 during pregnancy similarly found that the majority of patients – 84% across all coronavirus infections and 91% in COVID-19 pregnancies – were delivered by C-section.4,5 Given these high rates of cesarean deliveries, the early placement of neuraxial anesthesia while the patient is stable appears to be prudent and obviates the need for intubation, the latter of which is associated with increased aerosol generation and increased virus transmission risk.

Strict protocols for the optimal protection of staff should be observed, including proper personal protective equipment (PPE) protection. Protocols have been detailed in various guidelines and publications; they include the wearing of shoe covers, gowns, N95 masks, goggles, face shields, and two layers of gloves.

For institutions that currently do not offer routine COVID-19 testing to pregnant patients – especially those in areas of outbreaks – N95 masks and eye protection should still be provided to all HCWs involved in the intrapartum management of untested asymptomatic patients, particularly those in the active phase of labor. This protection is justified given the limitations of symptom- and history-based screening and the not-uncommon experience of the patient with a negative screen who subsequently develops the clinical syndrome.

Obstetric management of labor requires close patient contact that potentially elevates the risk of contamination and infection. During the active stage of labor, patient shouting, rapid mouth breathing, and other behaviors inherent to labor all increase the risk of aerosolization of oronasal secretions. In addition, nasal-prong oxygen administration is believed to independently increase the risk of aerosolization of secretions. The casual practice of nasal oxygen application should thus be discontinued and, where felt to be absolutely necessary, a mask should be worn on top of the prongs.

Regarding operative delivery, each participating obstetric surgeon should observe guidelines and recommendations of governing national organizations and professional groups – including the American College of Surgeons – regarding the safe conduct of operations on patients with COVID-19. Written guidelines should be tailored as needed to the performance of C-sections and readily available in L&D. Drills and simulations are generally valuable, and expertise and support should always be available in the labor room to assist with donning and doffing of PPE.
 

 

 

Postpartum care

Expeditious separation of the COVID-19–positive mother from her infant is recommended, including avoidance of delayed cord clamping because of insufficient evidence of benefit to the infant. Insufficient evidence exists to support vertical transmission, but the possibility of maternal-infant transmission is clinically accepted based on small case reports of infection in a neonate at 30 hours of life and in infants of mothers with suspected or confirmed COVID-19.6,7 Accordingly, it is recommended that the benefit of early infant separation should be discussed with the mother. If approved, the infant should be kept in a separate isolation area and observed.

There is no evidence of breast milk transmission of the virus. For those electing to breastfeed, the patient should be provided with a breast pump to express and store the milk for subsequent bottle feeding. For mothers who elect to room in with the infant, a separation distance of 6 feet is recommended with an intervening barrier curtain. For COVID-19–positive mothers who elect breastfeeding, meticulous hand and face washing, continuous wearing of a mask, and cleansing of the breast prior to feeding needs to be maintained.

Restrictive visiting policies of no more than one visitor should be maintained. For severely or critically ill patients with COVID-19, it has been suggested that no visitors be allowed. As with other hospitalizations of COVID-19 patients, the HCW contact should be kept at a justifiable minimum to reduce the risk of transmission.
 

Protecting the obstetrician and other HCWs

Protecting the health of obstetricians and other HCWs is central to any successful strategy to fight the COVID-19 epidemic. For the individual obstetrician, careful attention to national and local hospital guidelines is required as these are rapidly evolving.

Physicians and their leadership must maintain an ongoing dialogue with hospital leadership to continually upgrade and optimize infection prevention and control measures, and to uphold best practices. The experience in Wuhan, China, illustrates the effectiveness of the proper use of PPE along with population control measures to reduce infections in HCWs. Prior to understanding the mechanism of virus transmission and using protective equipment, infection rates of 3%-29% were reported among HCWs. With the meticulous utilization of mitigation strategies and population control measures – including consistent use of PPE – the rate of infection of HCWs reportedly fell to zero.

In outpatient offices, all staff and HCWs should wear masks at all times and engage in social distancing and in frequent hand sanitization. Patients should be strongly encouraged to wear masks during office visits and on all other occasions when they will be in physical proximity to other individuals outside of the home.

Reports from epidemic areas describe transmission from household sources as a significant cause of HCW infection. The information emphasizes the need for ongoing vigilance and attention to sanitization measures even when at home with one’s family. An additional benefit is reduced risk of transmission from HCWs to family members.

Dr. Bahado-Singh is professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Oakland University, Rochester, Mich., and health system chair for obstetrics and gynecology at Beaumont Health System.

References

1. Luo S et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Mar 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.03.043.

2. Lechien JR et al. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Apr 6. doi: 10.1007/s00405-020-05965-1.

3. Breslin N et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 Apr 9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100118.

4. Zaigham M, Andersson O. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020 Apr 7. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13867.

5. Di Mascio D et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 Mar 25. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100107.

6. Ital J. Pediatr 2020;46(1) doi: 10.1186/s13052-020-0820-x

7. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;149(2):130-6. 

*This article was updated 5/6/2020. 

The meteoric rise in the number of test-positive and clinical cases of COVID-19 because of infection with the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in states and cities across the United States has added urgency to the efforts to develop protocols for hospital triage, admission, labor and delivery management, and other aspects of obstetrical care.

Dr. Ray Bahado-Singh

Emerging data suggest that, while SARS-CoV-2 is less lethal overall than the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) proved to be, it is significantly more contagious. Although a severe disease, the limited worldwide data so far available (as of early May) do not indicate that pregnant women are at greater risk of severe disease, compared with the general population. However, there remains a critical need for data on maternal and perinatal outcomes in women infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Multiple physiological changes in pregnancy, from reduced cell-based immune competence to changes in respiratory tract and pulmonary function – e.g., edema of the respiratory tract, increases in secretions and oxygen consumption, elevation of the diaphragm, and decrease in functional residual capacity – have historically contributed to worse obstetric outcomes in pregnant women who have had viral pneumonias. Furthermore, limited published experience with COVID-19 in China suggests worse perinatal outcomes in some affected pregnancies, including prematurity and perinatal death.

With evolution of the pandemic and accumulation of experience, it is expected that data-driven guidelines on assessment and management of infected pregnant women will contribute to improved maternal and perinatal outcomes. What is clear now, however, is that, without protecting the health of obstetricians and other health care workers, urgently needed gains in patient outcomes will not be realized.

Here are my recommendations, based on a currently limited body of literature on COVID-19 and other communicable viral respiratory disorders, as well my experience in the greater Detroit area, a COVID-19 hot spot.
 

Preparing for hospital evaluation and admission

The obstetric triage or labor and delivery (L&D) unit should be notified prior to the arrival of a patient suspected of or known to be infected with the virus. This will minimize staff exposure and allow sufficient time to prepare appropriate accommodations, equipment, and supplies for the patient’s care. Hospital infection control should be promptly notified by L&D of the expected arrival of such a patient. Placement ideally should be in a negative-pressure room, which allows outside air to flow into the room but prevents contaminated air from escaping. In the absence of a negative-pressure room, an infection isolation area should be utilized.

The patient and one accompanying support individual should wear either medical-grade masks brought from home or supplied upon entry to the hospital or homemade masks or bandanas. This will reduce the risk of viral transmission to hospital workers and other individuals encountered in the hospital prior to arriving in L&D. An ideal setup is to have separate entry areas, access corridors, and elevators for patients known or suspected to have COVID-19 infection. The patient and visitor should be expeditiously escorted to the prepared area for evaluation. Patients who are not known or suspected to be infected ideally should be tested.
 

 

 

Screening of patients & support individuals

Proper screening of patients and support individuals is critical to protecting both patients and staff in the L&D unit. This should include an expanded questionnaire that asks about disturbances of smell and taste and GI symptoms like loss of appetite – not only the more commonly queried symptoms of fever, shortness of breath, coughing, and exposure to someone who may have been ill.

Recent studies regarding presenting symptoms cast significant doubt, in fact, on the validity of patients with “asymptomatic COVID-19.” Over 15% of patients with confirmed infection in one published case series had solely GI symptoms and almost all had some digestive symptoms, for example, and almost 90% in another study had absent or reduced sense of smell and/or taste.1,2 In fact, the use of the term “paucisymptomatic” rather than “asymptomatic” may be most appropriate.

Support individuals also should undergo temperature screening, ideally with laser noncontact thermometers on entry to the hospital or triage.
 

Visitor policy

The number of visitors/support individuals should be kept to a minimum to reduce transmission risk. The actual number will be determined by hospital or state policy, but up to one visitor in the labor room appears reasonable. Very strong individual justification should be required to exceed this threshold! The visitor should not only be screened for an expanded list of symptoms, but they also should be queried for underlying illnesses (e.g., diabetes, cardiovascular disease, significant lung disease, undergoing cancer therapy) as well as for age over 65 years, each of which increase the chances of severe COVID-19 disease should infection occur. The visitor should be informed of such risks and, especially when accompanying a patient with known or suspected COVID-19, provided the option of voluntarily revoking their visitor status. A visitor with known or suspected COVID-19 infection based on testing or screening should not be allowed into the L&D unit.

In addition, institutions may be considered to have obligations to the visitor/support person beyond screening. These include instructions in proper mask usage, hand washing, and limiting the touching of surfaces to lower infection risk.

“Visitor relays” where one visitor replaces another should be strongly discouraged. Visitors should similarly not be allowed to wander around the hospital (to use phones, for instance); transiting back and forth to obtain food and coffee should be kept to a strict minimum. For visitors accompanying COVID-19–-infected women, “visitor’s plates” provided by the hospital at reasonable cost is a much-preferred arrangement for obtaining meals during the course of the hospital stay. In addition, visitors should be sent out of the room during the performance of aerosolizing procedures.
 

Labor and delivery management

The successful management of patients with COVID-19 requires a rigorous infection control protocol informed by guidelines from national entities, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and by state health departments when available.

Strict limits on the number of obstetricians and other health care workers (HCWs) entering the patient’s room should be enforced and documented to minimize risk to the HCWs attending to patients who have a positive diagnosis or who are under investigation. Only in cases of demonstrable clinical benefit should repeat visits by the same or additional HCWs be permitted. Conventional and electronic tablets present an excellent opportunity for patient follow-up visits without room entry. In our institution, this has been successfully piloted in nonpregnant patients. Obstetricians and others caring for obstetrical patients – especially those who are infected or under investigation for infection – should always wear a properly fitted N95 mask.

Because patients with COVID-19 may have or go on to develop a constellation of organ abnormalities (e.g., cardiovascular, renal, pulmonary), it is vital that a standardized panel of baseline laboratory studies be developed for pregnant patients. This will minimize the need for repeated blood draws and other testing which may increase HCW exposure.

A negative screen based on nonreport of symptoms, lack of temperature elevation, and reported nonexposure to individuals with COVID-19 symptoms still has limitations in terms of disease detection. A recent report from a tertiary care hospital in New York City found that close to one-third of pregnant patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted over a 2-week period had no viral symptoms or instructive history on initial admission.3 This is consistent with our clinical experience. Most importantly, therefore, routine quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing should be performed on all patients admitted to the L&D unit.

Given the reported variability in the accuracy of polymerase chain reaction testing induced by variable effectiveness of sampling techniques, stage of infection, and inherent test accuracy issues, symptomatic patients with a negative test should first obtain clearance from infectious disease specialists before isolation precautions are discontinued. Repeat testing in 24 hours, including testing of multiple sites, may subsequently yield a positive result in persistently symptomatic patients.
 

 

 

Intrapartum management

As much as possible, standard obstetric indications should guide the timing and route of delivery. In the case of a COVID-19–positive patient or a patient under investigation, nonobstetric factors may bear heavily on decision making, and management flexibility is of great value. For example, in cases of severe or critical disease status, evidence suggests that early delivery regardless of gestational age can improve maternal oxygenation; this supports the liberal use of C-sections in these circumstances. In addition, shortening labor length as well as duration of hospitalization may be expected to reduce the risk of transmission to HCWs, other staff, and other patients.

High rates of cesarean delivery unsurprisingly have been reported thus far: One review of 108 case reports and series of test-positive COVID-19 pregnancies found a 92% C-section rate, and another review and meta-analysis of studies of SARS, MERS, and COVID-19 during pregnancy similarly found that the majority of patients – 84% across all coronavirus infections and 91% in COVID-19 pregnancies – were delivered by C-section.4,5 Given these high rates of cesarean deliveries, the early placement of neuraxial anesthesia while the patient is stable appears to be prudent and obviates the need for intubation, the latter of which is associated with increased aerosol generation and increased virus transmission risk.

Strict protocols for the optimal protection of staff should be observed, including proper personal protective equipment (PPE) protection. Protocols have been detailed in various guidelines and publications; they include the wearing of shoe covers, gowns, N95 masks, goggles, face shields, and two layers of gloves.

For institutions that currently do not offer routine COVID-19 testing to pregnant patients – especially those in areas of outbreaks – N95 masks and eye protection should still be provided to all HCWs involved in the intrapartum management of untested asymptomatic patients, particularly those in the active phase of labor. This protection is justified given the limitations of symptom- and history-based screening and the not-uncommon experience of the patient with a negative screen who subsequently develops the clinical syndrome.

Obstetric management of labor requires close patient contact that potentially elevates the risk of contamination and infection. During the active stage of labor, patient shouting, rapid mouth breathing, and other behaviors inherent to labor all increase the risk of aerosolization of oronasal secretions. In addition, nasal-prong oxygen administration is believed to independently increase the risk of aerosolization of secretions. The casual practice of nasal oxygen application should thus be discontinued and, where felt to be absolutely necessary, a mask should be worn on top of the prongs.

Regarding operative delivery, each participating obstetric surgeon should observe guidelines and recommendations of governing national organizations and professional groups – including the American College of Surgeons – regarding the safe conduct of operations on patients with COVID-19. Written guidelines should be tailored as needed to the performance of C-sections and readily available in L&D. Drills and simulations are generally valuable, and expertise and support should always be available in the labor room to assist with donning and doffing of PPE.
 

 

 

Postpartum care

Expeditious separation of the COVID-19–positive mother from her infant is recommended, including avoidance of delayed cord clamping because of insufficient evidence of benefit to the infant. Insufficient evidence exists to support vertical transmission, but the possibility of maternal-infant transmission is clinically accepted based on small case reports of infection in a neonate at 30 hours of life and in infants of mothers with suspected or confirmed COVID-19.6,7 Accordingly, it is recommended that the benefit of early infant separation should be discussed with the mother. If approved, the infant should be kept in a separate isolation area and observed.

There is no evidence of breast milk transmission of the virus. For those electing to breastfeed, the patient should be provided with a breast pump to express and store the milk for subsequent bottle feeding. For mothers who elect to room in with the infant, a separation distance of 6 feet is recommended with an intervening barrier curtain. For COVID-19–positive mothers who elect breastfeeding, meticulous hand and face washing, continuous wearing of a mask, and cleansing of the breast prior to feeding needs to be maintained.

Restrictive visiting policies of no more than one visitor should be maintained. For severely or critically ill patients with COVID-19, it has been suggested that no visitors be allowed. As with other hospitalizations of COVID-19 patients, the HCW contact should be kept at a justifiable minimum to reduce the risk of transmission.
 

Protecting the obstetrician and other HCWs

Protecting the health of obstetricians and other HCWs is central to any successful strategy to fight the COVID-19 epidemic. For the individual obstetrician, careful attention to national and local hospital guidelines is required as these are rapidly evolving.

Physicians and their leadership must maintain an ongoing dialogue with hospital leadership to continually upgrade and optimize infection prevention and control measures, and to uphold best practices. The experience in Wuhan, China, illustrates the effectiveness of the proper use of PPE along with population control measures to reduce infections in HCWs. Prior to understanding the mechanism of virus transmission and using protective equipment, infection rates of 3%-29% were reported among HCWs. With the meticulous utilization of mitigation strategies and population control measures – including consistent use of PPE – the rate of infection of HCWs reportedly fell to zero.

In outpatient offices, all staff and HCWs should wear masks at all times and engage in social distancing and in frequent hand sanitization. Patients should be strongly encouraged to wear masks during office visits and on all other occasions when they will be in physical proximity to other individuals outside of the home.

Reports from epidemic areas describe transmission from household sources as a significant cause of HCW infection. The information emphasizes the need for ongoing vigilance and attention to sanitization measures even when at home with one’s family. An additional benefit is reduced risk of transmission from HCWs to family members.

Dr. Bahado-Singh is professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Oakland University, Rochester, Mich., and health system chair for obstetrics and gynecology at Beaumont Health System.

References

1. Luo S et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Mar 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.03.043.

2. Lechien JR et al. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Apr 6. doi: 10.1007/s00405-020-05965-1.

3. Breslin N et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 Apr 9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100118.

4. Zaigham M, Andersson O. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020 Apr 7. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13867.

5. Di Mascio D et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 Mar 25. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100107.

6. Ital J. Pediatr 2020;46(1) doi: 10.1186/s13052-020-0820-x

7. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;149(2):130-6. 

*This article was updated 5/6/2020. 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap

Obstetrics during the COVID-19 pandemic

Article Type
Changed

The identification of the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and emergence of the associated infectious respiratory disease, COVID-19, in late 2019 catapulted the citizens of the world, especially those in the health care professions, into an era of considerable uncertainty. At this moment in human history, calm reassurance – founded in fact and evidence – seems its greatest need. Much of the focus within the biomedical community has been on containment, prevention, and treatment of this highly contagious and, for some, extremely virulent disease.

Dr. E. Albert Reece

However, for ob.gyns on the front lines of the COVID-19 fight, there is the additional challenge of caring for at least two patients simultaneously: the mother and her unborn baby. Studies in mother-baby dyads, while being published at an incredible pace, are still quite scarce. In addition, published reports are limited by the small sample size of the patient population (many are single-case reports), lack of uniformity in the timing and types of clinical samples collected, testing delays, and varying isolation protocols in cases where the mother has confirmed SARS-CoV-2.

Five months into a pandemic that has swept the world, we still know very little about COVID-19 infection in the general population, let alone the obstetric one. We do not know if having and resolving COVID-19 infection provides any long-term protection against future disease. We do not know if vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 occurs. We do not know if maternal infection confers any immunologic benefit to the neonate. The list goes on.



What we do know is that taking extra precautions works. Use of personal protective equipment saves health care practitioner and patient lives. Prohibiting or restricting visitors to only one person in hospitals reduces risk of transmission to vulnerable patients. Shifting to fewer in-office prenatal consults decreases a pregnant woman’s potential exposure to the virus.

Additionally, we know that leading with compassion is vital to easing patient – and practitioner – anxiety and stress. Most importantly, we know that people are extraordinarily resilient, especially when it comes to safeguarding the health of their families.

To address some of the major concerns that many ob.gyns. have regarding their risk of coronavirus exposure when caring for patients, we have invited Ray Bahado-Singh, MD, professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Oakland University, Rochester, Mich., and health system chair for obstetrics and gynecology at Beaumont Health System, who works in a suburb of Detroit, one of our nation’s COVID-19 hot spots.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland School of Medicine as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Publications
Topics
Sections

The identification of the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and emergence of the associated infectious respiratory disease, COVID-19, in late 2019 catapulted the citizens of the world, especially those in the health care professions, into an era of considerable uncertainty. At this moment in human history, calm reassurance – founded in fact and evidence – seems its greatest need. Much of the focus within the biomedical community has been on containment, prevention, and treatment of this highly contagious and, for some, extremely virulent disease.

Dr. E. Albert Reece

However, for ob.gyns on the front lines of the COVID-19 fight, there is the additional challenge of caring for at least two patients simultaneously: the mother and her unborn baby. Studies in mother-baby dyads, while being published at an incredible pace, are still quite scarce. In addition, published reports are limited by the small sample size of the patient population (many are single-case reports), lack of uniformity in the timing and types of clinical samples collected, testing delays, and varying isolation protocols in cases where the mother has confirmed SARS-CoV-2.

Five months into a pandemic that has swept the world, we still know very little about COVID-19 infection in the general population, let alone the obstetric one. We do not know if having and resolving COVID-19 infection provides any long-term protection against future disease. We do not know if vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 occurs. We do not know if maternal infection confers any immunologic benefit to the neonate. The list goes on.



What we do know is that taking extra precautions works. Use of personal protective equipment saves health care practitioner and patient lives. Prohibiting or restricting visitors to only one person in hospitals reduces risk of transmission to vulnerable patients. Shifting to fewer in-office prenatal consults decreases a pregnant woman’s potential exposure to the virus.

Additionally, we know that leading with compassion is vital to easing patient – and practitioner – anxiety and stress. Most importantly, we know that people are extraordinarily resilient, especially when it comes to safeguarding the health of their families.

To address some of the major concerns that many ob.gyns. have regarding their risk of coronavirus exposure when caring for patients, we have invited Ray Bahado-Singh, MD, professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Oakland University, Rochester, Mich., and health system chair for obstetrics and gynecology at Beaumont Health System, who works in a suburb of Detroit, one of our nation’s COVID-19 hot spots.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland School of Medicine as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

The identification of the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and emergence of the associated infectious respiratory disease, COVID-19, in late 2019 catapulted the citizens of the world, especially those in the health care professions, into an era of considerable uncertainty. At this moment in human history, calm reassurance – founded in fact and evidence – seems its greatest need. Much of the focus within the biomedical community has been on containment, prevention, and treatment of this highly contagious and, for some, extremely virulent disease.

Dr. E. Albert Reece

However, for ob.gyns on the front lines of the COVID-19 fight, there is the additional challenge of caring for at least two patients simultaneously: the mother and her unborn baby. Studies in mother-baby dyads, while being published at an incredible pace, are still quite scarce. In addition, published reports are limited by the small sample size of the patient population (many are single-case reports), lack of uniformity in the timing and types of clinical samples collected, testing delays, and varying isolation protocols in cases where the mother has confirmed SARS-CoV-2.

Five months into a pandemic that has swept the world, we still know very little about COVID-19 infection in the general population, let alone the obstetric one. We do not know if having and resolving COVID-19 infection provides any long-term protection against future disease. We do not know if vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 occurs. We do not know if maternal infection confers any immunologic benefit to the neonate. The list goes on.



What we do know is that taking extra precautions works. Use of personal protective equipment saves health care practitioner and patient lives. Prohibiting or restricting visitors to only one person in hospitals reduces risk of transmission to vulnerable patients. Shifting to fewer in-office prenatal consults decreases a pregnant woman’s potential exposure to the virus.

Additionally, we know that leading with compassion is vital to easing patient – and practitioner – anxiety and stress. Most importantly, we know that people are extraordinarily resilient, especially when it comes to safeguarding the health of their families.

To address some of the major concerns that many ob.gyns. have regarding their risk of coronavirus exposure when caring for patients, we have invited Ray Bahado-Singh, MD, professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Oakland University, Rochester, Mich., and health system chair for obstetrics and gynecology at Beaumont Health System, who works in a suburb of Detroit, one of our nation’s COVID-19 hot spots.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is executive vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland School of Medicine as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. He is the medical editor of this column. He said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Contact him at obnews@mdedge.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap

Telemedicine: A primer for today’s ObGyn

Article Type
Changed

If telemedicine had not yet begun to play a significant role in your ObGyn practice, it is almost certain to now as the COVID-19 pandemic demands new ways of caring for our patients while keeping others safe from disease. According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the term “telemedicine” refers to delivering traditional clinical diagnosis and monitoring via technology (see “ACOG weighs in on telehealth”).1

Whether they realize it or not, most Ob­Gyns have practiced a simple form of telemedicine when they take phone calls from patients who are seeking medication refills. In these cases, physicians either can call the pharmacy to refill the medication or suggest patients make an office appointment to receive a new prescription (much to the chagrin of many patients—especially millennials). Physicians who acquiesce to patients’ phone requests to have prescriptions filled or to others seeking free medical advice are not compensated for these services, yet are legally responsible for their actions and advice—a situation that does not make for good medicine.

This is where telemedicine can be an important addition to an ObGyn practice. Telemedicine saves the patient the time and effort of coming to the office, while providing compensation to the physician for his/her time and advice and providing a record of the interaction, all of which makes for far better medicine. This article—the first of 3 on the subject—discusses the process of integrating telemedicine into a practice with minimal time, energy, and expense.

Telemedicine and the ObGyn practice

Many ObGyn patients do not require an in-person visit in order to receive effective care. There is even the potential to provide prenatal care via telemedicine by replacing some of the many prenatal well-care office visits with at-home care for pregnant women with low-risk pregnancies. A typical virtual visit for a low-risk pregnancy includes utilizing home monitoring equipment to track fetal heart rate, maternal blood pressure, and fundal height.2

Practices typically use telemedicine platforms to manage one or both of the following types of encounters: 1) walk-in visits through the practice’s web site; for most of these, patients tend not to care which physicians they see; their priority is usually the first available provider; and 2) appointment-based consultations, where patients schedule video chats in advance, usually with a specific provider.

Although incorporating telemedicine into a practice may seem overwhelming, it requires minimal additional equipment, interfaces easily with a practice’s web site and electronic medical record (EMR) system, increases productivity, and improves workflow. And patients generally appreciate the option of not having to travel to the office for an appointment.

Most patients and physicians are already comfortable with their mobile phones, tablets, social media, and wearable technology, such as Fitbits. Telemedicine is a logical next step. And given the current situation with COVID-19, it is really not a matter of “if,” but rather “when” to incorporate telemedicine as a communication and practice tool, and the sooner the better.

Continue to: Getting started...

 

 

Getting started

Physicians and their colleagues and staff first need to become comfortable with telemedicine technology. Physicians can begin by using video communication for other purposes, such as for conducting staff meetings. They should practice starting and ending calls and adjusting audio volume and video quality to ensure good reception.

Selecting a video platform

TABLE 1 provides a list of the most popular video providers and the advantages and disadvantages of each, and TABLE 2 shows a list of free video chat apps. Apps are available that can:

  • share and mark up lab tests, magnetic resonance images, and other medical documents without exposing the entire desktop
  • securely send documents over a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant video
  • stream digital device images live while still seeing patients’ faces.

Physicians should make sure their implementation team has the necessary equipment, including webcams, microphones, and speakers, and they should take the time to do research and test out a few programs before selecting one for their practice. Consider appointing a telemedicine point person who is knowledgeable about the technology and can patiently explain it to others. And keep in mind that video chatting is dependent upon a fast, strong Internet connection that has sufficient bandwidth to transport a large amount of data. If your practice has connectivity problems, consider consulting with an information technology (IT) expert.

Testing it out and obtaining feedback

Once a team is comfortable using video within the practice, it is time to test it out with a few patients and perhaps a few payers. Most patients are eager to start using video for their medical encounters. Even senior patients are often willing to try consults via video. According to a recent survey, 64% of patients are willing to see a physician over video.3 And among those who were comfortable accepting an invitation to participate in a video encounter, increasing age was actually associated with a higher likelihood to accept an invite.

Physician colleagues, medical assistants, and nurse practitioners will need some basic telemedicine skills, and physicians and staff should be prepared to make video connections seamless for patients. Usually, patients need some guidance and encouragement, such as telling them to check their spam folder for their invites if the invites fail to arrive in their email inbox, adjusting audio settings, or setting up a webcam. In the beginning, ObGyns should make sure they build in plenty of buffer time for the unexpected, as there will certainly be some “bugs” that need to be worked out.

ObGyns should encourage and collect patient feedback to such questions as:

  • What kinds of devices (laptop, mobile) do they prefer using?
  • What kind of networks are they using (3G, corporate, home)?
  • What features do they like? What features do they have a hard time finding?
  • What do they like or not like about the video experience?
  • Keep track of the types of questions patients ask, and be patient as patients become acclimated to the video consultation experience.

Continue to: Streamlining online workflow...

 

 

Streamlining online workflow

Armed with feedback from patients, it is time to start streamlining online workflow. Most ObGyns want to be able to manage video visits in a way that is similar to the way they manage face-to-face visits with patients. This may mean experimenting with a virtual waiting room. A virtual waiting room is a simple web page or link that can be sent to patients. On that page, patients sign in with minimal demographic information and select one of the time slots when the physician is available. Typically, these programs are designed to alert the physicians and/or staff when a patient enters the virtual waiting room. Patients have access to the online patient queue and can start a chat or video call when both parties are ready. Such a waiting room model serves as a stepping stone for new practices to familiarize themselves with video conferencing. This approach is also perfect for practices that already have a practice management system and just want to add a video component.

Influences on practice workflow

With good time management, telemedicine can improve the efficiency and productivity of your practice. Your daily schedule and management of patients will need some minor changes, but significant alterations to your existing schedule and workflow are generally unnecessary. One of the advantages of telemedicine is the convenience of prompt care and the easy access patients have to your practice. This decreases visits to the emergency department and to urgent care centers.

Consider scheduling telemedicine appointments at the end of the day when your staff has left the office, as no staff members are required for a telemedicine visit. Ideally, you should offer a set time to communicate with patients, as this avoids having to make multiple calls to reach a patient. Another advantage of telemedicine is that you can provide care in the evenings and on weekends if you want. Whereas before you might have been fielding calls from patients during these times and not being compensated, with telemedicine you can conduct a virtual visit from any location and any computer or mobile phone and receive remuneration for your care.

And while access to care has been a problem in many ObGyn practices, many additional patients can be accommodated into a busy ObGyn practice by using telemedicine.

Telemedicine and the coronavirus

The current health care crisis makes implementing telemedicine essential. Patients who think they may have COVID-19 or who have been diagnosed need to be quarantined. Such patients can be helped safely in the comfort of their own homes without endangering others. Patients can be triaged virtually. All those who are febrile or have respiratory symptoms can continue to avail themselves of virtual visits.

According to reports in the media, COVID-19 is stretching the health care workforce to its limits and creating a shortage, both because of the sheer number of cases and because health care workers are getting sick themselves. Physicians who test positive do not have to be completely removed from the workforce if they have the ability to care for patients remotely from their homes. And not incidentally the new environment has prompted the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) and private payers to initiate national payment policies that create parity between office and telemedicine visits.4

Continue to: Bottom line...

 

 

Bottom line

Patient-driven care is the future, and telemedicine is part of that. Patients want to have ready access to their health care providers without having to devote hours to a medical encounter that could be completed in a matter of minutes via telemedicine.

In the next article in this series, we will review the proper coding for a telemedicine visit so that appropriate compensation is gleaned. We will also review the barriers to implementing telemedicine visits. The third article is written with the assistance of 2 health care attorneys, Anjali Dooley and Nadia de la Houssaye, who are experts in telemedicine and who have helped dozens of practices and hospitals implement the technology. They provide legal guidelines for ObGyns who are considering adding telemedicine to their practice. ●

ACOG weighs in on telehealth

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) encourages all practices and facilities without telemedicine capabilities “to strategize about how telehealth could be integrated into their services as appropriate.”1 In doing so, they also encourage consideration of ways to care for those who may not have access to such technology or who do not know how to use it. They also explain that a number of federal telehealth policy changes have been made in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and that most private health insurers are following suit.2 Such changes include:

  • covering all telehealth visits for all traditional Medicare beneficiaries regardless of geographic location or originating site
  • not requiring physicians to have a pre-existing relationship with a patient to provide a telehealth visit
  • permitting the use of FaceTime, Skype, and other everyday communication technologies to provide telehealth visits.

A summary of the major telehealth policy changes, as well as information on how to code and bill for telehealth visits can be found at https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/physician-faqs/~/link .aspx?_id=3803296EAAD940C69525D4DD2679A00E&_z=z.

References

  1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. COVID-19 FAQs for obstetriciangynecologists, gynecology. https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/physician-faqs/covid19faqs-for-ob-gyns-gynecology. Accessed April 8, 2020.
  2. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Managing patients remotely: billing for digital and telehealth services. Updated April 2, 2020. https://www.acog.org/clinicalinformation/physician-faqs/~/link.aspx?_id=3803296EAAD940C69525D4DD2679A00E&_z=z. Accessed April 8, 2020.

 

References
  1. Implementing telehealth in practice. ACOG Committee Opinion. February 2020. https://www.acog.org/clinical /clinical-guidance/committee-opinion/articles/2020/02 /implementing-telehealth-in-practice. Accessed April 6, 2020.
  2. de Mooij MJM, Hodny RL, O’Neil DA, et al. OB nest: reimagining low-risk prenatal care. Mayo Clin Proc. 2018;93:458-466.
  3. Gardner MR, Jenkins SM, O’Neil DA, et al. Perceptions of video-based appointments from the patient’s home: a patient survey. Telemed J E Health. 2015;21:281-285.
  4. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Managing patients remotely: billing for digital and telehealth services. Updated April 2, 2020. https://www.acog.org /clinical-information/physician-faqs/~/link.aspx?_id=380 3296EAAD940C69525D4DD2679A00E&_z=z. Accessed  April 8, 2020. 

    

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Karram is Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati, and Director of Urogynecology, The Christ Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio.
 

Dr. Baum is Professor of Clinical Urology,  Tulane Medical School, New Orleans,  Louisiana.
 

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management- 32(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
28-32
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Karram is Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati, and Director of Urogynecology, The Christ Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio.
 

Dr. Baum is Professor of Clinical Urology,  Tulane Medical School, New Orleans,  Louisiana.
 

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Karram is Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati, and Director of Urogynecology, The Christ Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio.
 

Dr. Baum is Professor of Clinical Urology,  Tulane Medical School, New Orleans,  Louisiana.
 

The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

If telemedicine had not yet begun to play a significant role in your ObGyn practice, it is almost certain to now as the COVID-19 pandemic demands new ways of caring for our patients while keeping others safe from disease. According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the term “telemedicine” refers to delivering traditional clinical diagnosis and monitoring via technology (see “ACOG weighs in on telehealth”).1

Whether they realize it or not, most Ob­Gyns have practiced a simple form of telemedicine when they take phone calls from patients who are seeking medication refills. In these cases, physicians either can call the pharmacy to refill the medication or suggest patients make an office appointment to receive a new prescription (much to the chagrin of many patients—especially millennials). Physicians who acquiesce to patients’ phone requests to have prescriptions filled or to others seeking free medical advice are not compensated for these services, yet are legally responsible for their actions and advice—a situation that does not make for good medicine.

This is where telemedicine can be an important addition to an ObGyn practice. Telemedicine saves the patient the time and effort of coming to the office, while providing compensation to the physician for his/her time and advice and providing a record of the interaction, all of which makes for far better medicine. This article—the first of 3 on the subject—discusses the process of integrating telemedicine into a practice with minimal time, energy, and expense.

Telemedicine and the ObGyn practice

Many ObGyn patients do not require an in-person visit in order to receive effective care. There is even the potential to provide prenatal care via telemedicine by replacing some of the many prenatal well-care office visits with at-home care for pregnant women with low-risk pregnancies. A typical virtual visit for a low-risk pregnancy includes utilizing home monitoring equipment to track fetal heart rate, maternal blood pressure, and fundal height.2

Practices typically use telemedicine platforms to manage one or both of the following types of encounters: 1) walk-in visits through the practice’s web site; for most of these, patients tend not to care which physicians they see; their priority is usually the first available provider; and 2) appointment-based consultations, where patients schedule video chats in advance, usually with a specific provider.

Although incorporating telemedicine into a practice may seem overwhelming, it requires minimal additional equipment, interfaces easily with a practice’s web site and electronic medical record (EMR) system, increases productivity, and improves workflow. And patients generally appreciate the option of not having to travel to the office for an appointment.

Most patients and physicians are already comfortable with their mobile phones, tablets, social media, and wearable technology, such as Fitbits. Telemedicine is a logical next step. And given the current situation with COVID-19, it is really not a matter of “if,” but rather “when” to incorporate telemedicine as a communication and practice tool, and the sooner the better.

Continue to: Getting started...

 

 

Getting started

Physicians and their colleagues and staff first need to become comfortable with telemedicine technology. Physicians can begin by using video communication for other purposes, such as for conducting staff meetings. They should practice starting and ending calls and adjusting audio volume and video quality to ensure good reception.

Selecting a video platform

TABLE 1 provides a list of the most popular video providers and the advantages and disadvantages of each, and TABLE 2 shows a list of free video chat apps. Apps are available that can:

  • share and mark up lab tests, magnetic resonance images, and other medical documents without exposing the entire desktop
  • securely send documents over a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant video
  • stream digital device images live while still seeing patients’ faces.

Physicians should make sure their implementation team has the necessary equipment, including webcams, microphones, and speakers, and they should take the time to do research and test out a few programs before selecting one for their practice. Consider appointing a telemedicine point person who is knowledgeable about the technology and can patiently explain it to others. And keep in mind that video chatting is dependent upon a fast, strong Internet connection that has sufficient bandwidth to transport a large amount of data. If your practice has connectivity problems, consider consulting with an information technology (IT) expert.

Testing it out and obtaining feedback

Once a team is comfortable using video within the practice, it is time to test it out with a few patients and perhaps a few payers. Most patients are eager to start using video for their medical encounters. Even senior patients are often willing to try consults via video. According to a recent survey, 64% of patients are willing to see a physician over video.3 And among those who were comfortable accepting an invitation to participate in a video encounter, increasing age was actually associated with a higher likelihood to accept an invite.

Physician colleagues, medical assistants, and nurse practitioners will need some basic telemedicine skills, and physicians and staff should be prepared to make video connections seamless for patients. Usually, patients need some guidance and encouragement, such as telling them to check their spam folder for their invites if the invites fail to arrive in their email inbox, adjusting audio settings, or setting up a webcam. In the beginning, ObGyns should make sure they build in plenty of buffer time for the unexpected, as there will certainly be some “bugs” that need to be worked out.

ObGyns should encourage and collect patient feedback to such questions as:

  • What kinds of devices (laptop, mobile) do they prefer using?
  • What kind of networks are they using (3G, corporate, home)?
  • What features do they like? What features do they have a hard time finding?
  • What do they like or not like about the video experience?
  • Keep track of the types of questions patients ask, and be patient as patients become acclimated to the video consultation experience.

Continue to: Streamlining online workflow...

 

 

Streamlining online workflow

Armed with feedback from patients, it is time to start streamlining online workflow. Most ObGyns want to be able to manage video visits in a way that is similar to the way they manage face-to-face visits with patients. This may mean experimenting with a virtual waiting room. A virtual waiting room is a simple web page or link that can be sent to patients. On that page, patients sign in with minimal demographic information and select one of the time slots when the physician is available. Typically, these programs are designed to alert the physicians and/or staff when a patient enters the virtual waiting room. Patients have access to the online patient queue and can start a chat or video call when both parties are ready. Such a waiting room model serves as a stepping stone for new practices to familiarize themselves with video conferencing. This approach is also perfect for practices that already have a practice management system and just want to add a video component.

Influences on practice workflow

With good time management, telemedicine can improve the efficiency and productivity of your practice. Your daily schedule and management of patients will need some minor changes, but significant alterations to your existing schedule and workflow are generally unnecessary. One of the advantages of telemedicine is the convenience of prompt care and the easy access patients have to your practice. This decreases visits to the emergency department and to urgent care centers.

Consider scheduling telemedicine appointments at the end of the day when your staff has left the office, as no staff members are required for a telemedicine visit. Ideally, you should offer a set time to communicate with patients, as this avoids having to make multiple calls to reach a patient. Another advantage of telemedicine is that you can provide care in the evenings and on weekends if you want. Whereas before you might have been fielding calls from patients during these times and not being compensated, with telemedicine you can conduct a virtual visit from any location and any computer or mobile phone and receive remuneration for your care.

And while access to care has been a problem in many ObGyn practices, many additional patients can be accommodated into a busy ObGyn practice by using telemedicine.

Telemedicine and the coronavirus

The current health care crisis makes implementing telemedicine essential. Patients who think they may have COVID-19 or who have been diagnosed need to be quarantined. Such patients can be helped safely in the comfort of their own homes without endangering others. Patients can be triaged virtually. All those who are febrile or have respiratory symptoms can continue to avail themselves of virtual visits.

According to reports in the media, COVID-19 is stretching the health care workforce to its limits and creating a shortage, both because of the sheer number of cases and because health care workers are getting sick themselves. Physicians who test positive do not have to be completely removed from the workforce if they have the ability to care for patients remotely from their homes. And not incidentally the new environment has prompted the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) and private payers to initiate national payment policies that create parity between office and telemedicine visits.4

Continue to: Bottom line...

 

 

Bottom line

Patient-driven care is the future, and telemedicine is part of that. Patients want to have ready access to their health care providers without having to devote hours to a medical encounter that could be completed in a matter of minutes via telemedicine.

In the next article in this series, we will review the proper coding for a telemedicine visit so that appropriate compensation is gleaned. We will also review the barriers to implementing telemedicine visits. The third article is written with the assistance of 2 health care attorneys, Anjali Dooley and Nadia de la Houssaye, who are experts in telemedicine and who have helped dozens of practices and hospitals implement the technology. They provide legal guidelines for ObGyns who are considering adding telemedicine to their practice. ●

ACOG weighs in on telehealth

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) encourages all practices and facilities without telemedicine capabilities “to strategize about how telehealth could be integrated into their services as appropriate.”1 In doing so, they also encourage consideration of ways to care for those who may not have access to such technology or who do not know how to use it. They also explain that a number of federal telehealth policy changes have been made in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and that most private health insurers are following suit.2 Such changes include:

  • covering all telehealth visits for all traditional Medicare beneficiaries regardless of geographic location or originating site
  • not requiring physicians to have a pre-existing relationship with a patient to provide a telehealth visit
  • permitting the use of FaceTime, Skype, and other everyday communication technologies to provide telehealth visits.

A summary of the major telehealth policy changes, as well as information on how to code and bill for telehealth visits can be found at https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/physician-faqs/~/link .aspx?_id=3803296EAAD940C69525D4DD2679A00E&_z=z.

References

  1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. COVID-19 FAQs for obstetriciangynecologists, gynecology. https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/physician-faqs/covid19faqs-for-ob-gyns-gynecology. Accessed April 8, 2020.
  2. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Managing patients remotely: billing for digital and telehealth services. Updated April 2, 2020. https://www.acog.org/clinicalinformation/physician-faqs/~/link.aspx?_id=3803296EAAD940C69525D4DD2679A00E&_z=z. Accessed April 8, 2020.

 

If telemedicine had not yet begun to play a significant role in your ObGyn practice, it is almost certain to now as the COVID-19 pandemic demands new ways of caring for our patients while keeping others safe from disease. According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the term “telemedicine” refers to delivering traditional clinical diagnosis and monitoring via technology (see “ACOG weighs in on telehealth”).1

Whether they realize it or not, most Ob­Gyns have practiced a simple form of telemedicine when they take phone calls from patients who are seeking medication refills. In these cases, physicians either can call the pharmacy to refill the medication or suggest patients make an office appointment to receive a new prescription (much to the chagrin of many patients—especially millennials). Physicians who acquiesce to patients’ phone requests to have prescriptions filled or to others seeking free medical advice are not compensated for these services, yet are legally responsible for their actions and advice—a situation that does not make for good medicine.

This is where telemedicine can be an important addition to an ObGyn practice. Telemedicine saves the patient the time and effort of coming to the office, while providing compensation to the physician for his/her time and advice and providing a record of the interaction, all of which makes for far better medicine. This article—the first of 3 on the subject—discusses the process of integrating telemedicine into a practice with minimal time, energy, and expense.

Telemedicine and the ObGyn practice

Many ObGyn patients do not require an in-person visit in order to receive effective care. There is even the potential to provide prenatal care via telemedicine by replacing some of the many prenatal well-care office visits with at-home care for pregnant women with low-risk pregnancies. A typical virtual visit for a low-risk pregnancy includes utilizing home monitoring equipment to track fetal heart rate, maternal blood pressure, and fundal height.2

Practices typically use telemedicine platforms to manage one or both of the following types of encounters: 1) walk-in visits through the practice’s web site; for most of these, patients tend not to care which physicians they see; their priority is usually the first available provider; and 2) appointment-based consultations, where patients schedule video chats in advance, usually with a specific provider.

Although incorporating telemedicine into a practice may seem overwhelming, it requires minimal additional equipment, interfaces easily with a practice’s web site and electronic medical record (EMR) system, increases productivity, and improves workflow. And patients generally appreciate the option of not having to travel to the office for an appointment.

Most patients and physicians are already comfortable with their mobile phones, tablets, social media, and wearable technology, such as Fitbits. Telemedicine is a logical next step. And given the current situation with COVID-19, it is really not a matter of “if,” but rather “when” to incorporate telemedicine as a communication and practice tool, and the sooner the better.

Continue to: Getting started...

 

 

Getting started

Physicians and their colleagues and staff first need to become comfortable with telemedicine technology. Physicians can begin by using video communication for other purposes, such as for conducting staff meetings. They should practice starting and ending calls and adjusting audio volume and video quality to ensure good reception.

Selecting a video platform

TABLE 1 provides a list of the most popular video providers and the advantages and disadvantages of each, and TABLE 2 shows a list of free video chat apps. Apps are available that can:

  • share and mark up lab tests, magnetic resonance images, and other medical documents without exposing the entire desktop
  • securely send documents over a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant video
  • stream digital device images live while still seeing patients’ faces.

Physicians should make sure their implementation team has the necessary equipment, including webcams, microphones, and speakers, and they should take the time to do research and test out a few programs before selecting one for their practice. Consider appointing a telemedicine point person who is knowledgeable about the technology and can patiently explain it to others. And keep in mind that video chatting is dependent upon a fast, strong Internet connection that has sufficient bandwidth to transport a large amount of data. If your practice has connectivity problems, consider consulting with an information technology (IT) expert.

Testing it out and obtaining feedback

Once a team is comfortable using video within the practice, it is time to test it out with a few patients and perhaps a few payers. Most patients are eager to start using video for their medical encounters. Even senior patients are often willing to try consults via video. According to a recent survey, 64% of patients are willing to see a physician over video.3 And among those who were comfortable accepting an invitation to participate in a video encounter, increasing age was actually associated with a higher likelihood to accept an invite.

Physician colleagues, medical assistants, and nurse practitioners will need some basic telemedicine skills, and physicians and staff should be prepared to make video connections seamless for patients. Usually, patients need some guidance and encouragement, such as telling them to check their spam folder for their invites if the invites fail to arrive in their email inbox, adjusting audio settings, or setting up a webcam. In the beginning, ObGyns should make sure they build in plenty of buffer time for the unexpected, as there will certainly be some “bugs” that need to be worked out.

ObGyns should encourage and collect patient feedback to such questions as:

  • What kinds of devices (laptop, mobile) do they prefer using?
  • What kind of networks are they using (3G, corporate, home)?
  • What features do they like? What features do they have a hard time finding?
  • What do they like or not like about the video experience?
  • Keep track of the types of questions patients ask, and be patient as patients become acclimated to the video consultation experience.

Continue to: Streamlining online workflow...

 

 

Streamlining online workflow

Armed with feedback from patients, it is time to start streamlining online workflow. Most ObGyns want to be able to manage video visits in a way that is similar to the way they manage face-to-face visits with patients. This may mean experimenting with a virtual waiting room. A virtual waiting room is a simple web page or link that can be sent to patients. On that page, patients sign in with minimal demographic information and select one of the time slots when the physician is available. Typically, these programs are designed to alert the physicians and/or staff when a patient enters the virtual waiting room. Patients have access to the online patient queue and can start a chat or video call when both parties are ready. Such a waiting room model serves as a stepping stone for new practices to familiarize themselves with video conferencing. This approach is also perfect for practices that already have a practice management system and just want to add a video component.

Influences on practice workflow

With good time management, telemedicine can improve the efficiency and productivity of your practice. Your daily schedule and management of patients will need some minor changes, but significant alterations to your existing schedule and workflow are generally unnecessary. One of the advantages of telemedicine is the convenience of prompt care and the easy access patients have to your practice. This decreases visits to the emergency department and to urgent care centers.

Consider scheduling telemedicine appointments at the end of the day when your staff has left the office, as no staff members are required for a telemedicine visit. Ideally, you should offer a set time to communicate with patients, as this avoids having to make multiple calls to reach a patient. Another advantage of telemedicine is that you can provide care in the evenings and on weekends if you want. Whereas before you might have been fielding calls from patients during these times and not being compensated, with telemedicine you can conduct a virtual visit from any location and any computer or mobile phone and receive remuneration for your care.

And while access to care has been a problem in many ObGyn practices, many additional patients can be accommodated into a busy ObGyn practice by using telemedicine.

Telemedicine and the coronavirus

The current health care crisis makes implementing telemedicine essential. Patients who think they may have COVID-19 or who have been diagnosed need to be quarantined. Such patients can be helped safely in the comfort of their own homes without endangering others. Patients can be triaged virtually. All those who are febrile or have respiratory symptoms can continue to avail themselves of virtual visits.

According to reports in the media, COVID-19 is stretching the health care workforce to its limits and creating a shortage, both because of the sheer number of cases and because health care workers are getting sick themselves. Physicians who test positive do not have to be completely removed from the workforce if they have the ability to care for patients remotely from their homes. And not incidentally the new environment has prompted the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) and private payers to initiate national payment policies that create parity between office and telemedicine visits.4

Continue to: Bottom line...

 

 

Bottom line

Patient-driven care is the future, and telemedicine is part of that. Patients want to have ready access to their health care providers without having to devote hours to a medical encounter that could be completed in a matter of minutes via telemedicine.

In the next article in this series, we will review the proper coding for a telemedicine visit so that appropriate compensation is gleaned. We will also review the barriers to implementing telemedicine visits. The third article is written with the assistance of 2 health care attorneys, Anjali Dooley and Nadia de la Houssaye, who are experts in telemedicine and who have helped dozens of practices and hospitals implement the technology. They provide legal guidelines for ObGyns who are considering adding telemedicine to their practice. ●

ACOG weighs in on telehealth

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) encourages all practices and facilities without telemedicine capabilities “to strategize about how telehealth could be integrated into their services as appropriate.”1 In doing so, they also encourage consideration of ways to care for those who may not have access to such technology or who do not know how to use it. They also explain that a number of federal telehealth policy changes have been made in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and that most private health insurers are following suit.2 Such changes include:

  • covering all telehealth visits for all traditional Medicare beneficiaries regardless of geographic location or originating site
  • not requiring physicians to have a pre-existing relationship with a patient to provide a telehealth visit
  • permitting the use of FaceTime, Skype, and other everyday communication technologies to provide telehealth visits.

A summary of the major telehealth policy changes, as well as information on how to code and bill for telehealth visits can be found at https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/physician-faqs/~/link .aspx?_id=3803296EAAD940C69525D4DD2679A00E&_z=z.

References

  1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. COVID-19 FAQs for obstetriciangynecologists, gynecology. https://www.acog.org/clinical-information/physician-faqs/covid19faqs-for-ob-gyns-gynecology. Accessed April 8, 2020.
  2. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Managing patients remotely: billing for digital and telehealth services. Updated April 2, 2020. https://www.acog.org/clinicalinformation/physician-faqs/~/link.aspx?_id=3803296EAAD940C69525D4DD2679A00E&_z=z. Accessed April 8, 2020.

 

References
  1. Implementing telehealth in practice. ACOG Committee Opinion. February 2020. https://www.acog.org/clinical /clinical-guidance/committee-opinion/articles/2020/02 /implementing-telehealth-in-practice. Accessed April 6, 2020.
  2. de Mooij MJM, Hodny RL, O’Neil DA, et al. OB nest: reimagining low-risk prenatal care. Mayo Clin Proc. 2018;93:458-466.
  3. Gardner MR, Jenkins SM, O’Neil DA, et al. Perceptions of video-based appointments from the patient’s home: a patient survey. Telemed J E Health. 2015;21:281-285.
  4. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Managing patients remotely: billing for digital and telehealth services. Updated April 2, 2020. https://www.acog.org /clinical-information/physician-faqs/~/link.aspx?_id=380 3296EAAD940C69525D4DD2679A00E&_z=z. Accessed  April 8, 2020. 

    

References
  1. Implementing telehealth in practice. ACOG Committee Opinion. February 2020. https://www.acog.org/clinical /clinical-guidance/committee-opinion/articles/2020/02 /implementing-telehealth-in-practice. Accessed April 6, 2020.
  2. de Mooij MJM, Hodny RL, O’Neil DA, et al. OB nest: reimagining low-risk prenatal care. Mayo Clin Proc. 2018;93:458-466.
  3. Gardner MR, Jenkins SM, O’Neil DA, et al. Perceptions of video-based appointments from the patient’s home: a patient survey. Telemed J E Health. 2015;21:281-285.
  4. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Managing patients remotely: billing for digital and telehealth services. Updated April 2, 2020. https://www.acog.org /clinical-information/physician-faqs/~/link.aspx?_id=380 3296EAAD940C69525D4DD2679A00E&_z=z. Accessed  April 8, 2020. 

    

Issue
OBG Management- 32(5)
Issue
OBG Management- 32(5)
Page Number
28-32
Page Number
28-32
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Eyebrow Default
part 1 of 3
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

COVID-19 apps for the ObGyn health care provider

Article Type
Changed

In the midst of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health care providers, including ObGyns, need up-to-date information to keep pace with the ever-changing health care crisis. Literature regarding obstetric populations is emerging in journals.1,2 General guidance in the management of COVID-19–positive patients may also be helpful to the ObGyn provider. Although scientific journals are now publishing COVID-19 research at warp speed, those same journals tend to be too specialized for general readers.3 Mobile apps may make the information more accessible.

This app review focuses on 3 apps that provide information about the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and detail general guidance for treatment of COVID-19–positive patients. An initial search in early April 2020 of major national health care organizations and ObGyn-specific organizational apps yielded the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) app. A subsequent search in the app stores using the term “COVID” yielded 2 additional apps: the Osler COVID Learning Centre app and the Relief Central app.

The CDC app contains a COVID-19-specific section that highlights pertinent information for health care providers as well as a section on caring for the obstetric patient. The Osler app includes podcasts and videos on critical care for noncritical care providers. Finally, the Relief Central app contains updated information on screening and treatment for COVID-19. The TABLE features details of the 3 apps.



Each app is evaluated based on a shortened version of the APPLICATIONS scoring system, APPLI (app comprehensiveness, price, platform, literature use, and important special features).4

 

References
  1. Rasmussen SA, Smulian JC, Lednicky JA, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pregnancy: what obstetricians need to know. Am J Obstet Gynecol. February 24, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.02.017.
  2. Dashraath P, Jing Lin Jeslyn W, Mei Xian Karen L, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. March 23, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.03.021.
  3. Tingley K. Coronavirus is forcing medical research to speed up. New York Times Magazine. April 26, 2020:16-18.
  4. Chyjek K, Farag S, Chen KT. Rating pregnancy wheel applications using the APPLICATIONS scoring system. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125:1478-1483.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Bogaert is a third-year resident in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount  Sinai, New York, New York.

Dr. Chen is Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive  Science and Medical Education, Vice-Chair of Ob-Gyn Education for the Mount Sinai Health System, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. She is an OBG Management Contributing Editor.

Dr. Chen reports being an advisory board member and receiving royalties from UpToDate, Inc. Dr. Bogaert reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.
 

Issue
OBG Management- 32(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
44, 46
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Bogaert is a third-year resident in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount  Sinai, New York, New York.

Dr. Chen is Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive  Science and Medical Education, Vice-Chair of Ob-Gyn Education for the Mount Sinai Health System, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. She is an OBG Management Contributing Editor.

Dr. Chen reports being an advisory board member and receiving royalties from UpToDate, Inc. Dr. Bogaert reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.
 

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Bogaert is a third-year resident in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount  Sinai, New York, New York.

Dr. Chen is Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive  Science and Medical Education, Vice-Chair of Ob-Gyn Education for the Mount Sinai Health System, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. She is an OBG Management Contributing Editor.

Dr. Chen reports being an advisory board member and receiving royalties from UpToDate, Inc. Dr. Bogaert reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.
 

Article PDF
Article PDF

In the midst of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health care providers, including ObGyns, need up-to-date information to keep pace with the ever-changing health care crisis. Literature regarding obstetric populations is emerging in journals.1,2 General guidance in the management of COVID-19–positive patients may also be helpful to the ObGyn provider. Although scientific journals are now publishing COVID-19 research at warp speed, those same journals tend to be too specialized for general readers.3 Mobile apps may make the information more accessible.

This app review focuses on 3 apps that provide information about the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and detail general guidance for treatment of COVID-19–positive patients. An initial search in early April 2020 of major national health care organizations and ObGyn-specific organizational apps yielded the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) app. A subsequent search in the app stores using the term “COVID” yielded 2 additional apps: the Osler COVID Learning Centre app and the Relief Central app.

The CDC app contains a COVID-19-specific section that highlights pertinent information for health care providers as well as a section on caring for the obstetric patient. The Osler app includes podcasts and videos on critical care for noncritical care providers. Finally, the Relief Central app contains updated information on screening and treatment for COVID-19. The TABLE features details of the 3 apps.



Each app is evaluated based on a shortened version of the APPLICATIONS scoring system, APPLI (app comprehensiveness, price, platform, literature use, and important special features).4

 

In the midst of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health care providers, including ObGyns, need up-to-date information to keep pace with the ever-changing health care crisis. Literature regarding obstetric populations is emerging in journals.1,2 General guidance in the management of COVID-19–positive patients may also be helpful to the ObGyn provider. Although scientific journals are now publishing COVID-19 research at warp speed, those same journals tend to be too specialized for general readers.3 Mobile apps may make the information more accessible.

This app review focuses on 3 apps that provide information about the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and detail general guidance for treatment of COVID-19–positive patients. An initial search in early April 2020 of major national health care organizations and ObGyn-specific organizational apps yielded the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) app. A subsequent search in the app stores using the term “COVID” yielded 2 additional apps: the Osler COVID Learning Centre app and the Relief Central app.

The CDC app contains a COVID-19-specific section that highlights pertinent information for health care providers as well as a section on caring for the obstetric patient. The Osler app includes podcasts and videos on critical care for noncritical care providers. Finally, the Relief Central app contains updated information on screening and treatment for COVID-19. The TABLE features details of the 3 apps.



Each app is evaluated based on a shortened version of the APPLICATIONS scoring system, APPLI (app comprehensiveness, price, platform, literature use, and important special features).4

 

References
  1. Rasmussen SA, Smulian JC, Lednicky JA, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pregnancy: what obstetricians need to know. Am J Obstet Gynecol. February 24, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.02.017.
  2. Dashraath P, Jing Lin Jeslyn W, Mei Xian Karen L, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. March 23, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.03.021.
  3. Tingley K. Coronavirus is forcing medical research to speed up. New York Times Magazine. April 26, 2020:16-18.
  4. Chyjek K, Farag S, Chen KT. Rating pregnancy wheel applications using the APPLICATIONS scoring system. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125:1478-1483.
References
  1. Rasmussen SA, Smulian JC, Lednicky JA, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pregnancy: what obstetricians need to know. Am J Obstet Gynecol. February 24, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.02.017.
  2. Dashraath P, Jing Lin Jeslyn W, Mei Xian Karen L, et al. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. March 23, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.03.021.
  3. Tingley K. Coronavirus is forcing medical research to speed up. New York Times Magazine. April 26, 2020:16-18.
  4. Chyjek K, Farag S, Chen KT. Rating pregnancy wheel applications using the APPLICATIONS scoring system. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125:1478-1483.
Issue
OBG Management- 32(5)
Issue
OBG Management- 32(5)
Page Number
44, 46
Page Number
44, 46
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Pandemic effect: All other health care visits can wait

Article Type
Changed

 

A majority of adults are reluctant to visit health care providers unless the visit is related to COVID-19, according to survey conducted at the end of April.

When asked how likely they were to visit a variety of health care settings for treatment not related to the coronavirus, 62% of respondents said it was unlikely that they would go to a hospital, 64% wouldn’t go to a specialist, and 65% would avoid walk-in clinics, digital media company Morning Consult reported May 4.

The only setting with less than a majority on the unlikely-to-visit side was primary physicians, who managed to combine a 39% likely vote with a 13% undecided/no-opinion tally, Morning Consult said after surveying 2,201 adults on April 29-30 (margin of error, ±2 percentage points).

As to when they might feel comfortable making such an in-person visit with their primary physician, 24% of respondents said they would willing to go in the next month, 14% said 2 months, 18% said 3 months, 13% said 6 months, and 10% said more than 6 months, the Morning Consult data show.

“Hospitals, despite being overburdened in recent weeks in coronavirus hot spots such as New York City, have reported dips in revenue as a result of potential patients opting against receiving elective surgeries out of fear of contracting COVID-19,” Morning Consult wrote, and these poll results suggest that “health care companies could continue to feel the pinch as long as the coronavirus lingers.”
 

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

A majority of adults are reluctant to visit health care providers unless the visit is related to COVID-19, according to survey conducted at the end of April.

When asked how likely they were to visit a variety of health care settings for treatment not related to the coronavirus, 62% of respondents said it was unlikely that they would go to a hospital, 64% wouldn’t go to a specialist, and 65% would avoid walk-in clinics, digital media company Morning Consult reported May 4.

The only setting with less than a majority on the unlikely-to-visit side was primary physicians, who managed to combine a 39% likely vote with a 13% undecided/no-opinion tally, Morning Consult said after surveying 2,201 adults on April 29-30 (margin of error, ±2 percentage points).

As to when they might feel comfortable making such an in-person visit with their primary physician, 24% of respondents said they would willing to go in the next month, 14% said 2 months, 18% said 3 months, 13% said 6 months, and 10% said more than 6 months, the Morning Consult data show.

“Hospitals, despite being overburdened in recent weeks in coronavirus hot spots such as New York City, have reported dips in revenue as a result of potential patients opting against receiving elective surgeries out of fear of contracting COVID-19,” Morning Consult wrote, and these poll results suggest that “health care companies could continue to feel the pinch as long as the coronavirus lingers.”
 

 

A majority of adults are reluctant to visit health care providers unless the visit is related to COVID-19, according to survey conducted at the end of April.

When asked how likely they were to visit a variety of health care settings for treatment not related to the coronavirus, 62% of respondents said it was unlikely that they would go to a hospital, 64% wouldn’t go to a specialist, and 65% would avoid walk-in clinics, digital media company Morning Consult reported May 4.

The only setting with less than a majority on the unlikely-to-visit side was primary physicians, who managed to combine a 39% likely vote with a 13% undecided/no-opinion tally, Morning Consult said after surveying 2,201 adults on April 29-30 (margin of error, ±2 percentage points).

As to when they might feel comfortable making such an in-person visit with their primary physician, 24% of respondents said they would willing to go in the next month, 14% said 2 months, 18% said 3 months, 13% said 6 months, and 10% said more than 6 months, the Morning Consult data show.

“Hospitals, despite being overburdened in recent weeks in coronavirus hot spots such as New York City, have reported dips in revenue as a result of potential patients opting against receiving elective surgeries out of fear of contracting COVID-19,” Morning Consult wrote, and these poll results suggest that “health care companies could continue to feel the pinch as long as the coronavirus lingers.”
 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap

COVID-19: We are in a war, without the most effective weapons to fight a novel viral pathogen

Article Type
Changed

On June 17, 1775, American colonists, defending a forward redoubt on Breed’s Hill, ran out of gunpowder, and their position was overrun by British troops. The Battle of Bunker Hill resulted in the death of 140 colonists and 226 British soldiers, setting the stage for major combat throughout the colonies. American colonists lacked many necessary weapons. They had almost no gunpowder, few field cannons, and no warships. Yet, they fought on with the weapons at hand for 6 long years.

In the spring of 2020, American society has been shaken by the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals have been overrun with thousands of people infected with the disease. Some hospitals are breaking under the crush of intensely ill people filling up and spilling out of intensive care units. We are in a war, fighting a viral disease with a limited supply of weapons. We do not have access to the most powerful medical munitions: easily available rapid testing, proven antiviral medications, and an effective vaccine. Nevertheless, clinicians and patients are courageous, and we will continue the fight with the limited weapons we have until the pandemic is brought to an end.



The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The virus is aptly named because it is usually transmitted through close contact with respiratory droplets. The disease can progress acutely, and some people experience a remarkably severe respiratory syndrome, including tachypnea, hypoxia, and interstitial and alveolar opacities on chest x-ray, necessitating ventilatory support. The virus is an encapsulated single-stranded RNA virus. When viewed by electron microscopy, the virus appears to have a halo or crown, hence it is named “coronavirus.” Among infected individuals, the virus is present in the upper respiratory system and in feces but not in urine.1 The World Health Organization (WHO) believes that respiratory droplets and contaminated surfaces are the major routes of transmission.2 The highest risk of developing severe COVID-19 disease occurs in people with one or more of the following characteristics: age greater than 70 years, hypertension, diabetes, respiratory disease, heart disease, and immunosuppression.3,4 Pregnant women do not appear to be at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease.4 The case fatality rate is highest in people 80 years of age or older.5

Who is infected with SARS-CoV-2?

Rapid high-fidelity testing for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid sequences would be the best approach to identifying people with COVID-19 disease. At the beginning of the pandemic, testing was strictly rationed because of lack of reagents and test swabs. Clinicians were permitted to test only a minority of people who had symptoms. Asymptomatic individuals were not eligible to be tested. This terribly flawed approach to screening permitted a vast army of SARS-CoV-2–positive asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic people to circulate unchecked in the general population, infecting dozens of other people, some of whom developed moderate or severe disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has reported on 7 independent clusters of COVID-19 disease, each of which appear to have been caused by one asymptomatic infected individual.6 Another cluster of COVID-19 disease from China appears to have been caused by one asymptomatic infected individual.7 Based on limited data, it appears that there may be a 1- to 3-day window where an individual with COVID-19 may be asymptomatic and able to infect others. I suspect that we will soon discover, based on testing for the presence of high-titre anti SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, that many people with no history of illness and people with mild respiratory symptoms had an undiagnosed COVID-19 infection.

As testing capacity expands we likely will be testing all women, including asymptomatic women, before they arrive at the hospital for childbirth or gynecologic surgery, as well as all inpatients and women with respiratory symptoms having an ambulatory encounter.

With expanded testing capability, some pregnant women who were symptomatic and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 have had sequential long-term follow-up testing. A frequent observation is that over one to two weeks the viral symptoms resolve and the nasopharyngeal test becomes negative for SARS-CoV-2 on multiple sequential tests, only to become positive at a later date. The cause of the positive-negative-negative-positive test results is unknown, but it raises the possibility that once a person tests positive for SARS-CoV-2, they may be able to transmit the infection over many weeks, even after viral symptoms resolve.

Continue to: COVID-19: Respiratory droplet or aerosol transmission?

 

 

COVID-19: Respiratory droplet or aerosol transmission?

Respiratory droplets are large particles (> 5 µm in diameter) that tend to be pulled to the ground or furniture surfaces by gravity. Respiratory droplets do not circulate in the air for an extended period of time. Droplet nuclei are small particles less than 5 µm in diameter. These small particles may become aerosolized and float through the air for an extended period of time. The CDC and WHO believe that under ordinary conditions, SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted through respiratory droplets and contact routes.2 In an analysis of more than 75,000 COVID-19 cases in China there were no reports of transmission by aerosolized airborne virus. Therefore, under ordinary conditions, surgical masks, face shields, gowns, and gloves provide a high level of protection from infection.8

In contrast to the WHO’s perspective, Dr. Harvey Fineberg, Chair of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Standing Committee on Emerging Infectious Diseases and 21st Century Health Threats, wrote a letter to the federal Office of Science and Technology Policy warning that normal breathing might generate aerosolization of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and result in airborne transmission.9 A report from the University of Nebraska Medical Center supports the concept of airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2. In a study of 13 patients with COVID-19, room surfaces, toilet facilities, and air had evidence of viral contamination.10 The investigators concluded that disease spreads through respiratory droplets, person-to-person touch, contaminated surfaces, and airborne routes. Other investigators also have reported that aersolization of SARS-CoV-2 may occur.11 Professional societies recommend that all medical staff caring for potential or confirmed COVID-19 patients should use personal protective equipment (PPE), including respirators (N95 respirators) when available. Importantly, all medical staff should be trained in and adhere to proper donning and doffing of PPE. The controversy about the modes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 will continue, but as clinicians we need to work within the constraints of the equipment we have.

Certain medical procedures and devices are known to generate aerosolization of respiratory secretions. These procedures and devices include: bronchoscopy, intubation, extubation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, nebulization, high-flow oxygen masks, and continuous- and bilevel-positive airway pressure devices. When aerosols are generated during the care of a patient with COVID-19, surgical masks are not sufficient protection against infection. When an aerosol is generated maximal protection of health care workers from viral transmission requires use of a negative-pressure room and an N95 respirator or powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) device. However, negative-pressure rooms, N95 masks, and PAPRs are in very short supply or are unavailable in some health systems. We are lucky at our hospital that all of the labor rooms can be configured to operate in a negative-pressure mode, limiting potential airborne spread of the virus on the unit. Many hospitals restrict the use of N95 masks to anesthesiologists, leaving nurses, ObGyns, and surgical technicians without the best protective equipment, risking their health. As one action to reduce aerosolization of virus, obstetricians can markedly reduce the use of oxygen masks and nasal cannulas by laboring women.

Universal use of surgical masks and mouth-nose coverings

During the entire COVID-19 pandemic, PPE has been in short supply, including severe shortages of N95 masks, PAPRs, and in some health systems, surgical masks, gowns, eye protection, and face shields. Given the severe shortages, some clinicians have needed to conserve PPE, using the same PPE across multiple patient encounters and across multiple work shifts.

Given that the virus is transmitted by respiratory droplets and contaminated surfaces, use of face coverings, including surgical masks, face shields, and gloves is critically important. Scrupulous hand hygiene is a simple approach to reducing infection risk. In my health system, all employees are required to wear a surgical mask, all day every day, requiring distribution of 35,000 masks daily.12 We also require every patient and visitor to our health care facilities to use a face mask. The purpose of the procedure or surgical mask is to prevent presymptomatic spread of COVID-19 from an asymptomatic health care worker to an uninfected patient or a colleague by reducing the transmission of respiratory droplets. Another benefit is to protect the uninfected health care worker from patients and colleagues who are infected and not yet diagnosed with COVID-19. The CDC now recommends that all people wear a mouth and nose covering when they are outside of their residence. America may become a nation where wearing masks in public becomes a routine practice. Since SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted by respiratory droplets, social distancing is an important preventive measure.

Continue to: Obstetric care...

 

 

Obstetric care

Can it be repeated too often? No. Containing COVID-19 disease requires social distancing, fastidious hand hygiene, and using a mask that covers the mouth and nose.

Pregnant women should be advised to assiduously practice social distancing and to wear a face covering or mask in public. Hand hygiene should be emphasized. Pregnant women with children should be advised to not allow their children to play with non‒cohabiting children because children may be asymptomatic vectors for COVID-19.

Pregnant health care workers should stop face-to-face contact with patients after 36 weeks’ gestation to avoid a late pregnancy infection that might cause the mother to be separated from her newborn. Based on data currently available, pregnancy in the absence of another risk factor is not a major risk factor for developing severe COVID-19 disease.13

Hyperthermia is a common feature of COVID-19. Acetaminophen is recommended treatment to suppress pyrexia during pregnancy.

The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed prenatal care from a series of face-to-face encounters at a health care facility to telemedicine either by telephone or a videoconferencing portal. Many factors contributed to the rapid switch to telemedicine, including orders by governors to restrict unnecessary travel, patients’ fear of contracting COVID-19 at their clinicians’ offices, clinicians’ fear of contracting COVID-19 from patients, and insurers’ rapid implementation of policies to pay for telemedicine visits. Most prenatal visits can be provided through telemedicine as long as the patient has a home blood pressure cuff and can reliably use the instrument. In-person visits may be required for blood testing, ultrasound assessment, anti-Rh immunoglobulin administration, and group B streptococcal infection screening. One regimen is to limit in-person prenatal visits to encounters at 12, 20, 28, and 36 weeks’ gestation when blood testing and ultrasound examinations are needed. The postpartum visit also may be conducted using telemedicine.

Pregnant women with COVID-19 and pneumonia are reported to have high rates of preterm birth less than 37 weeks (41%) and preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (19%).14

The rate of vertical transmission from mother to fetus is probably very low (<1%).15 However, based on serological studies, an occasional newborn has been reported to have IgM and IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein at birth.16,17

Pregnant women should be consistently and regularly screened for symptoms of an upper respiratory infection, including: fever, new cough, new runny nose or nasal congestion, new sore throat, shortness of breath, muscle aches, and anosmia. A report of any of these symptoms should result in nucleic acid testing of a nasal swab for SARS-CoV-2 of all pregnant women. Given limited testing resources, however, symptomatic pregnant women with the following characteristics should be prioritized for testing: if the woman is more than 36 weeks pregnant, intrapartum, or in the hospital after delivery. Ambulatory pregnant women with symptoms who do not need medical care should quarantine themselves at home, if possible, or at another secure location away from their families. In some regions, testing of ambulatory patients with upper respiratory symptoms is limited.

All women scheduled for induction or cesarean delivery (CD) and their support person should have a symptom screen 24 to 48 hours before arrival to the hospital and should be rescreened prior to entry to labor and delivery. In this situation if the pregnant woman screens positive, she should be tested for SARS-CoV-2, and if the test result is positive, the scheduled induction and CD should be rescheduled, if possible. All hospitalized women and their support persons should be screened for symptoms daily. If the pregnant woman screens positive she should have a nucleic acid test for SARS-CoV-2. If the support person screens positive, he or she should be sent home.

Systemic glucocorticoids may worsen the course of COVID-19. For pregnant women with COVID-19 disease, betamethasone administration should be limited to women at high risk for preterm delivery within 7 days and only given to women between 23 weeks to 33 weeks 6 days of gestation. Women at risk for preterm delivery at 34 weeks to 36 weeks and 6 days of gestation should not be given betamethasone.

If cervical ripening is required, outpatient regimens should be prioritized.

One support person plays an important role in optimal labor outcome and should be permitted at the hospital. All support persons should wear a surgical or procedure mask.

Nitrous oxide for labor anesthesia should not be used during the pandemic because it might cause aerosolization of respiratory secretions, endangering health care workers. Neuraxial anesthesia is an optimal approach to labor anesthesia.

Labor management and timing of delivery does not need to be altered during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, pregnant women with moderate or severe COVID-19 disease who are not improving may have a modest improvement in respiratory function if they are delivered preterm.

At the beginning of the COVID pandemic, the CDC recommended separation of a COVID-positive mother and her newborn until the mother’s respiratory symptoms resolved. However, the CDC now recommends that, for a COVID-positive mother, joint decision-making should be used to decide whether to support the baby rooming-in with the mother or to practice separation of mother and baby at birth to reduce the risk for postnatal infection from mother to newborn. There is no evidence that breast milk contains virus that can cause an infection. One option is for the mother who recently tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 to provide newborn nutrition with expressed breast milk.

Pregnant women with COVID-19 may be at increased risk for venous thromboembolism. Some experts recommend that hospitalized pregnant women and postpartum women with COVID-19 receive thromboembolism prophylaxis.
The Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention described a classification system for COVID-19 disease, including 3 categories18:

  • mild: no dyspnea, no pneumonia, or mild pneumonia
  • severe: dyspnea, respiratory frequency ≥ 30 breaths per minute, blood oxygen saturation ≤ 93%, lung infiltrates > 50% within 48 hours of onset of symptoms
  • critical: respiratory failure, septic shock, or multiple organ dysfunction or failure.

Among 72,314 cases in China, 81% had mild disease, 14% had severe disease, and 5% had critical disease. In a report of 118 pregnant women in China, 92% of the women had mild disease; 8% had severe disease (hypoxemia), one of whom developed critical disease requiring mechanical ventilation.19 In this cohort, the most common presenting symptoms were fever (75%), cough (73%), chest tightness (18%), fatigue (17%), shortness of breath (7%), diarrhea (7%), and headache (6%). Lymphopenia was present in 44% of the women.

Severe and critical COVID-19 disease are associated with elevations in D-dimer, C-reactive protein, troponin, ferritin, and creatine phosphokinase levels. These markers return to the normal range with resolution of disease.

Continue to: Gynecologic care...

 

 

Gynecologic care

Gynecologists are highly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Most state governments have requested that all elective surgery be suspended for the duration of the pandemic in order to redeploy health resources to the care of COVID-19 patients. Except for high-priority gynecologic surgery, including cancer surgery, treatment of heavy vaginal bleeding, and surgical care of ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage, most gynecologic surgery has ceased.

All office visits for routine gynecologic care have been suspended. Video and telephone visits can be used for contraceptive counseling and prescribing and for managing problems associated with the menopause, endometriosis, and vaginitis. Cervical cancer screening can be deferred for 3 to 6 months, depending on patient risk factors.

Medicines to treat COVID-19 infections

There are many highly effective medicines to manage HIV infection and medicines that cure hepatitis C. There is an urgent need to develop precision medicines to treat this disease. Early in the pandemic some experts thought that hydroxychloroquine might be helpful in the treatment of COVID-19 disease. But recent evidence suggests that hydroxychloroquine is probably not an effective treatment. As the pandemic has evolved, there is evidence that remdesivir may have modest efficacy in treating COVID-19 disease.20 Remdesivir has received emergency-use authorization by the FDA to treat COVID-19 infection.

Remdesivir

Based on expert opinion, in the absence of high-quality clinical trial evidence, our current practice is to offer pregnant women with severe or critical COVID-19 disease treatment with remdesivir.

Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, Inc) is a nucleoside analog that inhibits RNA synthesis. A dose regimen for remdesivir is a 200-mg loading dose given intravenously, followed by 100 mg daily given intravenously for 5 to 10 days. Remdesivir may cause elevation of hepatic enzymes. Remdesivir has been administered to a few pregnant women to treat Ebola and Marburg virus disease.21

Experts in infectious disease are important resources for determining optimal medication regimens for the treatment of COVID-19 disease in pregnant women.

Continue to: Convalescent serum...

 

 

Convalescent serum

There are no high-quality studies demonstrating the efficacy of convalescent serum for treatment of COVID-19. A small case series suggests that there may be modest benefit to treatment of people with severe COVID-19 disease with convalescent serum.22

Testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies

We may have a serious problem in our current approach to detecting COVID-19 disease. Based on measurement of IgM and IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, our current nucleic acid tests for SARS-CoV-2 may detect less than 80% of infections early in the course of disease. In two studies of IgM and IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, a single polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 had less than a 60% sensitivity for detecting the virus.23,24 During the second week of COVID-19 illness, IgM or IgG antibodies were detected in greater than 89% of infected patients.23 Severe disease resulted in high concentrations of antibody.

When testing for IgM and IgG antibodies is widely available, it may become an option to test all health care workers. This will permit the assignment of those health care workers with the highest levels of antibody to frontline duties with COVID-19 patients during the next disease outbreak, likely to occur at some point during the next 12 months.

A COVID-19 vaccine

Dozens of research teams, including pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and many academic laboratories, are working on developing and testing vaccines to prevent COVID-19 disease. An effective vaccine would reduce the number of people who develop severe disease during the next outbreak, reducing deaths, avoiding a shutdown of the country, and allowing the health systems to function normally. A vaccine is unlikely to be widely available until sometime early in 2021.

Facing COVID-19 well-being and mental health

SARS-CoV-2, like all viral particles, is incredibly small. Remarkably, it has changed permanently life on earth. COVID-19 is affecting our physical health, psychological well-being, economics, and patterns of social interaction. As clinicians it is difficult to face a viral enemy that cannot be stopped from causing the death of more than 100,000 people, including some of our clinical colleagues, within a short period of time.

Dr. Russ Harris, an Australian acceptance commitment therapist, has written an ebook (http://www.commpsych.com/wp-content/uploads/FACE_COVID-1.pdf) and produced an animated YouTube video, titled FACE COVID (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmvNCdpHUYM), which describes a systematic approach to deal with the challenge of the pandemic. He advises a 9-step approach:

  • F—focus on what is in your control
  • A—acknowledge your thoughts and feelings
  • C—come back to a focus on your body
  • E—engage in what you are doing
  • C—commit to acting effectively based on your core values
  • O—opening up to difficult feelings and being kind to yourself and others
  • V—values should guide your actions
  • I—identify resources for help, assistance, support, and advice
  • D—disinfect and practice social distancing.

This war will come to an end

During the American Revolution, colonists faced housing and food insecurity, epidemics of typhus and smallpox, traumatic injury including amputation of limbs, and a complete disruption of normal life activities. They persevered and, against the odds, successfully concluded the war. Unlike the colonists, who did not know if their conflict would end with success or failure, we clinicians know that the COVID-19 pandemic will end. We also know that eventually the global community of clinicians will develop and deploy the effective weapons we need to prevent a recurrence of this traumatic pandemic: population-wide testing for both the SARS-CoV-2 virus and serologic testing for IgG and IgM antibodies to the virus, effective antiviral medications, and a potent vaccine. ●

 

References

 

  1. Wang W, Xu Y, Gao R, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens [published online March 11, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .3786.
  2. World Health Organization. Modes of transmission of virus causing COVID-19: implications for IPC precaution recommendations. March 29, 2020. https://www.who.int/publications-detail/modes-of-transmission-of-virus-causing-covid-19-implications-for-ipc-precaution-recommendations. Accessed April 16, 2020.
  3.  Arentz M, Yim E, Klaff L, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of 21 critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Washington State [published online March 19, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .4326.
  4. Guan WJ, Liang WH, Zhao Y, et al; China Medical Treatment Expert Group for Covid-19. Comorbidity and its impact on 1590 patients with COVID-19 in China: a nationwide analysis [published online March 26, 2020]. Eur Respir J . doi: 10.1183/13993003.00547- 2020
  5. Onder G, Rezza G, Brusaferro S. Case fatality rate and characteristics of patients dying in relation to COVID-19 in Italy [published online March 23, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .4683.  
  6. Wei WE, Li Z, Chiew CJ, et al. Presymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 - Singapore, January 23 to March 16, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep . 2020;69:411-415.
  7. Bai Y, Yao L, Wei T, et al. Presumed asymptomatic carrier transmission of COVID-19 [published online February 21, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .2565. 
  8. Ong SW, Tan YK, Chia PY, et al. Air, surface environmental, and personal protective equipment contamination by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from a symptomatic patient [published online March 4, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/ jama .2020.3227.
  9. Fineberg HV. Rapid expert consultation on the possibility of bioaerosol spread of SARS-CoV-2 for the COVID-19 pandemic. April 1, 2020. https://www.nap.edu/read/25769/chapter/1. Accessed April 16, 2020.
  10. Santarpia JL, River DN, Herrera V, et al. Transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2 in viral shedding observed at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. MedRxiv. March 26, 2020. doi.org10.1101/2020.03.23.20039466.
  11.  Liu Y, Ning Z, Chen Y, et al. Aerodynamic characteristics and RNA concentration of SARS-CoV-2 aerosol in Wuhan Hospitals during COVID-19 outbreak. BioRxiv. March 10, 2020. doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.08.982637.
  12.  Klompas M, Morris CA, Sinclair J, et al. Universal masking in hospitals in the COVID-19 era [published online April 1, 2020]. N Engl J Med. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp2006372.
  13.  Liu D, Li L, Wu X, et al. Pregnancy and perinatal outcomes of women with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pneumonia: a preliminary analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020:1-6. doi: 10.2214/AJR.20.23072.
  14. Di Mascio D, Khalik A, Saccone G, et al. Outcome of coronavirus spectrum infections (SARS, MERS, COVID-19) during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. doi:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100107.
  15. Wang W, Xu Y, Gao R, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens [published online March 11, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.3786.
  16. Dong L, Tian J, He S, et al. Possible vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from an infected mother to her newborn [published online March 26, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama .2020.4621.
  17. Zeng H, Xu C, Fan J, et al. Antibodies in infants born to mothers with COVID-19 pneumonia [published online March 26, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama .2020.4861.
  18. Wu Z, McGoogan JM. Characteristics of and important lessons from the Coronavirus Diease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China. Summary of a report of 72314 cases from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention [published online February 24, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.2648.
  19. Chen L, Li Q, Zheng D, et al. Clinical characteristics of pregnant women with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China [published online April 17, 2020]. N Engl J Med. doi 10.1056/NEJMc2009226.
  20. Chen Z, Hu J, Zhang Z, et al. Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: results of a randomized clinical trial. MedRxiv. April 10, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.22.20040758.
  21. Maulangu S, Dodd LE, Davey RT Jr, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of Ebola virus disease therapeutics. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:2293-2303.
  22. Shen C, Wang Z, Zhao F, et al. Treatment of 5 critically ill patients with COVID-19 with convalescent plasma [published online March 27, 2020]. JAMA.   doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .4783.
  23. Zhao J, Yuan Q, Wang H, et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019 [published online March 29, 2020]. Clin Infect Dis. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa344.
  24.  Guo L, Ren L, Yang S, et al. Profiling early humoral response to diagnose novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) [published online March 21, 2020]. Clin Infect Dis. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa310.
     
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Robert L. Barbieri, MD 

Editor in Chief, OBG MANAGEMENT  
Chair, Obstetrics and Gynecology   
Brigham and Women’s Hospital 
Boston, Massachusetts 
Kate Macy Ladd Professor of Obstetrics,     
Gynecology and Reproductive Biology  
Harvard Medical School

Dr. Barbieri reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Issue
OBG Management- 32(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
8-10, 13-15, 22
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Robert L. Barbieri, MD 

Editor in Chief, OBG MANAGEMENT  
Chair, Obstetrics and Gynecology   
Brigham and Women’s Hospital 
Boston, Massachusetts 
Kate Macy Ladd Professor of Obstetrics,     
Gynecology and Reproductive Biology  
Harvard Medical School

Dr. Barbieri reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Robert L. Barbieri, MD 

Editor in Chief, OBG MANAGEMENT  
Chair, Obstetrics and Gynecology   
Brigham and Women’s Hospital 
Boston, Massachusetts 
Kate Macy Ladd Professor of Obstetrics,     
Gynecology and Reproductive Biology  
Harvard Medical School

Dr. Barbieri reports no financial relationships relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

On June 17, 1775, American colonists, defending a forward redoubt on Breed’s Hill, ran out of gunpowder, and their position was overrun by British troops. The Battle of Bunker Hill resulted in the death of 140 colonists and 226 British soldiers, setting the stage for major combat throughout the colonies. American colonists lacked many necessary weapons. They had almost no gunpowder, few field cannons, and no warships. Yet, they fought on with the weapons at hand for 6 long years.

In the spring of 2020, American society has been shaken by the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals have been overrun with thousands of people infected with the disease. Some hospitals are breaking under the crush of intensely ill people filling up and spilling out of intensive care units. We are in a war, fighting a viral disease with a limited supply of weapons. We do not have access to the most powerful medical munitions: easily available rapid testing, proven antiviral medications, and an effective vaccine. Nevertheless, clinicians and patients are courageous, and we will continue the fight with the limited weapons we have until the pandemic is brought to an end.



The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The virus is aptly named because it is usually transmitted through close contact with respiratory droplets. The disease can progress acutely, and some people experience a remarkably severe respiratory syndrome, including tachypnea, hypoxia, and interstitial and alveolar opacities on chest x-ray, necessitating ventilatory support. The virus is an encapsulated single-stranded RNA virus. When viewed by electron microscopy, the virus appears to have a halo or crown, hence it is named “coronavirus.” Among infected individuals, the virus is present in the upper respiratory system and in feces but not in urine.1 The World Health Organization (WHO) believes that respiratory droplets and contaminated surfaces are the major routes of transmission.2 The highest risk of developing severe COVID-19 disease occurs in people with one or more of the following characteristics: age greater than 70 years, hypertension, diabetes, respiratory disease, heart disease, and immunosuppression.3,4 Pregnant women do not appear to be at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease.4 The case fatality rate is highest in people 80 years of age or older.5

Who is infected with SARS-CoV-2?

Rapid high-fidelity testing for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid sequences would be the best approach to identifying people with COVID-19 disease. At the beginning of the pandemic, testing was strictly rationed because of lack of reagents and test swabs. Clinicians were permitted to test only a minority of people who had symptoms. Asymptomatic individuals were not eligible to be tested. This terribly flawed approach to screening permitted a vast army of SARS-CoV-2–positive asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic people to circulate unchecked in the general population, infecting dozens of other people, some of whom developed moderate or severe disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has reported on 7 independent clusters of COVID-19 disease, each of which appear to have been caused by one asymptomatic infected individual.6 Another cluster of COVID-19 disease from China appears to have been caused by one asymptomatic infected individual.7 Based on limited data, it appears that there may be a 1- to 3-day window where an individual with COVID-19 may be asymptomatic and able to infect others. I suspect that we will soon discover, based on testing for the presence of high-titre anti SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, that many people with no history of illness and people with mild respiratory symptoms had an undiagnosed COVID-19 infection.

As testing capacity expands we likely will be testing all women, including asymptomatic women, before they arrive at the hospital for childbirth or gynecologic surgery, as well as all inpatients and women with respiratory symptoms having an ambulatory encounter.

With expanded testing capability, some pregnant women who were symptomatic and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 have had sequential long-term follow-up testing. A frequent observation is that over one to two weeks the viral symptoms resolve and the nasopharyngeal test becomes negative for SARS-CoV-2 on multiple sequential tests, only to become positive at a later date. The cause of the positive-negative-negative-positive test results is unknown, but it raises the possibility that once a person tests positive for SARS-CoV-2, they may be able to transmit the infection over many weeks, even after viral symptoms resolve.

Continue to: COVID-19: Respiratory droplet or aerosol transmission?

 

 

COVID-19: Respiratory droplet or aerosol transmission?

Respiratory droplets are large particles (> 5 µm in diameter) that tend to be pulled to the ground or furniture surfaces by gravity. Respiratory droplets do not circulate in the air for an extended period of time. Droplet nuclei are small particles less than 5 µm in diameter. These small particles may become aerosolized and float through the air for an extended period of time. The CDC and WHO believe that under ordinary conditions, SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted through respiratory droplets and contact routes.2 In an analysis of more than 75,000 COVID-19 cases in China there were no reports of transmission by aerosolized airborne virus. Therefore, under ordinary conditions, surgical masks, face shields, gowns, and gloves provide a high level of protection from infection.8

In contrast to the WHO’s perspective, Dr. Harvey Fineberg, Chair of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Standing Committee on Emerging Infectious Diseases and 21st Century Health Threats, wrote a letter to the federal Office of Science and Technology Policy warning that normal breathing might generate aerosolization of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and result in airborne transmission.9 A report from the University of Nebraska Medical Center supports the concept of airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2. In a study of 13 patients with COVID-19, room surfaces, toilet facilities, and air had evidence of viral contamination.10 The investigators concluded that disease spreads through respiratory droplets, person-to-person touch, contaminated surfaces, and airborne routes. Other investigators also have reported that aersolization of SARS-CoV-2 may occur.11 Professional societies recommend that all medical staff caring for potential or confirmed COVID-19 patients should use personal protective equipment (PPE), including respirators (N95 respirators) when available. Importantly, all medical staff should be trained in and adhere to proper donning and doffing of PPE. The controversy about the modes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 will continue, but as clinicians we need to work within the constraints of the equipment we have.

Certain medical procedures and devices are known to generate aerosolization of respiratory secretions. These procedures and devices include: bronchoscopy, intubation, extubation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, nebulization, high-flow oxygen masks, and continuous- and bilevel-positive airway pressure devices. When aerosols are generated during the care of a patient with COVID-19, surgical masks are not sufficient protection against infection. When an aerosol is generated maximal protection of health care workers from viral transmission requires use of a negative-pressure room and an N95 respirator or powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) device. However, negative-pressure rooms, N95 masks, and PAPRs are in very short supply or are unavailable in some health systems. We are lucky at our hospital that all of the labor rooms can be configured to operate in a negative-pressure mode, limiting potential airborne spread of the virus on the unit. Many hospitals restrict the use of N95 masks to anesthesiologists, leaving nurses, ObGyns, and surgical technicians without the best protective equipment, risking their health. As one action to reduce aerosolization of virus, obstetricians can markedly reduce the use of oxygen masks and nasal cannulas by laboring women.

Universal use of surgical masks and mouth-nose coverings

During the entire COVID-19 pandemic, PPE has been in short supply, including severe shortages of N95 masks, PAPRs, and in some health systems, surgical masks, gowns, eye protection, and face shields. Given the severe shortages, some clinicians have needed to conserve PPE, using the same PPE across multiple patient encounters and across multiple work shifts.

Given that the virus is transmitted by respiratory droplets and contaminated surfaces, use of face coverings, including surgical masks, face shields, and gloves is critically important. Scrupulous hand hygiene is a simple approach to reducing infection risk. In my health system, all employees are required to wear a surgical mask, all day every day, requiring distribution of 35,000 masks daily.12 We also require every patient and visitor to our health care facilities to use a face mask. The purpose of the procedure or surgical mask is to prevent presymptomatic spread of COVID-19 from an asymptomatic health care worker to an uninfected patient or a colleague by reducing the transmission of respiratory droplets. Another benefit is to protect the uninfected health care worker from patients and colleagues who are infected and not yet diagnosed with COVID-19. The CDC now recommends that all people wear a mouth and nose covering when they are outside of their residence. America may become a nation where wearing masks in public becomes a routine practice. Since SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted by respiratory droplets, social distancing is an important preventive measure.

Continue to: Obstetric care...

 

 

Obstetric care

Can it be repeated too often? No. Containing COVID-19 disease requires social distancing, fastidious hand hygiene, and using a mask that covers the mouth and nose.

Pregnant women should be advised to assiduously practice social distancing and to wear a face covering or mask in public. Hand hygiene should be emphasized. Pregnant women with children should be advised to not allow their children to play with non‒cohabiting children because children may be asymptomatic vectors for COVID-19.

Pregnant health care workers should stop face-to-face contact with patients after 36 weeks’ gestation to avoid a late pregnancy infection that might cause the mother to be separated from her newborn. Based on data currently available, pregnancy in the absence of another risk factor is not a major risk factor for developing severe COVID-19 disease.13

Hyperthermia is a common feature of COVID-19. Acetaminophen is recommended treatment to suppress pyrexia during pregnancy.

The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed prenatal care from a series of face-to-face encounters at a health care facility to telemedicine either by telephone or a videoconferencing portal. Many factors contributed to the rapid switch to telemedicine, including orders by governors to restrict unnecessary travel, patients’ fear of contracting COVID-19 at their clinicians’ offices, clinicians’ fear of contracting COVID-19 from patients, and insurers’ rapid implementation of policies to pay for telemedicine visits. Most prenatal visits can be provided through telemedicine as long as the patient has a home blood pressure cuff and can reliably use the instrument. In-person visits may be required for blood testing, ultrasound assessment, anti-Rh immunoglobulin administration, and group B streptococcal infection screening. One regimen is to limit in-person prenatal visits to encounters at 12, 20, 28, and 36 weeks’ gestation when blood testing and ultrasound examinations are needed. The postpartum visit also may be conducted using telemedicine.

Pregnant women with COVID-19 and pneumonia are reported to have high rates of preterm birth less than 37 weeks (41%) and preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (19%).14

The rate of vertical transmission from mother to fetus is probably very low (<1%).15 However, based on serological studies, an occasional newborn has been reported to have IgM and IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein at birth.16,17

Pregnant women should be consistently and regularly screened for symptoms of an upper respiratory infection, including: fever, new cough, new runny nose or nasal congestion, new sore throat, shortness of breath, muscle aches, and anosmia. A report of any of these symptoms should result in nucleic acid testing of a nasal swab for SARS-CoV-2 of all pregnant women. Given limited testing resources, however, symptomatic pregnant women with the following characteristics should be prioritized for testing: if the woman is more than 36 weeks pregnant, intrapartum, or in the hospital after delivery. Ambulatory pregnant women with symptoms who do not need medical care should quarantine themselves at home, if possible, or at another secure location away from their families. In some regions, testing of ambulatory patients with upper respiratory symptoms is limited.

All women scheduled for induction or cesarean delivery (CD) and their support person should have a symptom screen 24 to 48 hours before arrival to the hospital and should be rescreened prior to entry to labor and delivery. In this situation if the pregnant woman screens positive, she should be tested for SARS-CoV-2, and if the test result is positive, the scheduled induction and CD should be rescheduled, if possible. All hospitalized women and their support persons should be screened for symptoms daily. If the pregnant woman screens positive she should have a nucleic acid test for SARS-CoV-2. If the support person screens positive, he or she should be sent home.

Systemic glucocorticoids may worsen the course of COVID-19. For pregnant women with COVID-19 disease, betamethasone administration should be limited to women at high risk for preterm delivery within 7 days and only given to women between 23 weeks to 33 weeks 6 days of gestation. Women at risk for preterm delivery at 34 weeks to 36 weeks and 6 days of gestation should not be given betamethasone.

If cervical ripening is required, outpatient regimens should be prioritized.

One support person plays an important role in optimal labor outcome and should be permitted at the hospital. All support persons should wear a surgical or procedure mask.

Nitrous oxide for labor anesthesia should not be used during the pandemic because it might cause aerosolization of respiratory secretions, endangering health care workers. Neuraxial anesthesia is an optimal approach to labor anesthesia.

Labor management and timing of delivery does not need to be altered during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, pregnant women with moderate or severe COVID-19 disease who are not improving may have a modest improvement in respiratory function if they are delivered preterm.

At the beginning of the COVID pandemic, the CDC recommended separation of a COVID-positive mother and her newborn until the mother’s respiratory symptoms resolved. However, the CDC now recommends that, for a COVID-positive mother, joint decision-making should be used to decide whether to support the baby rooming-in with the mother or to practice separation of mother and baby at birth to reduce the risk for postnatal infection from mother to newborn. There is no evidence that breast milk contains virus that can cause an infection. One option is for the mother who recently tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 to provide newborn nutrition with expressed breast milk.

Pregnant women with COVID-19 may be at increased risk for venous thromboembolism. Some experts recommend that hospitalized pregnant women and postpartum women with COVID-19 receive thromboembolism prophylaxis.
The Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention described a classification system for COVID-19 disease, including 3 categories18:

  • mild: no dyspnea, no pneumonia, or mild pneumonia
  • severe: dyspnea, respiratory frequency ≥ 30 breaths per minute, blood oxygen saturation ≤ 93%, lung infiltrates > 50% within 48 hours of onset of symptoms
  • critical: respiratory failure, septic shock, or multiple organ dysfunction or failure.

Among 72,314 cases in China, 81% had mild disease, 14% had severe disease, and 5% had critical disease. In a report of 118 pregnant women in China, 92% of the women had mild disease; 8% had severe disease (hypoxemia), one of whom developed critical disease requiring mechanical ventilation.19 In this cohort, the most common presenting symptoms were fever (75%), cough (73%), chest tightness (18%), fatigue (17%), shortness of breath (7%), diarrhea (7%), and headache (6%). Lymphopenia was present in 44% of the women.

Severe and critical COVID-19 disease are associated with elevations in D-dimer, C-reactive protein, troponin, ferritin, and creatine phosphokinase levels. These markers return to the normal range with resolution of disease.

Continue to: Gynecologic care...

 

 

Gynecologic care

Gynecologists are highly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Most state governments have requested that all elective surgery be suspended for the duration of the pandemic in order to redeploy health resources to the care of COVID-19 patients. Except for high-priority gynecologic surgery, including cancer surgery, treatment of heavy vaginal bleeding, and surgical care of ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage, most gynecologic surgery has ceased.

All office visits for routine gynecologic care have been suspended. Video and telephone visits can be used for contraceptive counseling and prescribing and for managing problems associated with the menopause, endometriosis, and vaginitis. Cervical cancer screening can be deferred for 3 to 6 months, depending on patient risk factors.

Medicines to treat COVID-19 infections

There are many highly effective medicines to manage HIV infection and medicines that cure hepatitis C. There is an urgent need to develop precision medicines to treat this disease. Early in the pandemic some experts thought that hydroxychloroquine might be helpful in the treatment of COVID-19 disease. But recent evidence suggests that hydroxychloroquine is probably not an effective treatment. As the pandemic has evolved, there is evidence that remdesivir may have modest efficacy in treating COVID-19 disease.20 Remdesivir has received emergency-use authorization by the FDA to treat COVID-19 infection.

Remdesivir

Based on expert opinion, in the absence of high-quality clinical trial evidence, our current practice is to offer pregnant women with severe or critical COVID-19 disease treatment with remdesivir.

Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, Inc) is a nucleoside analog that inhibits RNA synthesis. A dose regimen for remdesivir is a 200-mg loading dose given intravenously, followed by 100 mg daily given intravenously for 5 to 10 days. Remdesivir may cause elevation of hepatic enzymes. Remdesivir has been administered to a few pregnant women to treat Ebola and Marburg virus disease.21

Experts in infectious disease are important resources for determining optimal medication regimens for the treatment of COVID-19 disease in pregnant women.

Continue to: Convalescent serum...

 

 

Convalescent serum

There are no high-quality studies demonstrating the efficacy of convalescent serum for treatment of COVID-19. A small case series suggests that there may be modest benefit to treatment of people with severe COVID-19 disease with convalescent serum.22

Testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies

We may have a serious problem in our current approach to detecting COVID-19 disease. Based on measurement of IgM and IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, our current nucleic acid tests for SARS-CoV-2 may detect less than 80% of infections early in the course of disease. In two studies of IgM and IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, a single polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 had less than a 60% sensitivity for detecting the virus.23,24 During the second week of COVID-19 illness, IgM or IgG antibodies were detected in greater than 89% of infected patients.23 Severe disease resulted in high concentrations of antibody.

When testing for IgM and IgG antibodies is widely available, it may become an option to test all health care workers. This will permit the assignment of those health care workers with the highest levels of antibody to frontline duties with COVID-19 patients during the next disease outbreak, likely to occur at some point during the next 12 months.

A COVID-19 vaccine

Dozens of research teams, including pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and many academic laboratories, are working on developing and testing vaccines to prevent COVID-19 disease. An effective vaccine would reduce the number of people who develop severe disease during the next outbreak, reducing deaths, avoiding a shutdown of the country, and allowing the health systems to function normally. A vaccine is unlikely to be widely available until sometime early in 2021.

Facing COVID-19 well-being and mental health

SARS-CoV-2, like all viral particles, is incredibly small. Remarkably, it has changed permanently life on earth. COVID-19 is affecting our physical health, psychological well-being, economics, and patterns of social interaction. As clinicians it is difficult to face a viral enemy that cannot be stopped from causing the death of more than 100,000 people, including some of our clinical colleagues, within a short period of time.

Dr. Russ Harris, an Australian acceptance commitment therapist, has written an ebook (http://www.commpsych.com/wp-content/uploads/FACE_COVID-1.pdf) and produced an animated YouTube video, titled FACE COVID (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmvNCdpHUYM), which describes a systematic approach to deal with the challenge of the pandemic. He advises a 9-step approach:

  • F—focus on what is in your control
  • A—acknowledge your thoughts and feelings
  • C—come back to a focus on your body
  • E—engage in what you are doing
  • C—commit to acting effectively based on your core values
  • O—opening up to difficult feelings and being kind to yourself and others
  • V—values should guide your actions
  • I—identify resources for help, assistance, support, and advice
  • D—disinfect and practice social distancing.

This war will come to an end

During the American Revolution, colonists faced housing and food insecurity, epidemics of typhus and smallpox, traumatic injury including amputation of limbs, and a complete disruption of normal life activities. They persevered and, against the odds, successfully concluded the war. Unlike the colonists, who did not know if their conflict would end with success or failure, we clinicians know that the COVID-19 pandemic will end. We also know that eventually the global community of clinicians will develop and deploy the effective weapons we need to prevent a recurrence of this traumatic pandemic: population-wide testing for both the SARS-CoV-2 virus and serologic testing for IgG and IgM antibodies to the virus, effective antiviral medications, and a potent vaccine. ●

 

On June 17, 1775, American colonists, defending a forward redoubt on Breed’s Hill, ran out of gunpowder, and their position was overrun by British troops. The Battle of Bunker Hill resulted in the death of 140 colonists and 226 British soldiers, setting the stage for major combat throughout the colonies. American colonists lacked many necessary weapons. They had almost no gunpowder, few field cannons, and no warships. Yet, they fought on with the weapons at hand for 6 long years.

In the spring of 2020, American society has been shaken by the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals have been overrun with thousands of people infected with the disease. Some hospitals are breaking under the crush of intensely ill people filling up and spilling out of intensive care units. We are in a war, fighting a viral disease with a limited supply of weapons. We do not have access to the most powerful medical munitions: easily available rapid testing, proven antiviral medications, and an effective vaccine. Nevertheless, clinicians and patients are courageous, and we will continue the fight with the limited weapons we have until the pandemic is brought to an end.



The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The virus is aptly named because it is usually transmitted through close contact with respiratory droplets. The disease can progress acutely, and some people experience a remarkably severe respiratory syndrome, including tachypnea, hypoxia, and interstitial and alveolar opacities on chest x-ray, necessitating ventilatory support. The virus is an encapsulated single-stranded RNA virus. When viewed by electron microscopy, the virus appears to have a halo or crown, hence it is named “coronavirus.” Among infected individuals, the virus is present in the upper respiratory system and in feces but not in urine.1 The World Health Organization (WHO) believes that respiratory droplets and contaminated surfaces are the major routes of transmission.2 The highest risk of developing severe COVID-19 disease occurs in people with one or more of the following characteristics: age greater than 70 years, hypertension, diabetes, respiratory disease, heart disease, and immunosuppression.3,4 Pregnant women do not appear to be at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease.4 The case fatality rate is highest in people 80 years of age or older.5

Who is infected with SARS-CoV-2?

Rapid high-fidelity testing for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid sequences would be the best approach to identifying people with COVID-19 disease. At the beginning of the pandemic, testing was strictly rationed because of lack of reagents and test swabs. Clinicians were permitted to test only a minority of people who had symptoms. Asymptomatic individuals were not eligible to be tested. This terribly flawed approach to screening permitted a vast army of SARS-CoV-2–positive asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic people to circulate unchecked in the general population, infecting dozens of other people, some of whom developed moderate or severe disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has reported on 7 independent clusters of COVID-19 disease, each of which appear to have been caused by one asymptomatic infected individual.6 Another cluster of COVID-19 disease from China appears to have been caused by one asymptomatic infected individual.7 Based on limited data, it appears that there may be a 1- to 3-day window where an individual with COVID-19 may be asymptomatic and able to infect others. I suspect that we will soon discover, based on testing for the presence of high-titre anti SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, that many people with no history of illness and people with mild respiratory symptoms had an undiagnosed COVID-19 infection.

As testing capacity expands we likely will be testing all women, including asymptomatic women, before they arrive at the hospital for childbirth or gynecologic surgery, as well as all inpatients and women with respiratory symptoms having an ambulatory encounter.

With expanded testing capability, some pregnant women who were symptomatic and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 have had sequential long-term follow-up testing. A frequent observation is that over one to two weeks the viral symptoms resolve and the nasopharyngeal test becomes negative for SARS-CoV-2 on multiple sequential tests, only to become positive at a later date. The cause of the positive-negative-negative-positive test results is unknown, but it raises the possibility that once a person tests positive for SARS-CoV-2, they may be able to transmit the infection over many weeks, even after viral symptoms resolve.

Continue to: COVID-19: Respiratory droplet or aerosol transmission?

 

 

COVID-19: Respiratory droplet or aerosol transmission?

Respiratory droplets are large particles (> 5 µm in diameter) that tend to be pulled to the ground or furniture surfaces by gravity. Respiratory droplets do not circulate in the air for an extended period of time. Droplet nuclei are small particles less than 5 µm in diameter. These small particles may become aerosolized and float through the air for an extended period of time. The CDC and WHO believe that under ordinary conditions, SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted through respiratory droplets and contact routes.2 In an analysis of more than 75,000 COVID-19 cases in China there were no reports of transmission by aerosolized airborne virus. Therefore, under ordinary conditions, surgical masks, face shields, gowns, and gloves provide a high level of protection from infection.8

In contrast to the WHO’s perspective, Dr. Harvey Fineberg, Chair of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Standing Committee on Emerging Infectious Diseases and 21st Century Health Threats, wrote a letter to the federal Office of Science and Technology Policy warning that normal breathing might generate aerosolization of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and result in airborne transmission.9 A report from the University of Nebraska Medical Center supports the concept of airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2. In a study of 13 patients with COVID-19, room surfaces, toilet facilities, and air had evidence of viral contamination.10 The investigators concluded that disease spreads through respiratory droplets, person-to-person touch, contaminated surfaces, and airborne routes. Other investigators also have reported that aersolization of SARS-CoV-2 may occur.11 Professional societies recommend that all medical staff caring for potential or confirmed COVID-19 patients should use personal protective equipment (PPE), including respirators (N95 respirators) when available. Importantly, all medical staff should be trained in and adhere to proper donning and doffing of PPE. The controversy about the modes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 will continue, but as clinicians we need to work within the constraints of the equipment we have.

Certain medical procedures and devices are known to generate aerosolization of respiratory secretions. These procedures and devices include: bronchoscopy, intubation, extubation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, nebulization, high-flow oxygen masks, and continuous- and bilevel-positive airway pressure devices. When aerosols are generated during the care of a patient with COVID-19, surgical masks are not sufficient protection against infection. When an aerosol is generated maximal protection of health care workers from viral transmission requires use of a negative-pressure room and an N95 respirator or powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) device. However, negative-pressure rooms, N95 masks, and PAPRs are in very short supply or are unavailable in some health systems. We are lucky at our hospital that all of the labor rooms can be configured to operate in a negative-pressure mode, limiting potential airborne spread of the virus on the unit. Many hospitals restrict the use of N95 masks to anesthesiologists, leaving nurses, ObGyns, and surgical technicians without the best protective equipment, risking their health. As one action to reduce aerosolization of virus, obstetricians can markedly reduce the use of oxygen masks and nasal cannulas by laboring women.

Universal use of surgical masks and mouth-nose coverings

During the entire COVID-19 pandemic, PPE has been in short supply, including severe shortages of N95 masks, PAPRs, and in some health systems, surgical masks, gowns, eye protection, and face shields. Given the severe shortages, some clinicians have needed to conserve PPE, using the same PPE across multiple patient encounters and across multiple work shifts.

Given that the virus is transmitted by respiratory droplets and contaminated surfaces, use of face coverings, including surgical masks, face shields, and gloves is critically important. Scrupulous hand hygiene is a simple approach to reducing infection risk. In my health system, all employees are required to wear a surgical mask, all day every day, requiring distribution of 35,000 masks daily.12 We also require every patient and visitor to our health care facilities to use a face mask. The purpose of the procedure or surgical mask is to prevent presymptomatic spread of COVID-19 from an asymptomatic health care worker to an uninfected patient or a colleague by reducing the transmission of respiratory droplets. Another benefit is to protect the uninfected health care worker from patients and colleagues who are infected and not yet diagnosed with COVID-19. The CDC now recommends that all people wear a mouth and nose covering when they are outside of their residence. America may become a nation where wearing masks in public becomes a routine practice. Since SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted by respiratory droplets, social distancing is an important preventive measure.

Continue to: Obstetric care...

 

 

Obstetric care

Can it be repeated too often? No. Containing COVID-19 disease requires social distancing, fastidious hand hygiene, and using a mask that covers the mouth and nose.

Pregnant women should be advised to assiduously practice social distancing and to wear a face covering or mask in public. Hand hygiene should be emphasized. Pregnant women with children should be advised to not allow their children to play with non‒cohabiting children because children may be asymptomatic vectors for COVID-19.

Pregnant health care workers should stop face-to-face contact with patients after 36 weeks’ gestation to avoid a late pregnancy infection that might cause the mother to be separated from her newborn. Based on data currently available, pregnancy in the absence of another risk factor is not a major risk factor for developing severe COVID-19 disease.13

Hyperthermia is a common feature of COVID-19. Acetaminophen is recommended treatment to suppress pyrexia during pregnancy.

The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed prenatal care from a series of face-to-face encounters at a health care facility to telemedicine either by telephone or a videoconferencing portal. Many factors contributed to the rapid switch to telemedicine, including orders by governors to restrict unnecessary travel, patients’ fear of contracting COVID-19 at their clinicians’ offices, clinicians’ fear of contracting COVID-19 from patients, and insurers’ rapid implementation of policies to pay for telemedicine visits. Most prenatal visits can be provided through telemedicine as long as the patient has a home blood pressure cuff and can reliably use the instrument. In-person visits may be required for blood testing, ultrasound assessment, anti-Rh immunoglobulin administration, and group B streptococcal infection screening. One regimen is to limit in-person prenatal visits to encounters at 12, 20, 28, and 36 weeks’ gestation when blood testing and ultrasound examinations are needed. The postpartum visit also may be conducted using telemedicine.

Pregnant women with COVID-19 and pneumonia are reported to have high rates of preterm birth less than 37 weeks (41%) and preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (19%).14

The rate of vertical transmission from mother to fetus is probably very low (<1%).15 However, based on serological studies, an occasional newborn has been reported to have IgM and IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein at birth.16,17

Pregnant women should be consistently and regularly screened for symptoms of an upper respiratory infection, including: fever, new cough, new runny nose or nasal congestion, new sore throat, shortness of breath, muscle aches, and anosmia. A report of any of these symptoms should result in nucleic acid testing of a nasal swab for SARS-CoV-2 of all pregnant women. Given limited testing resources, however, symptomatic pregnant women with the following characteristics should be prioritized for testing: if the woman is more than 36 weeks pregnant, intrapartum, or in the hospital after delivery. Ambulatory pregnant women with symptoms who do not need medical care should quarantine themselves at home, if possible, or at another secure location away from their families. In some regions, testing of ambulatory patients with upper respiratory symptoms is limited.

All women scheduled for induction or cesarean delivery (CD) and their support person should have a symptom screen 24 to 48 hours before arrival to the hospital and should be rescreened prior to entry to labor and delivery. In this situation if the pregnant woman screens positive, she should be tested for SARS-CoV-2, and if the test result is positive, the scheduled induction and CD should be rescheduled, if possible. All hospitalized women and their support persons should be screened for symptoms daily. If the pregnant woman screens positive she should have a nucleic acid test for SARS-CoV-2. If the support person screens positive, he or she should be sent home.

Systemic glucocorticoids may worsen the course of COVID-19. For pregnant women with COVID-19 disease, betamethasone administration should be limited to women at high risk for preterm delivery within 7 days and only given to women between 23 weeks to 33 weeks 6 days of gestation. Women at risk for preterm delivery at 34 weeks to 36 weeks and 6 days of gestation should not be given betamethasone.

If cervical ripening is required, outpatient regimens should be prioritized.

One support person plays an important role in optimal labor outcome and should be permitted at the hospital. All support persons should wear a surgical or procedure mask.

Nitrous oxide for labor anesthesia should not be used during the pandemic because it might cause aerosolization of respiratory secretions, endangering health care workers. Neuraxial anesthesia is an optimal approach to labor anesthesia.

Labor management and timing of delivery does not need to be altered during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, pregnant women with moderate or severe COVID-19 disease who are not improving may have a modest improvement in respiratory function if they are delivered preterm.

At the beginning of the COVID pandemic, the CDC recommended separation of a COVID-positive mother and her newborn until the mother’s respiratory symptoms resolved. However, the CDC now recommends that, for a COVID-positive mother, joint decision-making should be used to decide whether to support the baby rooming-in with the mother or to practice separation of mother and baby at birth to reduce the risk for postnatal infection from mother to newborn. There is no evidence that breast milk contains virus that can cause an infection. One option is for the mother who recently tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 to provide newborn nutrition with expressed breast milk.

Pregnant women with COVID-19 may be at increased risk for venous thromboembolism. Some experts recommend that hospitalized pregnant women and postpartum women with COVID-19 receive thromboembolism prophylaxis.
The Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention described a classification system for COVID-19 disease, including 3 categories18:

  • mild: no dyspnea, no pneumonia, or mild pneumonia
  • severe: dyspnea, respiratory frequency ≥ 30 breaths per minute, blood oxygen saturation ≤ 93%, lung infiltrates > 50% within 48 hours of onset of symptoms
  • critical: respiratory failure, septic shock, or multiple organ dysfunction or failure.

Among 72,314 cases in China, 81% had mild disease, 14% had severe disease, and 5% had critical disease. In a report of 118 pregnant women in China, 92% of the women had mild disease; 8% had severe disease (hypoxemia), one of whom developed critical disease requiring mechanical ventilation.19 In this cohort, the most common presenting symptoms were fever (75%), cough (73%), chest tightness (18%), fatigue (17%), shortness of breath (7%), diarrhea (7%), and headache (6%). Lymphopenia was present in 44% of the women.

Severe and critical COVID-19 disease are associated with elevations in D-dimer, C-reactive protein, troponin, ferritin, and creatine phosphokinase levels. These markers return to the normal range with resolution of disease.

Continue to: Gynecologic care...

 

 

Gynecologic care

Gynecologists are highly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Most state governments have requested that all elective surgery be suspended for the duration of the pandemic in order to redeploy health resources to the care of COVID-19 patients. Except for high-priority gynecologic surgery, including cancer surgery, treatment of heavy vaginal bleeding, and surgical care of ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage, most gynecologic surgery has ceased.

All office visits for routine gynecologic care have been suspended. Video and telephone visits can be used for contraceptive counseling and prescribing and for managing problems associated with the menopause, endometriosis, and vaginitis. Cervical cancer screening can be deferred for 3 to 6 months, depending on patient risk factors.

Medicines to treat COVID-19 infections

There are many highly effective medicines to manage HIV infection and medicines that cure hepatitis C. There is an urgent need to develop precision medicines to treat this disease. Early in the pandemic some experts thought that hydroxychloroquine might be helpful in the treatment of COVID-19 disease. But recent evidence suggests that hydroxychloroquine is probably not an effective treatment. As the pandemic has evolved, there is evidence that remdesivir may have modest efficacy in treating COVID-19 disease.20 Remdesivir has received emergency-use authorization by the FDA to treat COVID-19 infection.

Remdesivir

Based on expert opinion, in the absence of high-quality clinical trial evidence, our current practice is to offer pregnant women with severe or critical COVID-19 disease treatment with remdesivir.

Remdesivir (Gilead Sciences, Inc) is a nucleoside analog that inhibits RNA synthesis. A dose regimen for remdesivir is a 200-mg loading dose given intravenously, followed by 100 mg daily given intravenously for 5 to 10 days. Remdesivir may cause elevation of hepatic enzymes. Remdesivir has been administered to a few pregnant women to treat Ebola and Marburg virus disease.21

Experts in infectious disease are important resources for determining optimal medication regimens for the treatment of COVID-19 disease in pregnant women.

Continue to: Convalescent serum...

 

 

Convalescent serum

There are no high-quality studies demonstrating the efficacy of convalescent serum for treatment of COVID-19. A small case series suggests that there may be modest benefit to treatment of people with severe COVID-19 disease with convalescent serum.22

Testing for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies

We may have a serious problem in our current approach to detecting COVID-19 disease. Based on measurement of IgM and IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, our current nucleic acid tests for SARS-CoV-2 may detect less than 80% of infections early in the course of disease. In two studies of IgM and IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, a single polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 had less than a 60% sensitivity for detecting the virus.23,24 During the second week of COVID-19 illness, IgM or IgG antibodies were detected in greater than 89% of infected patients.23 Severe disease resulted in high concentrations of antibody.

When testing for IgM and IgG antibodies is widely available, it may become an option to test all health care workers. This will permit the assignment of those health care workers with the highest levels of antibody to frontline duties with COVID-19 patients during the next disease outbreak, likely to occur at some point during the next 12 months.

A COVID-19 vaccine

Dozens of research teams, including pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and many academic laboratories, are working on developing and testing vaccines to prevent COVID-19 disease. An effective vaccine would reduce the number of people who develop severe disease during the next outbreak, reducing deaths, avoiding a shutdown of the country, and allowing the health systems to function normally. A vaccine is unlikely to be widely available until sometime early in 2021.

Facing COVID-19 well-being and mental health

SARS-CoV-2, like all viral particles, is incredibly small. Remarkably, it has changed permanently life on earth. COVID-19 is affecting our physical health, psychological well-being, economics, and patterns of social interaction. As clinicians it is difficult to face a viral enemy that cannot be stopped from causing the death of more than 100,000 people, including some of our clinical colleagues, within a short period of time.

Dr. Russ Harris, an Australian acceptance commitment therapist, has written an ebook (http://www.commpsych.com/wp-content/uploads/FACE_COVID-1.pdf) and produced an animated YouTube video, titled FACE COVID (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmvNCdpHUYM), which describes a systematic approach to deal with the challenge of the pandemic. He advises a 9-step approach:

  • F—focus on what is in your control
  • A—acknowledge your thoughts and feelings
  • C—come back to a focus on your body
  • E—engage in what you are doing
  • C—commit to acting effectively based on your core values
  • O—opening up to difficult feelings and being kind to yourself and others
  • V—values should guide your actions
  • I—identify resources for help, assistance, support, and advice
  • D—disinfect and practice social distancing.

This war will come to an end

During the American Revolution, colonists faced housing and food insecurity, epidemics of typhus and smallpox, traumatic injury including amputation of limbs, and a complete disruption of normal life activities. They persevered and, against the odds, successfully concluded the war. Unlike the colonists, who did not know if their conflict would end with success or failure, we clinicians know that the COVID-19 pandemic will end. We also know that eventually the global community of clinicians will develop and deploy the effective weapons we need to prevent a recurrence of this traumatic pandemic: population-wide testing for both the SARS-CoV-2 virus and serologic testing for IgG and IgM antibodies to the virus, effective antiviral medications, and a potent vaccine. ●

 

References

 

  1. Wang W, Xu Y, Gao R, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens [published online March 11, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .3786.
  2. World Health Organization. Modes of transmission of virus causing COVID-19: implications for IPC precaution recommendations. March 29, 2020. https://www.who.int/publications-detail/modes-of-transmission-of-virus-causing-covid-19-implications-for-ipc-precaution-recommendations. Accessed April 16, 2020.
  3.  Arentz M, Yim E, Klaff L, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of 21 critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Washington State [published online March 19, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .4326.
  4. Guan WJ, Liang WH, Zhao Y, et al; China Medical Treatment Expert Group for Covid-19. Comorbidity and its impact on 1590 patients with COVID-19 in China: a nationwide analysis [published online March 26, 2020]. Eur Respir J . doi: 10.1183/13993003.00547- 2020
  5. Onder G, Rezza G, Brusaferro S. Case fatality rate and characteristics of patients dying in relation to COVID-19 in Italy [published online March 23, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .4683.  
  6. Wei WE, Li Z, Chiew CJ, et al. Presymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 - Singapore, January 23 to March 16, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep . 2020;69:411-415.
  7. Bai Y, Yao L, Wei T, et al. Presumed asymptomatic carrier transmission of COVID-19 [published online February 21, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .2565. 
  8. Ong SW, Tan YK, Chia PY, et al. Air, surface environmental, and personal protective equipment contamination by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from a symptomatic patient [published online March 4, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/ jama .2020.3227.
  9. Fineberg HV. Rapid expert consultation on the possibility of bioaerosol spread of SARS-CoV-2 for the COVID-19 pandemic. April 1, 2020. https://www.nap.edu/read/25769/chapter/1. Accessed April 16, 2020.
  10. Santarpia JL, River DN, Herrera V, et al. Transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2 in viral shedding observed at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. MedRxiv. March 26, 2020. doi.org10.1101/2020.03.23.20039466.
  11.  Liu Y, Ning Z, Chen Y, et al. Aerodynamic characteristics and RNA concentration of SARS-CoV-2 aerosol in Wuhan Hospitals during COVID-19 outbreak. BioRxiv. March 10, 2020. doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.08.982637.
  12.  Klompas M, Morris CA, Sinclair J, et al. Universal masking in hospitals in the COVID-19 era [published online April 1, 2020]. N Engl J Med. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp2006372.
  13.  Liu D, Li L, Wu X, et al. Pregnancy and perinatal outcomes of women with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pneumonia: a preliminary analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020:1-6. doi: 10.2214/AJR.20.23072.
  14. Di Mascio D, Khalik A, Saccone G, et al. Outcome of coronavirus spectrum infections (SARS, MERS, COVID-19) during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. doi:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100107.
  15. Wang W, Xu Y, Gao R, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens [published online March 11, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.3786.
  16. Dong L, Tian J, He S, et al. Possible vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from an infected mother to her newborn [published online March 26, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama .2020.4621.
  17. Zeng H, Xu C, Fan J, et al. Antibodies in infants born to mothers with COVID-19 pneumonia [published online March 26, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama .2020.4861.
  18. Wu Z, McGoogan JM. Characteristics of and important lessons from the Coronavirus Diease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China. Summary of a report of 72314 cases from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention [published online February 24, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.2648.
  19. Chen L, Li Q, Zheng D, et al. Clinical characteristics of pregnant women with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China [published online April 17, 2020]. N Engl J Med. doi 10.1056/NEJMc2009226.
  20. Chen Z, Hu J, Zhang Z, et al. Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: results of a randomized clinical trial. MedRxiv. April 10, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.22.20040758.
  21. Maulangu S, Dodd LE, Davey RT Jr, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of Ebola virus disease therapeutics. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:2293-2303.
  22. Shen C, Wang Z, Zhao F, et al. Treatment of 5 critically ill patients with COVID-19 with convalescent plasma [published online March 27, 2020]. JAMA.   doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .4783.
  23. Zhao J, Yuan Q, Wang H, et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019 [published online March 29, 2020]. Clin Infect Dis. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa344.
  24.  Guo L, Ren L, Yang S, et al. Profiling early humoral response to diagnose novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) [published online March 21, 2020]. Clin Infect Dis. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa310.
     
References

 

  1. Wang W, Xu Y, Gao R, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens [published online March 11, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .3786.
  2. World Health Organization. Modes of transmission of virus causing COVID-19: implications for IPC precaution recommendations. March 29, 2020. https://www.who.int/publications-detail/modes-of-transmission-of-virus-causing-covid-19-implications-for-ipc-precaution-recommendations. Accessed April 16, 2020.
  3.  Arentz M, Yim E, Klaff L, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of 21 critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Washington State [published online March 19, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .4326.
  4. Guan WJ, Liang WH, Zhao Y, et al; China Medical Treatment Expert Group for Covid-19. Comorbidity and its impact on 1590 patients with COVID-19 in China: a nationwide analysis [published online March 26, 2020]. Eur Respir J . doi: 10.1183/13993003.00547- 2020
  5. Onder G, Rezza G, Brusaferro S. Case fatality rate and characteristics of patients dying in relation to COVID-19 in Italy [published online March 23, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .4683.  
  6. Wei WE, Li Z, Chiew CJ, et al. Presymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 - Singapore, January 23 to March 16, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep . 2020;69:411-415.
  7. Bai Y, Yao L, Wei T, et al. Presumed asymptomatic carrier transmission of COVID-19 [published online February 21, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .2565. 
  8. Ong SW, Tan YK, Chia PY, et al. Air, surface environmental, and personal protective equipment contamination by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from a symptomatic patient [published online March 4, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/ jama .2020.3227.
  9. Fineberg HV. Rapid expert consultation on the possibility of bioaerosol spread of SARS-CoV-2 for the COVID-19 pandemic. April 1, 2020. https://www.nap.edu/read/25769/chapter/1. Accessed April 16, 2020.
  10. Santarpia JL, River DN, Herrera V, et al. Transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2 in viral shedding observed at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. MedRxiv. March 26, 2020. doi.org10.1101/2020.03.23.20039466.
  11.  Liu Y, Ning Z, Chen Y, et al. Aerodynamic characteristics and RNA concentration of SARS-CoV-2 aerosol in Wuhan Hospitals during COVID-19 outbreak. BioRxiv. March 10, 2020. doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.08.982637.
  12.  Klompas M, Morris CA, Sinclair J, et al. Universal masking in hospitals in the COVID-19 era [published online April 1, 2020]. N Engl J Med. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp2006372.
  13.  Liu D, Li L, Wu X, et al. Pregnancy and perinatal outcomes of women with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pneumonia: a preliminary analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020:1-6. doi: 10.2214/AJR.20.23072.
  14. Di Mascio D, Khalik A, Saccone G, et al. Outcome of coronavirus spectrum infections (SARS, MERS, COVID-19) during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. doi:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100107.
  15. Wang W, Xu Y, Gao R, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens [published online March 11, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.3786.
  16. Dong L, Tian J, He S, et al. Possible vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from an infected mother to her newborn [published online March 26, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama .2020.4621.
  17. Zeng H, Xu C, Fan J, et al. Antibodies in infants born to mothers with COVID-19 pneumonia [published online March 26, 2020]. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/ jama .2020.4861.
  18. Wu Z, McGoogan JM. Characteristics of and important lessons from the Coronavirus Diease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China. Summary of a report of 72314 cases from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention [published online February 24, 2020]. JAMA . doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.2648.
  19. Chen L, Li Q, Zheng D, et al. Clinical characteristics of pregnant women with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China [published online April 17, 2020]. N Engl J Med. doi 10.1056/NEJMc2009226.
  20. Chen Z, Hu J, Zhang Z, et al. Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: results of a randomized clinical trial. MedRxiv. April 10, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.22.20040758.
  21. Maulangu S, Dodd LE, Davey RT Jr, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of Ebola virus disease therapeutics. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:2293-2303.
  22. Shen C, Wang Z, Zhao F, et al. Treatment of 5 critically ill patients with COVID-19 with convalescent plasma [published online March 27, 2020]. JAMA.   doi: 10.1001/ jama . 2020 .4783.
  23. Zhao J, Yuan Q, Wang H, et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019 [published online March 29, 2020]. Clin Infect Dis. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa344.
  24.  Guo L, Ren L, Yang S, et al. Profiling early humoral response to diagnose novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) [published online March 21, 2020]. Clin Infect Dis. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa310.
     
Issue
OBG Management- 32(5)
Issue
OBG Management- 32(5)
Page Number
8-10, 13-15, 22
Page Number
8-10, 13-15, 22
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Tip Sheet: Teledermatology 101

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Tip Sheet: Teledermatology 101

Article PDF
Publications
Topics
Sections
Article PDF
Article PDF

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Tip Sheet: Teledermatology 101
Display Headline
Tip Sheet: Teledermatology 101
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Article PDF Media

FDA grants EUA to muscle stimulator to reduce mechanical ventilator usage

Article Type
Changed

 

The Food and Drug Administration has issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the VentFree Respiratory Muscle Stimulator in order to potentially reduce the number of days adult patients, including those with COVID-19, require mechanical ventilation, according to a press release from Liberate Medical.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/ Creative Commons License

In comparison with mechanical ventilation, which is invasive and commonly weakens the breathing muscles, the VentFree system uses noninvasive neuromuscular electrical stimulation to contract the abdominal wall muscles in synchrony with exhalation during mechanical ventilation, according to the press release. This allows patients to begin treatment during the early stages of ventilation while they are sedated and to continue until they are weaned off of ventilation.

A pair of pilot randomized, controlled studies, completed in Europe and Australia, showed that VentFree helped to reduce ventilation duration and ICU length of stay, compared with placebo stimulation. The FDA granted VentFree Breakthrough Device status in 2019.

“We are grateful to the FDA for recognizing the potential of VentFree and feel privileged to have the opportunity to help patients on mechanical ventilation during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Angus McLachlan PhD, cofounder and CEO of Liberate Medical, said in the press release.

VentFree has been authorized for use only for the duration of the current COVID-19 emergency, as it has not yet been approved or cleared for usage by primary care providers.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

The Food and Drug Administration has issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the VentFree Respiratory Muscle Stimulator in order to potentially reduce the number of days adult patients, including those with COVID-19, require mechanical ventilation, according to a press release from Liberate Medical.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/ Creative Commons License

In comparison with mechanical ventilation, which is invasive and commonly weakens the breathing muscles, the VentFree system uses noninvasive neuromuscular electrical stimulation to contract the abdominal wall muscles in synchrony with exhalation during mechanical ventilation, according to the press release. This allows patients to begin treatment during the early stages of ventilation while they are sedated and to continue until they are weaned off of ventilation.

A pair of pilot randomized, controlled studies, completed in Europe and Australia, showed that VentFree helped to reduce ventilation duration and ICU length of stay, compared with placebo stimulation. The FDA granted VentFree Breakthrough Device status in 2019.

“We are grateful to the FDA for recognizing the potential of VentFree and feel privileged to have the opportunity to help patients on mechanical ventilation during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Angus McLachlan PhD, cofounder and CEO of Liberate Medical, said in the press release.

VentFree has been authorized for use only for the duration of the current COVID-19 emergency, as it has not yet been approved or cleared for usage by primary care providers.

 

The Food and Drug Administration has issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the VentFree Respiratory Muscle Stimulator in order to potentially reduce the number of days adult patients, including those with COVID-19, require mechanical ventilation, according to a press release from Liberate Medical.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/ Creative Commons License

In comparison with mechanical ventilation, which is invasive and commonly weakens the breathing muscles, the VentFree system uses noninvasive neuromuscular electrical stimulation to contract the abdominal wall muscles in synchrony with exhalation during mechanical ventilation, according to the press release. This allows patients to begin treatment during the early stages of ventilation while they are sedated and to continue until they are weaned off of ventilation.

A pair of pilot randomized, controlled studies, completed in Europe and Australia, showed that VentFree helped to reduce ventilation duration and ICU length of stay, compared with placebo stimulation. The FDA granted VentFree Breakthrough Device status in 2019.

“We are grateful to the FDA for recognizing the potential of VentFree and feel privileged to have the opportunity to help patients on mechanical ventilation during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Angus McLachlan PhD, cofounder and CEO of Liberate Medical, said in the press release.

VentFree has been authorized for use only for the duration of the current COVID-19 emergency, as it has not yet been approved or cleared for usage by primary care providers.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap