Impact of the Coronavirus Pandemic on Emergency Department (ED) Visits for Ob/Gyn Care

S. Mehri, R. Berg, I. Hoskins
{"title":"Impact of the Coronavirus Pandemic on Emergency Department (ED) Visits for Ob/Gyn Care","authors":"S. Mehri, R. Berg, I. Hoskins","doi":"10.11648/J.JGO.20210902.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted currently held norms and best practices for women who require evaluations and interventions for Obstetrics and gynecology (Ob/Gyn) emergency care. The resulting paradigm shifts have demonstrated a reassessment of how Ob/Gyn emergency care is provided in an acute setting while avoiding potential short and long-term harm. The objective of this study is to retrospectively evaluate if patients self-selected to avoid Emergency Department (ED) visits for perceived minor complaints and if postponing such care increased morbidity. Patients accessing Ob/Gyn ED care during the Covid-19 \"lockdown period\" (group A) in New York State were compared with those during a similar time frame in 2019 (group B). Primary outcomes were the number of ED visits and admission diagnoses. Secondary outcomes were the number of surgeries and clinical acuity on presentation. There was a 72% reduction in the total number of ED visits in group A compared to group B. Although the majority of the visits were for abdominal pain and vaginal bleeding in both groups, among patients who presented with vaginal bleeding in group A, a significantly higher number was due to early pregnancy loss rather than non-pregnancy-related uterine bleeding. The number of visits for non-emergency visits such as vulvovaginitis and contraceptive management was significantly lower and absent respectively. There were 61.5% fewer cases requiring emergency surgery in group A, however, the case acuity remained high with many patients being clinically unstable at presentation. There was a nonsignificant trend of an increased number of surgeries for ectopic pregnancy and pregnancy loss in group A compared to group B. Non-emergency surgeries, and visits for pain control, wound infections or ileus were absent in group A. We conclude that the decline in the ED visits and total number of emergency surgeries during the “lockdown period “were secondary to patients’ choices. This decrease was more pronounced for minor indications; however, many patients with serious conditions had delayed ED visits until they were clinically unstable. Therefore a reassessment of how patients access Ob/Gyn care via ED is indicated, with the goal being to avoid visits for minor indications while preventing potential life-threatening complications.","PeriodicalId":77904,"journal":{"name":"Supplement to International journal of gynecology and obstetrics","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supplement to International journal of gynecology and obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11648/J.JGO.20210902.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted currently held norms and best practices for women who require evaluations and interventions for Obstetrics and gynecology (Ob/Gyn) emergency care. The resulting paradigm shifts have demonstrated a reassessment of how Ob/Gyn emergency care is provided in an acute setting while avoiding potential short and long-term harm. The objective of this study is to retrospectively evaluate if patients self-selected to avoid Emergency Department (ED) visits for perceived minor complaints and if postponing such care increased morbidity. Patients accessing Ob/Gyn ED care during the Covid-19 "lockdown period" (group A) in New York State were compared with those during a similar time frame in 2019 (group B). Primary outcomes were the number of ED visits and admission diagnoses. Secondary outcomes were the number of surgeries and clinical acuity on presentation. There was a 72% reduction in the total number of ED visits in group A compared to group B. Although the majority of the visits were for abdominal pain and vaginal bleeding in both groups, among patients who presented with vaginal bleeding in group A, a significantly higher number was due to early pregnancy loss rather than non-pregnancy-related uterine bleeding. The number of visits for non-emergency visits such as vulvovaginitis and contraceptive management was significantly lower and absent respectively. There were 61.5% fewer cases requiring emergency surgery in group A, however, the case acuity remained high with many patients being clinically unstable at presentation. There was a nonsignificant trend of an increased number of surgeries for ectopic pregnancy and pregnancy loss in group A compared to group B. Non-emergency surgeries, and visits for pain control, wound infections or ileus were absent in group A. We conclude that the decline in the ED visits and total number of emergency surgeries during the “lockdown period “were secondary to patients’ choices. This decrease was more pronounced for minor indications; however, many patients with serious conditions had delayed ED visits until they were clinically unstable. Therefore a reassessment of how patients access Ob/Gyn care via ED is indicated, with the goal being to avoid visits for minor indications while preventing potential life-threatening complications.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
冠状病毒大流行对妇产科急诊就诊的影响
COVID-19大流行破坏了目前为需要评估和干预妇产科急诊护理的妇女制定的规范和最佳做法。由此产生的范式转变表明,在避免潜在的短期和长期伤害的同时,如何在急性环境中提供妇产科急诊护理的重新评估。本研究的目的是回顾性评估患者是否自行选择避免因轻微疾患而去急诊科(ED)就诊,以及推迟这种护理是否会增加发病率。将纽约州新冠肺炎“封锁期间”(A组)接受妇产科护理的患者与2019年类似时间框架内的患者(B组)进行比较。主要结果是急诊就诊次数和入院诊断。次要结果是手术次数和就诊时的临床视力。与b组相比,a组ED就诊的总次数减少了72%。尽管两组中大多数就诊的原因都是腹痛和阴道出血,但在a组出现阴道出血的患者中,由于妊娠早期流产而非与妊娠无关的子宫出血的患者数量明显更高。外阴阴道炎和避孕管理等非紧急就诊的就诊次数分别明显较低和无。A组需要急诊手术的病例减少了61.5%,然而,病例的敏锐度仍然很高,许多患者在就诊时临床上不稳定。与b组相比,a组的异位妊娠和妊娠丢失手术数量增加的趋势不显著。a组没有进行非紧急手术,并且没有因疼痛控制、伤口感染或肠梗阻而就诊。我们得出结论,在“封锁期间”急诊科就诊次数和急诊手术总数的下降是次要的,患者的选择。这种下降在轻微适应症中更为明显;然而,许多病情严重的患者推迟了急诊科就诊,直到他们临床不稳定。因此,重新评估患者如何通过急诊科获得妇产科护理,目标是避免因轻微适应症就诊,同时防止潜在的危及生命的并发症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Postpartum Subcutaneous Implant: Use and Follow-Up of Users at the Coronthie Communal Medical Center in Conakry, Guinea in 2022 Prevalence and Associated Factors of Hepatitis B Virus Infection Among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care at Felegehiwot Hospital, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia Postpartum Eclampsia Management with Lytic Cocktail Solutions in Rural and Semirural Health Care (with Limited Resources) Services in Eritrea Screening for Precancerous Lesions of the Cervix by IVA/IVL Visual Tests at the Training Center for the Prevention of Gynecological Cancer in Conakry (Guinea) Assessment of Quality of Comprehensive Abortion Care in Selected Health Institution of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1