J. Wingfield Digby, H. Petty, S. Brij, J. Bright, K. Irion, W. Khan
{"title":"P23实施每日COVID-19二级医疗多学科虚拟团队会议","authors":"J. Wingfield Digby, H. Petty, S. Brij, J. Bright, K. Irion, W. Khan","doi":"10.1136/thorax-2021-btsabstracts.133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"P23 Table 1Radiological Code (n=200) Positive COVID-19 RT-PCR (n= 162, 81%) Negative COVID-19 RT-PCR (n = 38, 19%) CVCX0 (Normal appearances) 3 (1.5%) 6 (3%) CVCX1 (Classical/Probable COVID-19) 103 (51.5%) 8 (4%) CVCX2 (Non-classical/intermediate appearances) 51 (25.5%) 19 (9.5%) CVCX3 (Atypical – pleural disease/pulmonary oedema/lobar consolidation) 5 (2.5%) 5 (2.5%) ResultsAttendance ranged from 5–15 people and always included a respiratory and radiology consultant and microbiology/virology registrar. Of the 200 MDT cases reviewed (n=10 excluded due to inadequate CXR or missing PCR), mean age was 64 years old, 66% were male, 47% BAME ,median LOS was 7 days and inpatient mortality was 41/200 (19%). Over half of cases (54.5%) had both a positive RT-PCR and classic CXR appearances of COVID-19, but n = 5 (2.5%) had atypical features alongside a positive PCR, warranting discussion and consideration of dual pathology (TB/lung cancer/suspected phrenic nerve palsy all suggested). A significant proportion of patients with a negative RT-PCR, n= 8/38 (21%) had radiological appearances that were classical of COVID-19 pneumonitis, prompting appropriate treatment and ward triage (avoiding hospital spread). CTPA was suggested in 16/200 (8%) of patients’ and confirmed PE in 5/16 scans. Of those surveyed, > 75% felt that their knowledge of anticoagulation (prophylaxis and treatment) in patients with COVID-19 improved and over 50% of junior doctors’ submitted post-MDT work based assessments.ConclusionThe COVID-19 vMDT helped with diagnosis and management of patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, whilst simultaneously providing education to health care professionals.","PeriodicalId":319670,"journal":{"name":"Virtual monitoring in COVID-19","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"P23 Implementing a daily virtual COVID-19 multi-disciplinary team meeting in secondary care\",\"authors\":\"J. Wingfield Digby, H. Petty, S. Brij, J. Bright, K. Irion, W. Khan\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/thorax-2021-btsabstracts.133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"P23 Table 1Radiological Code (n=200) Positive COVID-19 RT-PCR (n= 162, 81%) Negative COVID-19 RT-PCR (n = 38, 19%) CVCX0 (Normal appearances) 3 (1.5%) 6 (3%) CVCX1 (Classical/Probable COVID-19) 103 (51.5%) 8 (4%) CVCX2 (Non-classical/intermediate appearances) 51 (25.5%) 19 (9.5%) CVCX3 (Atypical – pleural disease/pulmonary oedema/lobar consolidation) 5 (2.5%) 5 (2.5%) ResultsAttendance ranged from 5–15 people and always included a respiratory and radiology consultant and microbiology/virology registrar. Of the 200 MDT cases reviewed (n=10 excluded due to inadequate CXR or missing PCR), mean age was 64 years old, 66% were male, 47% BAME ,median LOS was 7 days and inpatient mortality was 41/200 (19%). Over half of cases (54.5%) had both a positive RT-PCR and classic CXR appearances of COVID-19, but n = 5 (2.5%) had atypical features alongside a positive PCR, warranting discussion and consideration of dual pathology (TB/lung cancer/suspected phrenic nerve palsy all suggested). A significant proportion of patients with a negative RT-PCR, n= 8/38 (21%) had radiological appearances that were classical of COVID-19 pneumonitis, prompting appropriate treatment and ward triage (avoiding hospital spread). CTPA was suggested in 16/200 (8%) of patients’ and confirmed PE in 5/16 scans. Of those surveyed, > 75% felt that their knowledge of anticoagulation (prophylaxis and treatment) in patients with COVID-19 improved and over 50% of junior doctors’ submitted post-MDT work based assessments.ConclusionThe COVID-19 vMDT helped with diagnosis and management of patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, whilst simultaneously providing education to health care professionals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":319670,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Virtual monitoring in COVID-19\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Virtual monitoring in COVID-19\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/thorax-2021-btsabstracts.133\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virtual monitoring in COVID-19","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/thorax-2021-btsabstracts.133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
P23 Implementing a daily virtual COVID-19 multi-disciplinary team meeting in secondary care
P23 Table 1Radiological Code (n=200) Positive COVID-19 RT-PCR (n= 162, 81%) Negative COVID-19 RT-PCR (n = 38, 19%) CVCX0 (Normal appearances) 3 (1.5%) 6 (3%) CVCX1 (Classical/Probable COVID-19) 103 (51.5%) 8 (4%) CVCX2 (Non-classical/intermediate appearances) 51 (25.5%) 19 (9.5%) CVCX3 (Atypical – pleural disease/pulmonary oedema/lobar consolidation) 5 (2.5%) 5 (2.5%) ResultsAttendance ranged from 5–15 people and always included a respiratory and radiology consultant and microbiology/virology registrar. Of the 200 MDT cases reviewed (n=10 excluded due to inadequate CXR or missing PCR), mean age was 64 years old, 66% were male, 47% BAME ,median LOS was 7 days and inpatient mortality was 41/200 (19%). Over half of cases (54.5%) had both a positive RT-PCR and classic CXR appearances of COVID-19, but n = 5 (2.5%) had atypical features alongside a positive PCR, warranting discussion and consideration of dual pathology (TB/lung cancer/suspected phrenic nerve palsy all suggested). A significant proportion of patients with a negative RT-PCR, n= 8/38 (21%) had radiological appearances that were classical of COVID-19 pneumonitis, prompting appropriate treatment and ward triage (avoiding hospital spread). CTPA was suggested in 16/200 (8%) of patients’ and confirmed PE in 5/16 scans. Of those surveyed, > 75% felt that their knowledge of anticoagulation (prophylaxis and treatment) in patients with COVID-19 improved and over 50% of junior doctors’ submitted post-MDT work based assessments.ConclusionThe COVID-19 vMDT helped with diagnosis and management of patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, whilst simultaneously providing education to health care professionals.