Search

Aim COVID-19 has posed an unprecedented challenge to healthcare systems. We aimed to observe the impact on urological care delivery in an Irish university hospital. Methods Data on urological activity was prospectively collected for 3 months from March 2020. A retrospective review of the same period in 2019 was performed for control data. Results Over the 2020 study period, 356 urological admissions were recorded; a 23.1% decrease from the 2019 corresponding period(n=463). A 21.7% decrease in flexible cystoscopies was seen (162 versus 207). 125 theatre cases (36 off-site) were performed in the 2020 period, versus 151 in 2019. Emergency case load remained stable, with 69 cases in the 2020 period. The percentage of trainee-performed cases was preserved. COVID-era outpatient activity increased, to involve 559 clinic consultations compared to 439 the preceding year; a reflection of annual growth in service demand and facilitated by virtual clinic application (n=403). There were 490 instances of patients cancelling/failing to attend outpatient appointments, compared to 335 in 2019. Conclusion The Irish COVID-19 outbreak has created obstacles for urological care. Nonetheless, urgent/emergent urological cases persist. Our unit has managed this to-date with flexible adaptation of service delivery. The global challenge posed by COVID-19 will demand ongoing resourcefulness to minimise impact on patients with time-sensitive urological conditions., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: The role of Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) in day case/short-stay surgery is unknown., Aim: To characterise the current national use of LMWH prophylaxis in specific day and short stay surgeries., Methods: A standardised anonymous postal questionnaire was sent to all consultant general surgeons in Ireland. The operations selected were herniorraphy, anorectal, varicose vein and laparoscopic cholecystectomy., Results: Questionnaires were sent to 82 surgeons in 2003. There was a response rate of 68.3% (56). Fifty-four per cent of respondents said there was a protocol in place for administration of LMWH in day case surgery. Of these 41% were not confident that their protocols were being adhered. Fifty-nine per cent of all respondents said they stratified patients according to individual risk. Thirteen per cent reported occurrence of VTE post day case surgery, Conclusion: This study demonstrates a heterogeneous pattern of administration of LMWH. In the absence of published validated protocols, the authors suggest a consensus day case protocol.