Purpose: During coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, hospitals faced challenges which were different than previous years. The purpose this study was to report frequency of firearm injuries (FI) to head and neck during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study reviewed patients in the Trauma Registry at Grady Memorial Hospital (GMH) in Atlanta, GA. Patients were included if they sustained FI to head and neck, were listed in TR, and were treated at GMH. Patients were stratified according to date of injury into 1) before COVID-19 pandemic, (BC19) or 2) during initial 5 months of COVID-19 pandemic, (C19). Variables were patient demographics, illegal substance use, etiology, place of injury, distressed communities index, location of injury, Glasgow Coma scale on arrival, cardiopulmonary resuscitation in Emergency Department (ED), shock on admission, disposition from ED, length of stay, days on mechanical ventilation and discharge status. Descriptive, univariate, and bivariate analysis were completed. Chi square test was used for categorical variables. Statistical significance was P < .05. Results: There were 215 patients who met inclusion criteria. There were 96 patients (78 males) with a mean age of 31.5 years old during BC19. There were 119 patients (101 males) with a mean age 32.7 years old during C19. There was a 10.4% increase in FI to head and neck during COVID-19. Our data showed that alcohol use was associated with FI during C19 (P≤ .0001). FI to base of skull occurred 34.5% more often during C19 (P = .002). Cranial injuries occurred 26% more often during BC19 (P = .03). During BC19, 85.4% of the patients arrived alive to GMH, but only 16% arrived alive during C19 (P ≤ .0001). Conclusions: There were more FI to head and neck during COVID-10 pandemic than during the previous time period.

Several uncertainties exist regarding how we will conduct our clinical, didactic, business, and social activities as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic abates and social distancing guidelines are relaxed. We anticipate changes in how we interact with our patients and other providers, how patient workflow is designed, the methods used to conduct our teaching sessions, and how we perform procedures in different clinical settings. The objective of the present report is to review some of the changes to consider in the clinical and academic oral and maxillofacial surgery workflow and, allow for a smoother transition, with less risk to our patients and healthcare personnel. New infection control policies should be strictly enforced and monitored in all clinical and nonclinical settings, with an overall goal to decrease the risk of exposure and transmission. Screening for COVID-19 symptoms, testing when indicated, and establishing the epidemiologic linkage will be crucial to containing and preventing new COVID-19 cases until a vaccine or an alternate solution is available. Additionally, the shortage of essential supplies such as drugs and personal protective equipment, the design and ventilation of workspaces and waiting areas, the increase in overhead costs, and the possible absence of staff, if quarantine is necessary, must be considered. This shift in our workflow and patient care paths will likely continue in the short-term at least through 2021 or the next 12 to 24 months. Thus, we must prioritize surgery, balancing patient preferences and healthcare personnel risks. We have an opportunity now to make changes and embrace telemedicine and other collaborative virtual platforms for teaching and clinical care. It is crucial that we maintain COVID-19 awareness, proper surveillance in our microenvironments, good clinical judgment, and ethical values to continue to deliver high-quality, economical, and accessible patient care.

Disparity in didactic education among oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) training programs has driven a national conversation regarding the need for a standardized OMS curriculum, which has been recently amplified by the drastic interruption of OMS training programs during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In the present report, we have described the Collaborative OMS Virtual Interinstitutional Didactic (COVID) Program, a multi-institutional educational curriculum developed in response to the pandemic and aimed toward OMS resident education.

Objective: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused delays in medical and surgical interventions in most health care systems worldwide. Oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMSs) delayed operations to protect themselves, patients, and staff. This article (1) presents one institution's experience in the management of pediatric craniomaxillofacial trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic and (2) suggests recommendations to decrease transmission. Methods: This was a retrospective review of children aged 18 years or younger who underwent surgery at Children's Healthcare of Atlanta in Atlanta, GA, between March and August 2020. Patients (1) were aged 18 years old or younger, (2) had one or more maxillofacial fractures, and (3) underwent surgery performed by an OMS, otolaryngologist, or plastic surgeon. Medical records were reviewed regarding (1) fracture location, (2) COVID-19 status, (3) timing, (4) personal protective equipment, and (5) infection status. Descriptive statistics were computed. Results: Fifty-eight children met the inclusion criteria. The most commonly injured maxillofacial location was the nose. Operations were performed 50.9 hours after admission. Specific prevention perioperative guidelines were used with all patients, with no transmission occurring from a patient to a health care worker. Conclusions: With application of our recommendations, there was no transmission to health care workers. We hope that these guidelines will assist OMSs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Timing of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 has attracted substantial attention. Initial guidelines recommended delaying or avoiding tracheostomy due to the potential for particle aerosolization and theoretical risk to providers. However, early tracheostomy could improve patient outcomes and alleviate resource shortages. This study compares outcomes in a diverse population of hospitalized COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheostomy either "early"(within 14 d of intubation) or "late"(more than 14 d after intubation). DESIGN: International multi-institute retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Thirteen hospitals in Bolivia, Brazil, Spain, and the United States. PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 undergoing early or late tracheostomy between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 549 patients from 13 hospitals in four countries were included in the final analysis. Multivariable regression analysis showed that early tracheostomy was associated with a 12-day decrease in time on mechanical ventilation (95% CI, -16 to -8; p < 0.001). Further, ICU and hospital lengths of stay in patients undergoing early tracheostomy were 15 days (95% CI, -23 to -9 d; p < 0.001) and 22 days (95% CI, -31 to -12 d) shorter, respectively. In contrast, early tracheostomy patients experienced lower risk-adjusted survival at 30-day post-admission (hazard ratio, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.8-5.2). Differences in 90-day post-admission survival were not identified. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy within 14 days of intubation have reduced ventilator dependence as well as reduced lengths of stay. However, early tracheostomy patients experienced lower 30-day survival. Future efforts should identify patients most likely to benefit from early tracheostomy while accounting for location-specific capacity.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic.1 COVID-19 concentrates in the upper airway mucosa2; thus, procedures involving this location are considered high risk. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a significant shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) worldwide. Professional additive manufacturing providers, makers, and designers in the 3-dimensional (3D) printing community have posted free COVID-19–related 3D printer designs on their websites.1 , 3 Most oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMSs) are familiar with 3D printing technology. We describe our method of using a 3D printer to print face shields to protect OMSs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

SARS-CoV-2 has been associated with an increased rate of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. Since surgical patients are already at higher risk of venous thromboembolism than general populations, this study aimed to determine if patients with peri-operative or prior SARS-CoV-2 were at further increased risk of venous thromboembolism. We conducted a planned sub-study and analysis from an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of elective and emergency patients undergoing surgery during October 2020. Patients from all surgical specialties were included. The primary outcome measure was venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis) within 30 days of surgery. SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was defined as peri-operative (7 days before to 30 days after surgery); recent (1–6 weeks before surgery); previous (≥7 weeks before surgery); or none. Information on prophylaxis regimens or pre-operative anti-coagulation for baseline comorbidities was not available. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rate was 0.5% (666/123,591) in patients without SARS-CoV-2; 2.2% (50/2317) in patients with peri-operative SARS-CoV-2; 1.6% (15/953) in patients with recent SARS-CoV-2; and 1.0% (11/1148) in patients with previous SARS-CoV-2. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients with peri-operative (adjusted odds ratio 1.5 (95%CI 1.1–2.0)) and recent SARS-CoV-2 (1.9 (95%CI 1.2–3.3)) remained at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, with a borderline finding in previous SARS-CoV-2 (1.7 (95%CI 0.9–3.0)). Overall, venous thromboembolism was independently associated with 30-day mortality (5.4 (95%CI 4.3–6.7)). In patients with SARS-CoV-2, mortality without venous thromboembolism was 7.4% (319/4342) and with venous thromboembolism was 40.8% (31/76). Patients undergoing surgery with peri-operative or recent SARS-CoV-2 appear to be at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism compared with patients with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Optimal venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment are unknown in this cohort of patients, and these data should be interpreted accordingly.

After decades on the margins of primary health care, surgical and anaesthesia care is gaining increasing priority within the global development arena. The 2015 publications of the Disease Control Priorities third edition on Essential Surgery and the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery created a compelling evidenced-based argument for the fundamental role of surgery and anaesthesia within cost-effective health systems strengthening global strategy. The launch of the Global Alliance for Surgical, Obstetric, Trauma, and Anaesthesia Care in 2015 has further coordinated efforts to build priority for surgical care and anaesthesia. These combined efforts culminated in the approval of a World Health Assembly resolution recognizing the role of surgical care and anaesthesia as part of universal health coverage. Momentum gained from these milestones highlights the need to identify consensus goals, targets and indicators to guide policy implementation and track progress at the national level. Through an open consultative process that incorporated input from stakeholders from around the globe, a global target calling for safe surgical and anaesthesia care for 80% of the world by 2030 was proposed. In order to achieve this target, we also propose 15 consensus indicators that build on existing surgical systems metrics and expand the ability to prioritize surgical systems strengthening around the world.