Heat stroke (HS) is defined as a severe elevation of core body temperature along with central nervous system dysfunction. Exertional heat stroke (EHS) with acute liver failure (ALF) is a rare condition. The authors report the case of a 25-year-old man with a history of cognitive enhancers’ intake who developed hyperthermia and neurological impairment while running an outdoor marathon. The patient was cooled and returned to normal body temperature after 6 h. He subsequently developed ALF and was transferred to the intensive care unit. Over-the-counter drug intake may have been related to heat intolerance and contributed to the event. The patient was successfully treated with conservative measures. In the presence of EHS, it is crucial to act promptly with aggressive total body cooling, in order to prevent progression of the clinical syndrome. Liver function must also be monitored, since it can be a late organ dysfunction.

Background: Cancer comprises a high burden on health systems. Performance indicators monitoring cancer outcomes are routinely used in OECD countries. However, the development of process and cancer-pathway based information is essential to guide health care delivery, allowing for better monitoring of changes in the quality of care provided. Assessing the changes in the quality of cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic requires a structured approach considering the high volume of publications. This study aims to summarize performance indicators used in the literature to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care (January-June 2020) in OECD countries and to assess changes in the quality of care as reported via selected indicators. Methods: Search conducted in MEDLINE and Embase databases. Performance indicators and their trends were collated according to the cancer care pathway. Results: This study included 135 articles, from which 1013 indicators were retrieved. Indicators assessing the diagnostic process showed a decreasing trend: from 33 indicators reporting on screening, 30 (91%) signalled a decrease during the pandemic (n = 30 indicators, 91%). A reduction was also observed in the number of diagnostic procedures (n = 64, 58%) and diagnoses (n = 130, 89%). The proportion of diagnoses in the emergency setting and waiting times showed increasing trends (n = 8, 89% and n = 14, 56%, respectively). A decreasing trend in the proportion of earliest stage cancers was reported by 63% of indicators (n = 9), and 70% (n = 43) of indicators showed an increasing trend in the proportion of advanced-stage cancers. Indicators reflecting the treatment process signalled a reduction in the number of procedures: 79%(n = 82) of indicators concerning surgeries, 72%(n = 41) of indicators assessing radiotherapy, and 93%(n = 40) of indicators related to systemic therapies. Modifications in cancer treatment were frequently reported: 64%(n = 195) of indicators revealed changes in treatment. Conclusions: This study provides a summary of performance indicators used in the literature to assess the cancer care pathway from January 2020 to June 2020 in OECD countries, and the changes in the quality of care signalled by these indicators. The trends reported inform on potential bottlenecks of the cancer care pathway. Monitoring this information closely could contribute to identifying moments for intervention during crises.

This study aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital cardiac care, as assessed by performance indicators. Scoping review methodology: performance indicators were extracted to inform on changes in care during January–June 2020. Database searches yielded 6277 articles, of which 838 met the inclusion criteria. After full-text screening, 94 articles were included and 1637 indicators were retrieved. Most of the indicators that provided information on changes in the number of admissions (n = 118, 88%) signaled a decrease in admissions; 88% (n = 15) of the indicators showed patients’ delayed presentation and 40% (n = 54) showed patients in a worse clinical condition. A reduction in diagnostic and treatment procedures was signaled by 95% (n = 18) and 81% (n = 64) of the indicators, respectively. Length of stay decreased in 58% (n = 21) of the indicators, acute coronary syndromes treatment times increased in 61% (n = 65) of the indicators, and outpatient activity decreased in 94% (n = 17) of the indicators related to outpatient care. Telehealth utilization increased in 100% (n = 6). Outcomes worsened in 40% (n = 35) of the indicators, and mortality rates increased in 52% (n = 31). All phases of the pathway were affected. This information could support the planning of care during the ongoing pandemic and in future events.

Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has created a new paradigm for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients, but their increased risk for coronary disease is well documented. We present the case of a 57-year-old man, co-infected with HIV-2 and hepatitis B virus, adequately controlled and with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and dyslipidemia, who was admitted with non-ST elevation acute myocardial infarction. Coronary angiography performed on day four of hospital stay documented two-vessel disease (mid segment of the right coronary artery [RCA, 90% stenosis] and the first marginal). Two drug-eluting stents were successfully implanted. The patient was discharged under dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin 100 mg/day and clopidogrel 75 mg/day) and standard coronary artery disease medication. He was admitted to the emergency room four hours after discharge with chest pain radiating to the left arm and inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction was diagnosed. Coronary angiography was performed within one hour and documented thrombosis of both stents. Optical coherence tomography revealed good apposition of the stent in the RCA, with intrastent thrombus. Angioplasty was performed, with a good outcome. The acute stent thrombosis might be explained by the thrombotic potential of HIV infection and diabetes. There are no specific guidelines regarding HAART in secondary prevention of acute coronary syndromes. A multidisciplinary approach is essential for optimal management of these patients.

The COVID-19 pandemic severely impacted care for non-COVID patients. Performance indicators to monitor acute care, timely reported and internationally accepted, lacked during the pandemic in OECD countries. This study aims to summarize the performance indicators available in the literature to monitor changes in the quality of acute care in OECD countries during the first year and a half of the pandemic (2020-July 2021) and to assess their trends. Scoping review. Search in Embase and MEDLINE (07-07-2022). Acute care performance indicators and indicators related to acute general surgery were collected and collated following a care pathway approach. Indicators assessing identical clinical measures were grouped under a common indicator title. The trends from each group of indicators were collated (increase/decrease/stable). A total of 152 studies were included. 2354 indicators regarding general acute care and 301 indicators related to acute general surgery were included. Indicators focusing on pre-hospital services reported a decreasing trend in the volume of patients: from 225 indicators, 110 (49%) reported a decrease. An increasing trend in pre-hospital treatment times was reported by most of the indicators (n = 41;70%) and a decreasing trend in survival rates of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (n = 61;75%). Concerning care provided in the emergency department, most of the indicators (n = 752;71%) showed a decreasing trend in admissions across all levels of urgency. Concerning the mortality rate after admission, most of the indicators (n = 23;53%) reported an increasing trend. The subset of indicators assessing acute general surgery showed a decreasing trend in the volume of patients (n = 50;49%), stability in clinical severity at admission (n = 36;53%), and in the volume of surgeries (n = 14;47%). Most of the indicators (n = 28;65%) reported no change in treatment approach and stable mortality rate (n = 11,69%). This review signals relevant disruptions across the acute care pathway. A subset of general surgery performance indicators showed stability in most of the phases of the care pathway. These results highlight the relevance of assessing this care pathway more regularly and systematically across different clinical entities to monitor disruptions and to improve the resilience of emergency services during a crisis.

Objectives Summarize performance indicators used in the literature to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care (January-June 2020), and to assess changes in the quality of care as assessed via selected indicators. Methods Scoping review. Indicators and their reported trends were collated following the cancer care pathway. Results Database searches retrieved 6277 articles, 838 articles met the inclusion criteria, and 135 articles were included after full-text screening, from which 917 indicators were retrieved. Indicators assessing the diagnostic process showed a decreasing trend: from 33 indicators reporting on screening, 30 (91%) signalled a decrease during the pandemic (n=30 indicators, 91%). A reduction was also observed in the number of diagnostic procedures (n=64, 58%) and in the diagnoses (n=130, 89%). The proportion of diagnoses in the emergency setting and waiting times showed an increasing trend (n=8, 89% and n=14, 56%, respectively). Nine indicators (64%) showed stability in cancer stages distribution. A decreasing trend in the proportion of earliest stage cancers was reported by 63% of indicators (n=9), and 70% (n=43) of indicators showed an increasing trend in the proportion of advanced-stage cancers. Indicators reflecting the treatment process signalled a reduction in the number of procedures: 79% (n=82) of indicators concerning surgeries, 72% (n=41) of indicators assessing trends in radiotherapy, and 93% (n=40) of indicators related to systemic therapies. Modifications in cancer treatment were frequently reported: 64% (n=195) of indicators revealed changes in treatment. Ten indicators (83%) signalled a decreasing number of hospital admissions. Conclusion Health systems struggled to ensure continuity of cancer care. As this pandemic keeps evolving, the trends reported over the first 6 months of 2020 provide an argument to monitor these changes closely. This information needs to be transparent, standardised, and timely, allowing to monitor quality and outcomes of care during crises and inform policy responses.