@article{Sethwala_A-2024_177328,
title = {Recovery Rates of Diagnostic Cardiac Procedural Volume in Oceania 1 Year Into COVID-19: The IAEA Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocol Survey on COVID-19 (INCAPS COVID 2)},
author = {Sethwala, A. and Hirschfeld, C. and O'Sullivan, P. and Akbarally, M. and Younger, J. and Van Pelt, N. and Randazzo, M. and Lenturut-Katal, D. and Vitola, J. and Cerci, R. and Williams, M. and Shaw, L. and Karthikeyan, G. and Villines, T. and Dorbala, S. and Choi, A. and Cohen, Y. and Malkovskiy, E. and Pascual, T. and Pynda, Y. and Dondi, M. and Paez, D. and Einstein, A. and Better, N.},
month = {feb},
year = {2024},
abstract = {Aim The aim of this study was to assess the recovery rates of diagnostic cardiac procedure volumes in the Oceania Region, midway through the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods A survey was performed comparing procedure volumes between March 2019 (pre-pandemic), April 2020 (during first wave of COVID-19 pandemic), and April 2021 (1 year into the COVID-19 pandemic). A total of 31 health care facilities within Oceania that perform cardiac diagnostic procedures were surveyed, including a mixture of metropolitan and regional, hospital and outpatient, public and private sites, as well as teaching and non-teaching hospitals. A comparison was made with 549 centres in 96 countries in the rest of the world (RoW) outside of Oceania. The total number and median percentage change in procedure volume were measured between the three timepoints, compared by test type and by facility. Results A total of 11,902 cardiac diagnostic procedures were performed in Oceania in April 2021 as compared with 11,835 pre-pandemic in March 2019 and 5,986 in April 2020; whereas, in the RoW, 499,079 procedures were performed in April 2021 compared with 497,615 pre-pandemic in March 2019 and 179,014 in April 2020. There was no significant difference in the median recovery rates for total procedure volumes between Oceania (−6%) and the RoW (−3%) (p=0.81). While there was no statistically significant difference in percentage recovery been functional ischaemia testing and anatomical coronary testing in Oceania as compared with the RoW, there was, however, a suggestion of poorer recovery in anatomical coronary testing in Oceania as compared with the RoW (CT coronary angiography -16% in Oceania vs −1% in RoW, and invasive coronary angiography −20% in Oceania vs −9% in RoW). There was no statistically significant difference in recovery rates in procedure volume between metropolitan vs regional (p=0.44), public vs private (p=0.92), hospital vs outpatient (p=0.79), or teaching vs non-teaching centres (p=0.73). Conclusions Total cardiology procedure volumes in Oceania normalised 1 year post-pandemic compared to pre-pandemic levels, with no significant difference compared with the RoW and between the different types of health care facilities.},
pages = {384-391},
volume = {33},
issue = {3},
journal = {Heart, Lung and Circulation},
publisher = {Elsevier},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2023.12.011},
}
