Volume 214 Issue 11

Novel PPE, such as 3D printed face shields, must be compliant with regulatory requirements and a clinical evaluation protocol should be developed

Mathilde R Desselle · Marianne Kirrane · Ian T Chao · Jasamine Coles Black · Maria A Woodruff · Jason Chuen · Clair Sullivan

Genomic surveillance enhances detection and response to emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants

Patiyan Andersson · Norelle L Sherry · Benjamin P Howden

The Academy focuses on the nation’s most pressing health challenges and supports Australia’s thriving health and medical research sector

Ingrid E Scheffer · Ian H Frazer

Opioid agonist therapy should be normalised as a routine part of opioid dependence treatment

Pallavi Prathivadi · Elizabeth A Sturgiss

A 64-year-old woman presented to the emergency department with 7 days of right ankle pain

Peter Bradhurst · Carlos El‐Haddad · John Ng · Nicolás Urriola

Navigating parenthood and pandemics: uncertainty is the new normal

Jacqueline Fleetwood

The psittacosis epidemic of 1929–1930, spread by the Australian budgie, provides lessons for the COVID- 19 pandemic

Robert M Kaplan

Cultural participation can be a buffer to racism and a tool to heal

Raymond W Lovett · Makayla‐May Brinckley

Improving systems of care can achieve earlier treatment and increase survival

John K French

Objectives: To examine associations between community cultural connectedness indicators and suicide mortality rates for young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Study design: Retrospective mortality study. Setting, participants: Suicide deaths of people aged 10‒19 years recorded by the Queensland Suicide Register, 2001‒2015. Main outcome measures: Age‐standardised suicide death rates, by Indigenous status, sex, and age group; age‐standardised suicide death rates for young First Nations people by area level remoteness and Index of Relative Socioeconomic Advantage and Disadvantage, and by cultural connectedness indicators (at statistical area level 2): cultural social capital index score, community Indigenous language use, and reported discrimination. Results: The age‐specific suicide rate was 21.1 deaths per 100 000 persons/year for First Nations young people and 5.0 deaths per 100 000 persons/year for non‐Indigenous young people (rate ratio [RR], 4.3; 95% CI, 3.5‒5.1). The rate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people was higher in areas with low levels of cultural social capital (greater participation of community members in cultural events, ceremonies, organisations, and community activities) than in areas classified as having high levels (RR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2‒2.7), and also in communities with high levels of reported discrimination (RR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.7‒4.3). Associations with proportions of Indigenous language speakers and area level socio‐economic resource levels were not statistically significant. Conclusion: We found that suicide mortality rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people in Queensland were influenced by community level culturally specific risk and protective factors. Our findings suggest that strategies for increasing community cultural connectedness at the community level and reducing institutional and personal discrimination could reduce suicide rates.

Mandy Gibson · Jaimee Stuart · Stuart Leske · Raelene Ward · Robert Tanton

Objective: To assess long term survival and patient characteristics associated with survival following acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in Australia and New Zealand. Design: Cohort study. Setting, participants: All patients admitted with AMI (ICD‐10‐AM codes I21.0‒I21.4) to all public and most private hospitals in Australia and New Zealand during 2009‒2015. Main outcome measure: All‐cause mortality up to seven years after an AMI. Results: 239 402 initial admissions with AMI were identified; the mean age of the patients was 69.3 years (SD, 14.3 years), 154 287 were men (64.5%), and 64 335 had ST‐elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI; 26.9%). 7‐year survival after AMI was 62.3% (STEMI, 70.8%; non‐ST‐elevation myocardial infarction [NSTEMI], 59.2%); survival exceeded 85% for people under 65 years of age, but was 17.4% for those aged 85 years or more. 120 155 patients (50.2%) underwent revascularisation (STEMI, 72.2%; NSTEMI, 42.1%); 7‐year survival exceeded 80% for patients in each group who underwent revascularisation, and was lower than 45% for those who did not. Being older (85 years or older v 18–54 years: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 10.6; 95% CI, 10.1–11.1) or a woman (aHR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.13–1.17) were each associated with greater long term mortality during the study period, as was prior heart failure (aHR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.76‒1.83). Several non‐cardiac conditions and geriatric syndromes common in these patients were independently associated with lower long term survival, including major and metastatic cancer, cirrhosis and end‐stage liver disease, and dementia. Conclusion: AMI care in Australia and New Zealand is associated with high rates of long term survival; 7‐year rates exceed 80% for patients under 65 years of age and for those who undergo revascularisation. Efforts to further improve survival should target patients with NSTEMI, who are often older and have several comorbid conditions, for whom revascularisation rates are low and survival after AMI poor.

Bora Nadlacki · Dennis Horton · Sadia Hossain · Saranya Hariharaputhiran · Linh Ngo · Anna Ali · Bernadette Aliprandi‐Costa · Chris J Ellis · Robert JT Adams · Renuka Visvanathan · Isuru Ranasinghe

Onsite “buddies” are not always available to monitor the donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE) in hospitals, especially during a pandemic, potentially leading to poor PPE compliance and increased risk of health care infections.1,2 We therefore compared monitoring of PPE donning/doffing procedures in a standard critical care setting3,4 by remote buddies with monitoring by onsite buddies. We designed 30 procedural scenarios (15 donning, 15 doffing) that included random errors in some procedural steps (online Supporting Information). Four buddies (two onsite, two remote), unaware of the number and type of errors in each scenario, concurrently viewed and assessed each step. The remote buddies viewed the procedures via videoconferencing on their computers. The camera of the transmitting laptop computer was positioned so that the entire body of the person donning or doffing PPE could be seen. Procedures were live‐streamed to the remote buddies via the hospital Wi‐Fi network. The buddies were not permitted to communicate with each other or with the person donning or doffing PPE. The study was approved by the Melbourne Health Human Research Ethics Committee (QA2020104). Sensitivity (correctly identifying correct procedure) was 100% for both onsite and remote buddies; specificity (correctly identifying incorrect procedure) was 98.9% for onsite buddies and 94.5% for remote buddies; overall accuracy was respectively 99.7% and 98.7% (Box). Concordance between assessments by onsite and remote buddies (κ = 0.95), by the two onsite buddies (κ = 0.97), and by the two remote buddies (κ = 0.98) was very good. The most frequent error was remote buddies missing chin exposure below the mask, probably because of the two‐dimensional view provided by the camera. Paying specific attention to the mask position when the donner turns side on in front of the camera might prevent this error. Practical considerations for remote buddies include the need for reliable hospital network and internet connections, or a wired hardware system, to avoid disruption of monitoring. As the remote buddy is unable to physically intervene when they identify an error, clear verbal communication is important. The psychological effect of having an onsite buddy was not characterised, but may influence user acceptability of remote buddies. All buddies were very experienced in providing observation feedback, but we did not assess their proficiency. Their accuracy may also have reflected greater vigilance while being observed (the Hawthorne effect). Finally, we did not weight the donning and doffing steps according to their importance for safety. Having a trained observer monitor PPE compliance is important for health care safety. The high level of accuracy and the agreement between onsite and remote buddies were encouraging. Apart from identifying errors, remote buddies could also provide step‐by‐step instruction in donning and doffing procedures, which could improve compliance and minimise contamination.5 Using remote buddies may help preserve PPE supplies and ensure reliable access to monitoring, even when PPE supply or onsite staff numbers are limited, while also reducing the infection exposure risk for the monitoring observers. Box – Personal protective equipment (PPE) monitoring assessment accuracy by onsite and remote buddies Scenario outcome* Buddy outcome* Pass Fail Onsite buddies (390 tests) Pass 298 1 PPV, 99.7% Fail 0 91 NPV, 100% Sensitivity, 100% Specificity, 98.9% Overall accuracy, 99.7% Remote buddies (383 tests†) Pass 292 5 PPV, 98.3% Fail 0 86 NPV, 100% Sensitivity, 100% Specificity, 94.5% Overall accuracy, 98.7% PPV = positive predictive value; NPV = negative predictive value. * For each step of each PPE donning/doffing procedure: pass = correctly performed; fail = not correctly performed. † Seven assessments were missing because of internet interruptions.

Reny Segal · William PL Bradley · Daryl Williams · Romulo Correa de Araujo Nunes · Irene Ng

Introduction: The Australian Council on Healthcare Standards (ACHS) sponsored an expert‐led, consensus‐driven, four‐stage process, based on a modified Delphi methodology, to determine a set of clinical indicators as quality measures of cancer service provision in Australia. This was done in response to requests from institutional health care providers seeking accreditation, which were additional and complementary to the existing radiation oncology set. The steering group members comprised multidisciplinary key opinion leaders and a consumer representative. Five additional participants constituted the stakeholder group, who deliberated on the final indicator set. Methods and recommendations: An initial meeting of the steering group scoped the high level nature of the desired set. In stage 2, 65 candidate indicators were identified by a literature review and a search of international metrics. These were ranked by survey, based on ease of data accessibility and collectability and clinical relevance. The top 27 candidates were debated by the stakeholder group and culled to a final set of 16 indicators. A user manual was created with indicators mapped to clinical codes. The indicator set was ratified by the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia and is now available for use by health care organisations participating in the ACHS Clinical Indicator Program. This inaugural cancer clinical indicator set covers high level assessment of various critical processes in cancer service provision in Australia. Regular reviews and updates will ensure usability. Changes in management as a result of this statement: This is the inaugural indicator set for cancer care for use across Australia and internationally under the ACHS Clinical Indicator Program. Multidisciplinary involvement through a modified Delphi process selected indicators representing both generic and specific aspects of care across the cancer journey pathway and will provide a functional tool to compare health care delivery across multiple settings. It is anticipated that this will drive continual improvement in cancer care provision.

Eva Segelov · Christine Carrington · Sanchia Aranda · David Currow · John R Zalcberg · Alexander G Heriot · Linda Mileshkin · John Coutsouvelis · Jeremy L Millar · Brian T Collopy · Jon D Emery · Phoebe Zhang · Simon Cooper · Carmel O’Kane · Janet Wale · Stephen J Hancock · Anthony Sulkowski · John Bashford

To the Editor: Sexual incidents involving patients in hospitals are prevalent and are distressing for patients and staff alike, but they are poorly managed.1 Such incidents are frequently perpetrated by people with acute mental illness (eg, mania, psychosis), substance misuse, personality vulnerabilities, and cognitive impairment (eg, delirium, dementia). Sexual incidents span the age range, although lack of staff's understanding of sexuality and sexual behaviour in older adults2 mandates practice improvement. Sexual safety is defined in health care settings as “recognition, maintenance and mutual respect of the physical [including sexual], psychological, emotional and spiritual boundaries between people”.3 Sexual incidents include sexual offences (criminal offences such as sexual assault) and inappropriate sexual behaviour, ranging from suggestive language to removing clothing, exposure, and public masturbation. State public mental health services have sexual safety policies and guidelines, but no such policies exist for general hospitals. The scholarly literature is similarly limited. Our experience of sexual safety in health care can be described as “a neglected area, there is no training, no one is talking about it and there seems little interest until something happens,” particularly involving older people.1 A hypothetical case based on clinical experience (Box) demonstrates the trivialisation and minimisation of sexual incidents in health care and the associated risks and ramifications. This phenomenon is aligned with the “dirty old man” stereotype, a reflection of ageist societal attitudes towards sex in older people as inappropriate, shameful or funny.4 Consequences of these attitudes for clinical management include poor documentation and communication, inconsistent responses to patient behaviour, and multiple victims, particularly staff. Sexual harassment is both under‐reported by staff5 and dealt with superficially, despite having significant effects on physical and psychological health and burnout.6 These issues are compounded in aged care, where staff ignore or minimise the impact of sexual behaviour, which is often excused by cognitive impairment4 or dismissed as harmless due to frailty or advanced age.5 Aged care staff may feel shame, guilt, confusion and even responsibility for causing the behaviour.5 Conversely, a tension exists between a cognitively impaired person’s right to sexual expression and the health care worker’s right to a safe workplace. Education of health care staff and development of guidelines with response pathways are needed to ensure sexual behaviour is understood and dealt with consistently and respectfully.4 In this situation, ageism trivialises risk and harm, which may have an adverse impact on a safe health care environment. Box – Hypothetical case based on clinical experience describing the trivialisation and minimisation of sexual incidents in health care and the associated risks and ramifications Warren is a 73‐year‐old single man treated in a geriatric ward in a general hospital for delirium. He has a history of cognitive impairment due to long term alcohol misuse and has a guardian for medical decision making. The delirium is slow to resolve and after a few weeks he starts propositioning nursing staff for sex and making sexual comments. Warren often has an erection when nurses assist with personal care and he masturbates on his bed, visible to patients, visitors and staff. He is moved to a single room and a minimum of two staff are present for any clinical interaction. Three female staff members are grabbed on their breasts while providing Warren with care. This is inconsistently documented in his medical record. His sexual behaviour is discussed with some derision in staff handovers. There is no disclosure of his behaviour to non‐ward staff involved in his care (eg, consulting teams), among whom further assaults occur. A security guard is stationed at his door to keep him in his room. He is commenced on a specific serotonin reuptake inhibitor with the aim of reducing libido. Warren continues to be sexually disinhibited in behaviour and comments, a barrier to securing a nursing home placement. General principles: Management must include behaviour assessment and addressing underlying issues (eg, delirium, unmet sexual needs) with practical environmental and governance measures such as formal handover of behaviour between shifts and for consulting teams and clinicians, clear and easily accessible management plans, and support for staff, visitors and other patients. Consider the use of sexual harassment measurement tools for reporting and awareness raising.

Anne PF Wand · Carmelle Peisah

To the Editor: Hoffman and colleagues’1 excellent review highlights the tightrope women walk when pursuing both a career and children. It is clear that, internationally, inflexible workplace policies as well as more insidious outdated attitudes towards working women cause significant damage to society as a whole. While mothers evidently bear the brunt, such discrimination also negatively affects fathers and we would argue that the real issue is “parenthood and medicine” rather than just “motherhood”. A culture that presents balancing a career and children as being a goal that only women should struggle with is itself part of the underlying problem. In recent generations, the traditional expectation for women to assume the role of primary childcarer has undergone a paradigm shift. It is increasingly commonplace for men to take paternity leave and even to return to part‐time work in order to achieve greater presence in their family life. A growing number of same‐sex couples are also choosing to have a family and face additional, unique challenges. Unfortunately, public policy is lagging far behind; in Australia, partners are entitled to only 2 weeks of paid leave after the birth of a child.2 Better access to spousal leave exists overseas, particularly in Scandinavia; for example, in Sweden, parents can share up to 480 days off work after the birth or adoption of a child, divided as however suits the individuals.3 In the United Kingdom, additional paternity leave of up to 50 weeks is available after the standard 2 weeks.4 A study from 2013 found uptake of the additional leave had been disappointingly low, highlighting poor awareness, practical deterrents, concerns around impact on finances and training, and fear of negative perceptions as key underlying reasons.5 With the majority of doctors in Australia having children at some point in their careers, it is time for further research, education and policy change to support all individuals.

Elizabeth Wootton · Gerard Forrest

In reply

Rebekah Hoffman · Judy Mullan · Andrew D Bonney

To the Editor: We identified a geographic and temporal cluster of four patients with drug poisoning occurring within one week in February 2020 from two addresses less than 1 km apart. All patients presented with typical features of opiate poisoning but had no history of opiate use. There was one death, with the three other cases having significant morbidity, which required escalating bolus doses of naloxone. Rapid sample analysis by the New South Wales Pathology Forensic and Analytical Science Service (FASS) using liquid chromatography quadrupole time‐of‐flight mass spectrometry (LC‐Q‐TOF‐MS) found acetyl fentanyl — a synthetic fentanyl non‐pharmaceutical designer drug — in all cases within 3 days. The identification and subsequent response were coordinated by the Prescription, Recreational and Illicit Substance Evaluation (PRISE) program, a collaboration between the NSW Ministry of Health, the NSW Poisons Information Centre and FASS. The analytical confirmation and public health response, involving data collection, risk assessment with a health expert committee and customised clinical and public health response, occurred within 15 days of notification to PRISE. Two further cases were identified by the NSW Ministry of Health in other hospitals in the 2 months prior and 2 months subsequent to our cases. In October 2020, a further cluster of five cases occurred in regional NSW. Ethics approval was granted by the Sydney Local Health District Research Ethics and Governance Office, HREC 2020/ETH01380. The presence of fentanyl analogues as an adulterant in recreational drugs has become common globally but only one case of poisoning by acetyl fentanyl has been reported in the literature in Australia.1,2 This poses a significant risk to unassuming users, particularly users whose primary recreational use is stimulants, as they are likely to be opioid naïve and have worse clinical outcomes. Cases of toxicity from fentanyl and its analogues are often under‐reported because of issues with detection. Synthetic opioids do not test positive on urine drug screen immunoassays; mass spectrometry is required to confirm the diagnosis.3 Acetyl fentanyl is a non‐pharmaceutical designer analogue of fentanyl first described in 2013 after an outbreak with reported mortality in Rhode Island.4 Pharmacokinetic data for acetyl fentanyl are limited, but the drug is 15 times more potent than heroin and has an ED50 (median effective dose) and LD50 (median lethal dose) ten times narrower than morphine.5 The purpose of PRISE is to detect atypical substances in the community, focusing on presentations that are unexpected, severe and/or clusters, and coordinate an appropriate response. Rapid detection and toxicosurveillance allowed for prompt dissemination of information to clinicians and the public. Information directed to user groups is a particularly important harm minimisation strategy. Rapid detection and early dissemination of information may have limited further outbreaks. Clinicians should be informed that atypical presentations in recreational drug use may be due to substitution or contamination by other substances. Notification of cases to Poisons Information Centres can provide treatment advice and facilitate rapid identification and response by providing an access pathway, such as the NSW Ministry of Health PRISE Program.

Varan Perananthan · Chris Tremonti · Emily Nash · Thanjira Jiranantakan · Andrew H Dawson

To the Editor: There is a new player in the treatment of opioid use disorder: extended‐release depot buprenorphine. This has been hailed “a game changer”1 and has proven to be of great benefit, particularly during the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Depot buprenorphine has an impact on presentations to hospital and health services, meaning that all clinicians must be familiar with the advantages and disadvantages (Box) as well as the formulations. Opioid use disorder is a complex, chronic, relapsing health condition that requires lengthy management and is over‐represented in incarcerated people. Opioid treatment successfully reduces illicit use, overdose deaths, and costs. In Australia, there are opioid treatment programs for incarcerated persons, improving individual and community wellbeing and social functioning following release. However, until recently, the treatment perpetuated a daily drug pattern and risks, such as diversion to others, injecting opioid treatments, overdose risks and violent behaviour.2 What changed the game and model of care in Australia is the development of extended‐release depot buprenorphine. The Australian game has two products: one is available as weekly and monthly injection options and the other as a monthly injection. Depot buprenorphine is a subcutaneous injection and must be administered by a health care professional, as inadvertent injection into other structures forms a depot gel that will not provide slow release of the medication and depot gels in a vein may cause serious, life‐threatening health problems.3 Weekly or monthly doses of depot buprenorphine are provided following stabilisation using sublingual buprenorphine, most often for 7 days, and may be started the day after the last daily sublingual buprenorphine. Dose conversion tables exist to match depot buprenorphine to the sublingual buprenorphine dose. Steady state equilibrium is achieved after three to four doses.3 Hospital and health service clinicians must be aware that all buprenorphine formulations complicate routine opioid analgesia for acute pain management, and consideration of other non‐opioid‐adjuvant analgesics is needed (Box).3 Uptake of depot buprenorphine has been welcomed by patients, the community and correctional programs, with many who have transitioned reporting positive outcomes, including reduction in cravings, anxiety, improved attitude, relationships, and general mood.4 The timing of this game changing depot buprenorphine has enabled remote health care and ongoing availability of opioid therapy in the context of the COVID‐19 pandemic.5 Box – Advantages and disadvantages of depot buprenorphine Advantages of depot buprenorphine: it provides greater convenience and does not require attendance for daily dosing it reduces the treatment cost for clients and service providers it has less risk of diversion and non-medical use of the medication it has greater medication adherence and enhanced treatment outcomes it opens opportunities for normal life and to consider employment, study and travel it removes risks related to takeaway opioid treatment doses it reduces stigma and discrimination and has a positive impact on the way that people with opioid use problems are perceived Disadvantages of depot buprenorphine: ul#arrow { position: relative; list-style: none; } ul#arrow li::before { content: '▶ '; position: relative; left: 0; } it complicates routine opioid analgesia in the management of severe acute pain: it may require the use of higher doses of traditional opioids such as morphine; and it may require the use of a mu opioid receptor super agonist such as fentanyl and/or the use of non-opioid analgesic approaches (eg, ketamine infusions or regional analgesia) it provides reduced patient health care, social interactions and support opportunities it results in a loss of control over how the patient manages their dose (especially takeaways)

Katerina Lagios

Choosing to fight injustice wherever she sees it has been Dr Skye Kinder’s major motivation

Cate Swannell