Influence of COVID-19 confinement measures on appendectomies in Germany—a claims data analysis of 9797 patients

  1. Matthias Maneck
  2. Christian Günster
  3. Hans-Joachim Meyer
  4. Claus-Dieter Heidecke
  5. Udo Rolle

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Purpose

COVID-19 pandemic had multiple influences on the social, industrial, and medical situation in all affected countries. Measures of obligatory medical confinement were suspensions of scheduled non-emergent surgical procedures and outpatients’ clinics as well as overall access restrictions to hospitals and medical practices. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess if the obligatory confinement (lockdown) had an effect on the number of appendectomies (during and after the period of lockdown).

Methods

This retrospective study was based on anonymized nationwide administrative claims data of the German Local General Sickness Fund (AOK). Patients admitted for diseases of the appendix (ICD-10: K35-K38) or abdominal and pelvic pain (ICD-10: R10) who underwent an appendectomy (OPS: 5-470) were included. The study period included 6 weeks of German lockdown (16 March–26 April 2020) as well as 6 weeks before (03 February–15 March 2020) and after (27 April–07 June 2020). These periods were compared to the respective one in 2018 and 2019.

Results

The overall number of appendectomies was significantly reduced during the lockdown time in 2020 compared to that in 2018 and 2019. This decrease affects only appendectomies due to acute simple (ICD-10: K35.30, K35.8) and non-acute appendicitis (ICD-10: K36-K38, R10). Numbers for appendectomies in acute complex appendicitis remained unchanged. Female patients and in the age group 1–18 years showed the strongest decrease in number of cases.

Conclusion

The lockdown in Germany resulted in a decreased number of appendectomies. This affected mainly appendectomies in simple acute and non-acute appendicitis, but not complicated acute appendicitis. The study gives no evidence that the confinement measures resulted in a deterioration of medical care for appendicitis.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1007/s00423-020-02041-4
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.25.20198986: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    All evaluations were performed with the software STATA16.0 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas).
    StataCorp
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.09.25.20198986v1 on medRxiv