Quantifying Viral Particle Aerosolization Risk During Tracheostomy Surgery and Tracheostomy Care

The effects of a novel, continuous disinfectant technology on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), fungi, and aerobic bacteria in 2 separate intensive care units in 2 different states: An experimental design with observed impact on health care associated infections (HAIs)

BACKGROUND

Hospitals are exposed to abundant contamination sources with limited remediation strategies. Without new countermeasures or treatments, the risk of health care-associated infections will remain high. This study explored the impact of advanced photohydrolysis continuous disinfection technology on hospital environmental bioburden.

METHODS

Two acute care intensive care units in different locations (ie, Kentucky, Louisiana) during different time periods were sampled every 4 weeks for 4 months for colony-forming units (CFUs) of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and fungi on surfaces and floors and fungi and aerobic bacteria in the air.

RESULTS

At both sites, surface testing showed greater than 98% reduction in mean fungi and MRSA CFUs. Floor results had reductions by more than 96% for fungi and MRSA at both sites. Aerobic bacterial air and fungal CFUs had reductions up to 72% and 89%, respectively. HAIs declined 70% when postactivation data were compared to preactivation data.

DISCUSSION

The continuous nature of advanced photohydrolysis decontamination, its ability to be used in occupied rooms, and its independence of human resources provide an innovative intervention for complex health care environments.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is on the pioneering edge of demonstrating that continuous decontamination can reduce surface, floor, and air contamination and thereby reduce the acquisition of HAIs.

Outcomes for COVID-19 Patients Undergoing Tracheostomy With or Without Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO)

Introduction The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to the more common use of venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). While tracheostomy is generally understood to decrease the risks of prolonged endotracheal intubation, there is conflicting data regarding the benefit of tracheostomy in patients on ECMO. The purpose of this study is to determine whether ECMO cannulation before tracheostomy impacted patient outcomes. Methods This is a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent tracheostomy for COVID-19-related ARDS at a tertiary academic center from March 2020 through March 2022. Patients were separated into two groups based on whether they were cannulated for ECMO prior to tracheostomy. Fisher's exact test or Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare the two groups. Results A total of 24 patients were included in the study, with 13 in the ECMO group and 11 in the non-ECMO group. There was no significant difference in age, comorbidities, race, or gender between the groups. Patients on ECMO had a longer time from admission to intubation (seven days vs. three days, p=.002), were more likely to have multiple intubations (54% vs 9%, p= .033), had increased rates of postoperative bleeding (62% vs. 18%, p = .047), and had a higher mortality rate (39% vs. 0%, p= .041). Conclusions ECMO cannulation prior to tracheostomy for COVID-19-related ARDS is associated with poorer outcomes. It is unclear whether this is related to a more severe disease burden in these patients. Further study is needed to evaluate this and guide future management.

Guidance on Mitigating the Risk of Transmitting Respiratory Infections During Nebulization by the COPD Foundation Nebulizer Consortium

BACKGROUND

Nebulizers are used commonly for inhaled drug delivery. Because they deliver medication through aerosol generation, clarification is needed on what constitutes safe aerosol delivery in infectious respiratory disease settings. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of understanding the safety and potential risks of aerosol-generating procedures. However, evidence supporting the increased risk of disease transmission with nebulized treatments is inconclusive, and inconsistent guidelines and differing opinions have left uncertainty regarding their use. Many clinicians opt for alternative devices, but this practice could impact outcomes negatively, especially for patients who may not derive full treatment benefit from handheld inhalers. Therefore, it is prudent to develop strategies that can be used during nebulized treatment to minimize the emission of fugitive aerosols, these comprising bioaerosols exhaled by infected individuals and medical aerosols generated by the device that also may be contaminated. This is particularly relevant for patient care in the context of a highly transmissible virus.

RESEARCH QUESTION

How can potential risks of infections during nebulization be mitigated?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The COPD Foundation Nebulizer Consortium (CNC) was formed in 2020 to address uncertainties surrounding administration of nebulized medication. The CNC is an international, multidisciplinary collaboration of patient advocates, pulmonary physicians, critical care physicians, respiratory therapists, clinical scientists, and pharmacists from research centers, medical centers, professional societies, industry, and government agencies. The CNC developed this expert guidance to inform the safe use of nebulized therapies for patients and providers and to answer key questions surrounding medication delivery with nebulizers during pandemics or when exposure to common respiratory pathogens is anticipated.

RESULTS

CNC members reviewed literature and guidelines regarding nebulization and developed two sets of guidance statements: one for the health care setting and one for the home environment.

INTERPRETATION

Future studies need to explore the risk of disease transmission with fugitive aerosols associated with different nebulizer types in real patient care situations and to evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation strategies.

Comparison between Real-Time Ultrasound-guided Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy and Surgical Tracheostomy in critically ill Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

Tracheostomy is an important procedure for critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), and percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) has gained popularity due to its safety and effectiveness. However, there are limited data comparing ultrasound-guided PDT (US-PDT) with surgical tracheostomy (ST). In our previous study, we reported that US-PDT had similar safety and effectiveness to ST, with a shorter procedure time. However, the study design was retrospective, and the sample size was small. Therefore, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of US-PDT compared to ST.

METHODS

A total of 70 patients who underwent either US-PDT (n=35) or ST (n=35) were enrolled in the study between October 20, 2020 and July 26, 2022. The patients were randomly assigned to their respective procedures. The data collected included patient clinical characteristics, procedure time and details, complications, duration of ICU stay, time taken for weaning from mechanical ventilation, and hospital mortality.

RESULTS

The procedure time of US-PDT was shorter than that of ST (4.0±2.2 minutes vs. 10.1±4.6 minutes). The incision length of US-PDT was also shorter than that of ST (1.5±0.5 cm vs. 1.8±0.4 cm). There were no statistically significant differences in demographics, procedure details, complications, length of ICU stay, ventilator weaning time, and hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

US-PDT has a similar complication rate and shorter procedure time compared with ST. It can be safely and effectively performed in critically ill patients and can serve as a potential alternative to ST.

Aerosol generation during coughing: an observational study

OBJECTIVE

Coronavirus disease 2019 has highlighted the lack of knowledge on aerosol exposure during respiratory activity and aerosol-generating procedures. This study sought to determine the aerosol concentrations generated by coughing to better understand, and to set a standard for studying, aerosols generated in medical procedures.

METHODS

Aerosol exposure during coughing was measured in 37 healthy volunteers in the operating theatre with an optical particle sizer, from 40 cm, 70 cm and 100 cm distances.

RESULTS

Altogether, 306 volitional and 15 involuntary coughs were measured. No differences between groups were observed.

CONCLUSION

Many medical procedures are expected to generate aerosols; it is unclear whether they are higher risk than normal respiratory activity. The measured aerosol exposure can be used to determine the risk for significant aerosol generation during medical procedures. Considerable variation of aerosol generation during cough was observed between individuals, but whether cough was volitional or involuntary made no difference to aerosol production.

Aerosol Concentrations During Otolaryngology Procedures in a Negative Pressure Isolation Room

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of a negative pressure room with a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration system on reducing aerosol exposure in common otolaryngology procedures.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective quantification of aerosol generation.

SETTINGS

Tertiary care.

METHODS

The particle concentrations were measured at various times during tracheostomy tube changes with tracheostomy suctioning, nasal endoscopy with suctioning, and fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FOL), which included 5 times per procedure in a negative pressure isolation room with a HEPA filter and additional 5 times in a nonpressure-controlled room without a HEPA filter. The particle concentrations were measured from the baseline, during the procedure, and continued until 30 minutes after the procedure ended. The particle concentrations were compared to the baseline concentrations.

RESULTS

The particle concentration significantly increased from the baseline during tracheostomy tube changes (mean difference [MD] 0.80 × 10⁶  p/m³ , p = .01), tracheostomy suctioning (MD 0.78 × 10⁶  p/m³ , p = .004), at 2 minutes (MD 1.29 × 10⁶  p/m³ , p = .01), and 3 minutes (MD 1.3 × 10⁶  p/m³ , p = .004) after suctioning. There were no significant differences in the mean particle concentrations among various time points during nasal endoscopy with suctioning and FOL neither in isolation nor nonpressure-controlled rooms.

CONCLUSION

A negative pressure isolation room with a HEPA filter was revealed to be safe for medical personnel inside and outside the room. Tracheostomy tube change with tracheostomy suctioning required an isolation room because this procedure generated aerosol, while nasal endoscopy with suctioning and FOL did not. Aerosol generated in an isolation room was diminished to the baseline after 4 minutes.

Prevention of Tracheostomy-Related Pressure Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In the critical care environment, individuals who undergo tracheostomy are highly susceptible to tracheostomy-related pressure injuries.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce tracheostomy-related pressure injury in the critical care setting.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies of pediatric or adult patients in intensive care units conducted to evaluate interventions to reduce tracheostomy-related pressure injury. Reviewers independently extracted data on study and patient characteristics, incidence of tracheostomy-related pressure injury, characteristics of the interventions, and outcomes. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias criteria.

RESULTS

Ten studies (2 randomized clinical trials, 5 quasi-experimental, 3 observational) involving 2023 critically ill adult and pediatric patients met eligibility criteria. The incidence of tracheostomy-related pressure injury was 17.0% before intervention and 3.5% after intervention, a 79% decrease. Pressure injury most commonly involved skin in the peristomal area and under tracheostomy ties and flanges. Interventions to mitigate risk of tracheostomy-related pressure injury included modifications to tracheostomy flange securement with foam collars, hydrophilic dressings, and extended-length tracheostomy tubes. Interventions were often investigated as part of care bundles, and there was limited standardization of interventions between studies. Meta-analysis supported the benefit of hydrophilic dressings under tracheostomy flanges for decreasing tracheostomy-related pressure injury.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of hydrophilic dressings and foam collars decreases the incidence of tracheostomy-related pressure injury in critically ill patients. Evidence regarding individual interventions is limited by lack of sensitive measurement tools and by use of bundled interventions. Further research is necessary to delineate optimal interventions for preventing tracheostomy-related pressure injury.

Comparison Between Real-Time Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Tracheostomy and Surgical Tracheostomy in Critically Ill Patients

Background. Ultrasound-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (US-PDT) has been adapted for use in intensive care units (ICU). US-PDT is comparable to bronchoscopy-assisted tracheostomy. However, compared to surgical tracheostomy (ST), its safety and effectiveness have not been well studied. Objectives. To determine the efficacy and safety of US-PDT compared to ST. Materials and Methods. A total of 90 patients who underwent US-PDT (n = 36) or ST (n = 54) between July 2019 and September 2020 were enrolled. US-PDT was performed in the ICU without a surgical assistant or bronchoscope. Data were collected retrospectively and analyzed regarding clinical characteristics, procedure times and details, complications, and mortality rate. Results. The success rate of US-PDT was 97.4% and the procedure time was shorter than ST (5.2 ± 3.1 vs. 10.5 ± 5.0 min). There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics and procedure details. There was no procedure-related mortality in either of the groups. Conclusions. US-PDT is time-efficient and as safe as ST. Based on our results, US-PDT may be considered a potential alternative to ST in high-risk patients and in those who cannot be transported.

Measuring SARS-CoV-2 aerosolization in rooms of hospitalized patients

Objective

Airborne spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains a significant risk for healthcare workers. Understanding transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital could help minimize nosocomial infection. The objective of this pilot study was to measure aerosolization of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital rooms of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

Two air samplers (Inspirotec) were placed 1 and 4 m away from adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection hospitalized at an urban, academic tertiary care center from June to October 2020. Airborne SARS-CoV-2 concentration was measured by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and analyzed by clinical parameters and patient demographics.

Results

Thirteen patients with COVID-19 (eight females [61.5%], median age: 57 years old, range 25-82) presented with shortness of breath (100%), cough (38.5%) and fever (15.4%). Respiratory therapy during air sampling varied: mechanical ventilation via endotracheal tube (n = 3), high flow nasal cannula (n = 4), nasal cannula (n = 4), respiratory helmet (n = 1), and room air (n = 1). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was identified in rooms of three out of three intubated patients compared with one out of 10 of the non-intubated patients (p = .014). Airborne SARS-CoV-2 tended to decrease with distance (1 vs. 4 m) in rooms of intubated patients.

Conclusions

Hospital rooms of intubated patients had higher levels of aerosolized SARS-CoV-2, consistent with increased aerosolization of virus in patients with severe disease or treatment with positive pressure ventilation through an endotracheal tube. While preliminary, these data have safety implications for health care workers and design of protective measures in the hospital.

Level of Evidence

2.

Aerosol-Generating Procedures and Virus Transmission

During the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, many respiratory therapies were classified as aerosol-generating procedures. This categorization resulted in a broad range of clinical concerns and a shortage of essential medical resources for some patients. In the past 2 years, many studies have assessed the transmission risk posed by various respiratory care procedures. These studies are discussed in this narrative review, with recommendations for mitigating transmission risk based on the current evidence.

Temporal Dynamics of Nasopharyngeal and Tracheal SARS-CoV-2 Cycle Thresholds in COVID-19 Patients with Tracheostomy

In this study of 45 patients with COVID-19 undergoing tracheostomy, nasopharyngeal and tracheal cycle threshold (Ct) values were analyzed. Ct values rose to 37.9 by the time of tracheostomy and remained >35 postoperatively, demonstrating that persistent test positivity may not be associated with persistent transmissible virus in this population.

Tracheostomy care and communication during COVID-19: Global interprofessional perspectives

Objective

Investigate healthcare providers, caregivers, and patient perspectives on tracheostomy care barriers during COVID-19.

Study design

Cross-sectional anonymous survey

Setting

Global Tracheostomy Collaborative Learning Community

Methods

A 17-item questionnaire was electronically distributed, assessing demographic and occupational data; challenges in ten domains of tracheostomy care; and perceptions regarding knowledge and preparedness for navigating the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results

Respondents (n = 115) were from 20 countries, consisting of patients/caregivers (10.4%) and healthcare professionals (87.0%), including primarily otolaryngologists (20.9%), nurses (24.3%), speech-language pathologists (18.3%), respiratory therapists (11.3%), and other physicians (12.2%). The most common tracheostomy care problem was inability to communicate (33.9%), followed by mucus plugging and wound care. Need for information on how to manage cuffs and initiate speech trials was rated highly by most respondents, along with other technical and knowledge areas. Access to care and disposable supplies were also prominent concerns, reflecting competition between community needs for routine tracheostomy supplies and shortages in intensive care units. Integrated teamwork was reported in 40 to 67% of respondents, depending on geography. Forty percent of respondents reported concern regarding personal protective equipment (PPE), and 70% emphasized proper PPE use.

Conclusion

While safety concerns, centering on personal protective equipment and pandemic resources are prominent concerns in COVID-19 tracheostomy care, patient-centered concerns must also be prioritized. Communication and speech, adequate supplies, and care standards are critical considerations in tracheostomy. Stakeholders in tracheostomy care can partner to identify creative solutions for delays in restoring communication, supply disruptions, and reduced access to tracheostomy care in both inpatient and community settings.

Measurement of airborne particle emission during surgical and percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy COVID-19 adapted procedures in a swine model: Experimental report and review of literature

INTRODUCTION

Surgical tracheostomy (ST) and Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) are classified as high-risk aerosol-generating procedures and might lead to healthcare workers (HCW) infection. Albeit the COVID-19 strain slightly released since the vaccination era, preventing HCW from infection remains a major economical and medical concern. To date, there is no study monitoring particle emissions during ST and PDT in a clinical setting. The aim of this study was to monitor particle emissions during ST and PDT in a swine model.

METHODS

A randomized animal study on swine model with induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was conducted. A dedicated room with controlled airflow was used to standardize the measurements obtained using an airborne optical particle counter. 6 ST and 6 PDT were performed in 12 pigs. Airborne particles (diameter of 0.5 to 3 μm) were continuously measured; video and audio data were recorded. The emission of particles was considered as significant if the number of particles increased beyond the normal variations of baseline particle contamination determinations in the room. These significant emissions were interpreted in the light of video and audio recordings. Duration of procedures, number of expiratory pauses, technical errors and adverse events were also analyzed.

RESULTS

10 procedures (5 ST and 5 PDT) were fully analyzable. There was no systematic aerosolization during procedures. However, in 1/5 ST and 4/5 PDT, minor leaks and some adverse events (cuff perforation in 1 ST and 1 PDT) occurred. Human factors were responsible for 1 aerosolization during 1 PDT procedure. ST duration was significantly shorter than PDT (8.6 ± 1.3 vs 15.6 ± 1.9 minutes) and required less expiratory pauses (1 vs 6.8 ± 1.2).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 adaptations allow preventing for major aerosol leaks for both ST and PDT, contributing to preserving healthcare workers during COVID-19 outbreak, but failed to achieve a perfectly airtight procedure. However, with COVID-19 adaptations, PDT required more expiratory pauses and more time than ST. Human factors and adverse events may lead to aerosolization and might be more frequent in PDT.

Evidence-based aerosol clearance times in a healthcare environment

Background

As researchers race to understand the nature of COVID-19 transmission, healthcare institutions must treat COVID-19 patients while also safeguarding the health of staff and other patients. One aspect of this process involves mitigating aerosol transmission of the SARS-CoV2 virus. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provides general guidance on airborne contaminant removal, but directly measuring aerosol clearance in clinical rooms provides empirical evidence to guide clinical procedure.

Aim

We present a risk-assessment approach to empirically measuring and certifying the aerosol clearance time (ACT) in operating and procedure rooms to improve hospital efficiency while also mitigating the risk of nosocomial infection.

Methods

Rooms were clustered based on physical and procedural parameters. Sample rooms from each cluster were randomly selected and tested by challenging the room with aerosol and monitoring aerosolized particle concentration until 99.9% clearance was achieved. Data quality was analysed and aerosol clearance times for each cluster were determined.

Findings

Of the 521 operating and procedure rooms considered, 449 (86%) were issued a decrease in clearance time relative to CDC guidance, 32 (6%) had their clearance times increased, and 40 (8%) remained at guidance. The average clearance time change of all rooms assessed was a net reduction of 27.8%.

Conclusion

The process described here balances the need for high-quality, repeatable data with the burden of testing in a functioning clinical setting. Implementation of this approach resulted in a reduction in clearance times for most clinical rooms, thereby improving hospital efficiency while also safeguarding patients and staff.