Actions Taken by US Hospitals to Prepare for Increased Demand for Intensive Care During the First Wave of COVID-19: A National Survey

Impact of healthcare system strain on the implementation of ICU sedation practices and encephalopathy burden during the early COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide, particularly in managing critically ill patients requiring mechanical ventilation early in the pandemic. Surging patient volumes strained hospital resources and complicated the implementation of standard-of-care intensive care unit (ICU) practices, including sedation management. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of an evidence-based ICU sedation bundle during the early COVID-19 pandemic. The bundle was designed by a multi-disciplinary collaborative to reinforce best clinical practices related to ICU sedation. The bundle was implemented prospectively with retrospective analysis of electronic medical record data. The setting was the ICUs of a single-center tertiary hospital. The patients were the ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation for confirmed COVID-19 between March and June 2020. A learning health collaborative developed a sedation bundle encouraging goal-directed sedation and use of adjunctive strategies to avoid excessive sedative administration. Implementation strategies included structured in-service training, audit and feedback, and continuous improvement. Sedative utilization and clinical outcomes were compared between patients admitted before and after the sedation bundle implementation. Quasi-experimental interrupted time-series analyses of pre and post intervention sedative utilization, hospital length of stay, and number of days free of delirium, coma, or death in 21 days (as a quantitative measure of encephalopathy burden). The analysis used the time duration between start of the COVID-19 wave and ICU admission to identify a "breakpoint" indicating a change in observed trends. A total of 183 patients (age 59.0 ± 15.9 years) were included, with 83 (45%) admitted before the intervention began. Benzodiazepine utilization increased for patients admitted after the bundle implementation, while agents intended to reduce benzodiazepine use showed no greater utilization. No "breakpoint" was identified to suggest the bundle impacted any endpoint measure. However, increasing time between COVID-19 wave start and ICU admission was associated with fewer delirium, coma, and death-free days (β =  - 0.044 [95% CI - 0.085, - 0.003] days/wave day); more days of benzodiazepine infusion (β = 0.056 [95% CI 0.025, 0.088] days/wave day); and a higher maximum benzodiazepine infusion rate (β = 0.079 [95% CI 0.037, 0.120] mg/h/wave day). The evidence-based practice bundle did not significantly alter sedation utilization patterns during the first COVID-19 wave. Sedation practices deteriorated and encephalopathy burden increased over time, highlighting that strategies to reinforce clinical practices may be hindered under conditions of extreme healthcare system strain.

Telemedicine-based serious illness conversations, healthcare utilization, and end of life care among patients with advanced lung cancer

PURPOSE

Little is known about serious illness conversations (SIC) conducted during telemedicine visits and their impact on end-of-life (EOL) outcomes for patients with advanced cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis telemedicine visits for patients with metastatic lung cancer conducted during the first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic (October 3, 2020-October 6, 2020). We used natural language processing (NLP) to characterize documentation of SIC domains (ie, goals of care [GOC], limitation of life-sustaining treatment [LLST], prognostic awareness [PA], palliative care [PC], and hospice). We used unadjusted logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with SIC documentation and the relationship between SIC documentation and EOL outcomes.

RESULTS

The study included 634 telemedicine visits across 360 patients. Documentation of at least one SIC domain was present in 188 (29.7%) visits with GOC and PA being the most discussed domains. Family presence (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; P = .004), progressive or newly diagnosed disease (OR, 5.42; P < .000), age ≥ 70 (OR, 1.80; P = .009), and male sex (OR, 2.23; P < .000) were associated with a greater likelihood of discussing ≥ 1 SIC domain. Of the 61 patients who died within 12 months of the study period, having ≥ 1 SIC domain discussed was associated with a lower likelihood of hospitalization in the last 30 days of life (OR, 0.27; P = .020).

CONCLUSION

In this study of telehealth visits, we identified important factors associated with an increased likelihood of having documentation of an SIC and demonstrated that SIC documentation correlated with lower likelihood of hospitalization at EOL.

Interprofessional Staffing Pattern Clusters in U.S. ICUs

OBJECTIVES

To identify interprofessional staffing pattern clusters used in U.S. ICUs.

DESIGN

Latent class analysis.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Adult U.S. ICUs.

PATIENTS

None.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

ANALYSIS

We used data from a staffing survey that queried respondents (n = 596 ICUs) on provider (intensivist and nonintensivist), nursing, respiratory therapist, and clinical pharmacist availability and roles. We used latent class analysis to identify clusters describing interprofessional staffing patterns and then compared ICU and hospital characteristics across clusters.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We identified three clusters as optimal. Most ICUs (54.2%) were in cluster 1 ("higher overall staffing") characterized by a higher likelihood of good provider coverage (both intensivist [onsite 24 hr/d] and nonintensivist [orders placed by ICU team exclusively, presence of advanced practice providers, and physicians-in-training]), nursing leadership (presence of charge nurse, nurse educators, and managers), and bedside nursing support (nurses with registered nursing degrees, fewer patients per nurse, and nursing aide availability). One-third (33.7%) were in cluster 2 ("lower intensivist coverage & nursing leadership, higher bedside nursing support") and 12.1% were in cluster 3 ("higher provider coverage & nursing leadership, lower bedside nursing support"). Clinical pharmacists were more common in cluster 1 (99.4%), but present in greater than 85% of all ICUs; respiratory therapists were nearly universal. Cluster 1 ICUs were larger (median 20 beds vs. 15 and 17 in clusters 2 and 3, respectively; p < 0.001), and in larger (> 250 beds: 80.6% vs. 66.1% and 48.5%; p < 0.001), not-for-profit (75.9% vs. 69.4% and 60.3%; p < 0.001) hospitals. Telemedicine use 24 hr/d was more common in cluster 3 units (71.8% vs. 11.7% and 14.1%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of U.S. ICUs had higher staffing overall. Others tended to have either higher provider presence and nursing leadership or higher bedside nursing support, but not both.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 cases admitted to adult intensive care units during the pandemic: A single center experience

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is the largest recorded pandemic in history. It causes several complications such as shock, pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and organ failure. The objective was to determine COVID-19 outcomes and risk factors in the intensive care (ICU) setting.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was conducted. Adult patients with a positive RT-PCR test for COVID-19 admitted to ICUs of a tertiary care hospital between 2020 and 2022 were included. Patients who had severe complex trauma were excluded. The outcomes examined included ventilation use and duration, length of stay (LOS), and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 964 patients were included. The mean ( ± standard deviation, SD) age was 63.7 ± 16.9 years. The majority of the patients were males (59.0 %) and Saudi (75.7 %). Ventilation use was documented in 443 (57.1 %) patients, with a mean ( ± SD) ventilation duration of 9.7 ± 8.4 days. Death occurred in 361 (37.4 %) patients after a mean ( ± SD) of 33.3 ± 44.5 days from infection. The mean ( ± SD) LOS was 30.6 ± 54.1 days in hospital and 5.2 ± 5.4 days in ICU. Ventilation use was associated with older age, males, longer ICU LOS, mortality, and admission to medical-surgical ICU. Crude mortality use was associated with older age, longer ICU LOS, use of ventilator, shorter ventilation duration, and admission to medical-surgical or respiratory ICUs.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 patients admitted to adult ICUs are at high risk of death and mechanical ventilation. The crude risks of both outcomes are higher in older age and longer ICU LOS and are very variable by ICU type.

Tele-Critical Care Support Outside the Intensive Care Unit

Tele-intensive care unit (ICU), or Tele Critical Care (TCC), has been in active use for 25 years and has expanded beyond the original model to support critically ill patients beyond the confines of the ICU. Here, the author reviews the role of TCC in supporting rapid response events, critical care in emergency departments, and disaster and pandemic responses. The ability to rapidly expand critical care services has important capacity and care quality implications. Moreover, as TCC infrastructure becomes less expensive, the opportunities to leverage this care modality also have potentially important financial benefits.

Lung Protective Ventilation Adherence and Outcomes for Patients With COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Treated in an Intermediate Care Unit Repurposed to ICU Level of Care

OBJECTIVE

During the COVID-19 pandemic, some centers converted intermediate care units (IMCUs) to COVID-19 ICUs (IMCU/ICUs). In this study, we compared adherence to lung protective ventilation (LPV) and outcomes for patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) treated in an IMCU/ICU versus preexisting medical ICUs (MICUs).

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study using electronic medical record data.

SETTING

Two academic medical centers from March 2020 to September 2020 (period 1) and October 2020 to May 2021 (period 2), which capture the first two COVID-19 surges in this health system.

PATIENTS

Adults with COVID-19 receiving invasive mechanical ventilation who met ARDS oxygenation criteria (Pao2/Fio2 ≤ 300 mm Hg or Spo2/Fio2 ≤ 315).

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We defined LPV adherence as the percent of the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation that met a restrictive definition of LPV of, tidal volume/predicted body weight (Vt/PBW) less than or equal to 6.5 mL/kg and plateau pressure (Pplat) less than or equal to 30 cm H2o. In an expanded definition, we added that if Pplat is greater than 30 cm H2o, Vt/PBW had to be less than 6.0 mL/kg. Using the restricted definition, period 1 adherence was lower among 133 IMCU/ICU versus 199 MICU patients (92% [95% CI, 50-100] vs. 100% [86-100], p = 0.05). Period 2 adherence was similar between groups (100% [75-100] vs. 95% CI [65-100], p = 0.68). A similar pattern was observed using the expanded definition. For the full study period, the adjusted hazard of death at 90 days was lower in IMCU/ICU versus MICU patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55-0.99]), whereas ventilator liberation by day 28 was similar between groups (adjusted subdistribution HR 1.09 [95% CI, 0.85-1.39]).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with COVID-19 ARDS treated in an IMCU/ICU, LPV adherence was similar to, and observed survival better than those treated in preexisting MICUs. With adequate resources, protocols, and staffing, IMCUs provide an effective source of additional ICU capacity for patients with acute respiratory failure.

Critical care bed capacity in Asian countries and regions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the importance of critical care. The aim of the current study was to compare the number of adult critical care beds in relation to population size in Asian countries and regions before (2017) and during (2022) the pandemic.

Methods

This observational study collected data closest to 2022 on critical care beds (intensive care units and intermediate care units) in 12 middle-income and 7 high-income economies (using the 2022-2023 World Bank classification), through a mix of methods including government sources, national critical care societies, personal contacts, and data extrapolation. Data were compared with a prior study from 2017 of the same countries and regions.

Findings

The cumulative number of critical care beds per 100,000 population increased from 3.0 in 2017 to 9.4 in 2022 (p = 0.003). The median figure for middle-income economies increased from 2.6 (interquartile range [IQR] 1.7-7.8) to 6.6 (IQR 2.2-13.3), and that for high-income economies increased from 11.4 (IQR 7.3-22.8) to 13.9 (IQR 10.7-21.7). Only 3 countries did not see a rise in bed capacity. Where data were available in 2022, 10.9% of critical care beds were in single rooms (median 5.0% in middle-income and 20.3% in high-income economies), and 5.3% had negative pressure (median 0.7% in middle-income and 18.5% in high-income economies).

Interpretation

Critical care bed capacity in the studied Asian countries and regions increased close to three-fold from 2017 to 2022. Much of this increase was attributed to middle-income economies, but substantial heterogeneity exists.

Funding

None.

Physical rehabilitation while awake, intubated and proned for COVID-19-associated severe acute respiratory distress syndrome

This case study demonstrates the implementation of evidence-based guidelines in the intensive care unit setting, including light sedation and early physical rehabilitation while receiving prone positioning and lung protective mechanical ventilation for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Association Between Nurse Copatient Illness Severity and Mortality in the ICU

OBJECTIVES

In the context of traditional nurse-to-patient ratios, ICU patients are typically paired with one or more copatients, creating interdependencies that may affect clinical outcomes. We aimed to examine the effect of copatient illness severity on ICU mortality.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records from a multihospital health system from 2018 to 2020. We identified nurse-to-patient assignments for each 12-hour shift using a validated algorithm. We defined copatient illness severity as whether the index patient's copatient received mechanical ventilation or vasoactive support during the shift. We used proportional hazards regression with time-varying covariates to assess the relationship between copatient illness severity and 28-day ICU mortality.

SETTING

Twenty-four ICUs in eight hospitals.

PATIENTS

Patients hospitalized in the ICU between January 1, 2018, and August 31, 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The main analysis included 20,650 patients and 84,544 patient-shifts. Regression analyses showed a patient's risk of death increased when their copatient received both mechanical ventilation and vasoactive support (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.30; 95% CI, 1.05-1.61; p = 0.02) or vasoactive support alone (HR: 1.82; 95% CI, 1.39-2.38; p < 0.001), compared with situations in which the copatient received neither treatment. However, if the copatient was solely on mechanical ventilation, there was no significant increase in the risk of death (HR: 1.03; 95% CI, 0.86-1.23; p = 0.78). Sensitivity analyses conducted on cohorts with varying numbers of copatients consistently showed an increased risk of death when a copatient received vasoactive support.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that considering copatient illness severity, alongside the existing practice of considering individual patient conditions, during the nurse-to-patient assignment process may be an opportunity to improve ICU outcomes.

Inpatient Costs of Treating Patients With COVID-19

Importance

With more than 6.2 million hospitalizations due to COVID-19 in the US, recognition of the average hospital costs to provide inpatient care during the pandemic is necessary to understanding the national medical resource use and improving public health readiness and related policies.

Objective

To examine the mean cost to provide inpatient care to treat COVID-19 and how it varied through the pandemic waves and by important sociodemographic patient characteristics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used inpatient-level data from March 1, 2020, to March 31, 2022, extracted from a repository of clinical, administrative, and financial information covering 97% of academic medical centers across the US.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Cost to produce care for each stay was calculated using direct hospital costs to provide care adjusted for geographic differences in labor costs using area wage indices.

Results

The sample included 1 333 404 stays with a primary or secondary COVID-19 diagnosis from 841 hospitals. The cohort included 692 550 (52%) men, with mean (SD) age of 59.2 (17.5) years. The adjusted mean cost of an inpatient stay was $11 275 (95% CI, $11 252-$11 297) overall, increasing from $10 394 (95% CI, $10 228-$10 559) at the end of March 2020 to $13 072 (95% CI, $12 528-$13 617) by the end of March 2022. Patients with specific comorbidities had significantly higher mean costs than their counterparts: those with obesity incurred an additional $2924 in inpatient stay costs, and those with coagulation deficiency incurred an additional $3017 in inpatient stay costs. Stays during which the patient required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) had an adjusted mean cost of $36 484 (95% CI, $34 685-$38 284).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study, an adjusted mean hospital cost to provide care for patients with COVID-19 increased more than 5 times the rate of medical inflation overall. This appeared to be explained partly by changes in the use of ECMO, which increased over time.

The Impact of Visitor Restrictions During COVID-19 Pandemic on Bereaved Family Members of Patients in Palliative Care Units

COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the families of patients in Palliative Care Units because of the visitor restrictions which were introduced to reduce the risk of infection. This study investigates how the bereaved families of the patients who died in end-of-life care during the pandemic evaluate the visitor restrictions and how the lack of direct communication with the patient affected them. We conducted a quantitative survey using an anonymous self-administered questionnaire. Participants were the bereaved families of patients who died in a Palliative Care Unit from April 2020 to March 2021. Their perspectives on the negative impact of COVID-19 pandemic on visitations, visitor restrictions, the quality of medical care in the month before the death of the patient, and online visitations were recorded in the survey. The results show that most participants experienced a negative impact on visitations. However, most respondents felt that the restrictions were unavoidable. According to visitor permissions in patients' last days, bereaved families were satisfied with the medical care provided for the patient and the amount of time spent with the patient in his/her last days. The importance of direct meetings during the last days of the patients' life for their family members was presented. We suggest further research to find measures which enable visitation in palliative care units, as caregiving from family and friends and maintaining COVID safety regulations are equally significant in end-of-life care.

Physician and administrator experience of preparing to implement Ontario's intensive care unit Triage Emergency Standard of Care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

As the COVID-19 pandemic created a surge in demand for critical care resources, the province of Ontario, Canada, released the Adult Critical Care Clinical Emergency Standard of Care for Major Surge (Emergency Standard of Care [ESoC]), a triage framework to guide the allocation of critical care resources in the expectation that intensive care units would be overwhelmed. Our aim was to understand physicians' and administrators' experiences and perceptions of planning to implement the ESoC, and to identify ways to improve critical care triage processes for future pandemics.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with critical care, emergency and internal medicine physicians, and hospital administrators from various Ontario health regions who were involved in their hospital's or region's ESoC implementation planning. Interviews were conducted virtually between April and October 2021. We analyzed the data using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We conducted interviews with 11 physicians and 10 hospital administrators representing 9 health regions. We identified 4 themes regarding participants' preparation to implement the ESoC: infrastructure to enable effective triage implementation; social, medical and political supports to enable effective triage implementation; moral dimensions of triage implementation; and communication of triage results. Participants outlined administrative and implementation-related improvements that could be provided at the provincial level, such as billing codes for ESoC. They also suggested improving ethical supports for the usability and quality of the ESoC (e.g., designating an ethicist in each region), and ways to improve the efficiency and usability of the tools for assessing short-term mortality risk (e.g., create information technology solutions such as a dashboard).

INTERPRETATION

The implementation of a jurisdiction-level triage framework poses moral challenges for a health care system, but it also requires dedicated infrastructure, as well as institutional supports. Lessons learned from Ontario's process to prepare for ESoC implementation, as well as participants' suggestions, can be used for planning for current and future pandemics.

In Situ Simulation as a Quality Improvement Tool to Identify and Mitigate Latent Safety Threats for Emergency Department SARS-CoV-2 Airway Management: A Multi-Institutional Initiative

BACKGROUND

In situ simulation has emerged as a powerful quality improvement (QI) tool in the identification of latent safety threats (LSTs). Following the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 at an urban epicenter of the disease, a multi-institutional collaborative was formed to integrate an in situ simulation protocol across five emergency departments (EDs) for systems improvement of acute airway management.

METHODS

A prospective, multi-institutional QI initiative using two Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles was implemented across five EDs. Each institution conducted simulations involving mannequins in acute respiratory failure requiring definitive airways. Simulations and systems-based debriefs were standardized. LSTs were collected in an online database, focused on (1) equipment availability, (2) infection control, and (3) communication.

RESULTS

From June 2020 through May 2021, 58 of 70 (82.9%) planned simulations were completed across five sites with 328 unique individual participants. Overall LSTs per simulation (7.00-4.69, p < 0.001) and equipment LSTs (3.00-1.46, p < 0.001) decreased from cycle 1 to cycle 2. Changes in mean LSTs for infection control and communication categories varied among sites. There was no correlation between total LSTs or any of the categories and team size. Number of beds occupied was significantly negatively correlated with total and infection control LSTs.

CONCLUSION

This study was unique in simultaneously running a structured in situ protocol across numerous diverse institutions during a global pandemic. This initiative found similar categories of threats across sites, and the protocol developed empowered participants to implement changes to mitigate identified threats.

Ethical analysis examining the prioritisation of living donor transplantation in times of healthcare rationing

The transplant community has faced unprecedented challenges balancing risks of performing living donor transplants during the COVID-19 pandemic with harms of temporarily suspending these procedures. Decisions regarding postponement of living donation stem from its designation as an elective procedure, this despite that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services categorise transplant procedures as tier 3b (high medical urgency-do not postpone). In times of severe resource constraints, health systems may be operating under crisis or contingency standards of care. In this manuscript, the United Network for Organ Sharing Ethics Workgroup explores prioritisation of living donation where health systems operate under contingency standards of care and provide a framework with recommendations to the transplant community on how to approach living donation in these circumstances.To guide the transplant community in future decisions, this analysis suggests that: (1) living donor transplants represent an important option for individuals with end-stage liver and kidney disease and should not be suspended uniformly under contingency standards, (2) exposure risk to SARS-CoV-2 should be balanced with other risks, such as exposure risks at dialysis centres. Because many of these risks are not quantifiable, donors and recipients should be included in discussions on what constitutes acceptable risk, (3) transplant hospitals should strive to maintain a critical transplant workforce and avoid diverting expertise, which could negatively impact patient preparedness for transplant, (4) transplant hospitals should consider implementing protocols to ensure early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections and discuss these measures with donors and recipients in a process of shared decision-making.

Intensivist physician-to-patient ratios and mortality in the intensive care unit

PURPOSE

A high daily census may hinder the ability of physicians to deliver quality care in the intensive care unit (ICU). We sought to determine the relationship between intensivist-to-patient ratios and mortality among ICU patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of intensivist-to-patient ratios in 29 ICUs in 10 hospitals in the United States from 2018 to 2020. We used meta-data from progress notes in the electronic health record to determine an intensivist-specific caseload for each ICU day. We then fit a multivariable proportional hazards model with time-varying covariates to estimate the relationship between the daily intensivist-to-patient ratio and ICU mortality at 28 days.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 51,656 patients, 210,698 patient days, and 248 intensivist physicians. The average caseload per day was 11.8 (standard deviation: 5.7). There was no association between the intensivist-to-patient ratio and mortality (hazard ratio for each additional patient: 0.987, 95% confidence interval: 0.968-1.007, p = 0.2). This relationship persisted when we defined the ratio as caseload over the sample-wide average (hazard ratio: 0.907, 95% confidence interval: 0.763-1.077, p = 0.26) and cumulative days with a caseload over the sample-wide average (hazard ratio: 0.991, 95% confidence interval: 0.966-1.018, p = 0.52). The relationship was not modified by the presence of physicians-in-training, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants (p value for interaction term: 0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality for ICU patients appears resistant to high intensivist caseloads. These results may not generalize to ICUs organized differently than those in this sample, such as ICUs outside the United States.

Team dynamics in a COVID-19 intensive care unit: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, new intensive care units (ICUs) were created and clinicians were assigned or volunteered to work in these ICUs. These new ICU teams were newly formed and may have had varying practice styles which could affect team dynamics. The purpose of our qualitative descriptive study was to explore clinician perceptions of team dynamics in this newly formed ICU and specifically understand the challenges and potential improvements in this environment to guide future planning and preparedness in ICUs.

METHODS

We conducted 14 semistructured one-on-one interviews with six nurses and eight physicians from a newly formed 36- to 50-bed medical ICU designed for COVID-19 patients in a teaching hospital. We purposively sampled and recruited ICU nurses, medical/surgical nurses, fellows, and attending physicians (with pulmonary/critical care and anaesthesia training) to participate. Participants were asked about team dynamics in the ICU, its challenges, and potential solutions. We then used a rapid analytic approach by first deductively categorising interview data into themes, based on our interview guide, to create a unique data summary for each interview. Then, these data were transferred to a matrix to compare data across all interviews and inductively analysed these data to provide deeper insights into team dynamics in ICUs.

RESULTS

We identified two themes that impacted team dynamics positively (facilitator) and negatively (barrier): interpersonal factors (individual character traits and interactions among clinicians) and structural factors (unit-level factors affecting workflow, organisation, and administration). Clinicians had several suggestions to improve team dynamics (e.g., scheduling to ensure clinicians familiar with one another worked together, standardisation of care processes across teams, and disciplines).

CONCLUSIONS

In a newly formed COVID ICU, interpersonal factors and structural factors impacted the team's ability to work together. Considering team dynamics during ICU reorganisation is crucial and requires thoughtful attention to interpersonal and structural factors.

Nursing workforce deployment and intensive care unit strain during the COVID-19 pandemic in Victoria, Australia

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic demanded intensive care units (ICUs) globally to expand to meet increasing patient numbers requiring critical care. Critical care nurses were a finite resource in this challenge to meet growing patient numbers, necessitating redeployment of nursing staff to work in ICUs.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to describe the extent and manner by which the increased demand for ICU care during the COVID-19 pandemic was met by ICU nursing workforce expansion in the late 2021 and early 2022 in Victoria, Australia.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of Victorian ICUs who contributed nursing data to the Critical Health Information System from 1 December 2021 to 11 April 2022. Bedside nursing workforce data, in categories as defined by Safer Care Victoria's pandemic response guidelines, were analysed. The primary outcome was 'insufficient ICU skill mix'-whenever a site had more patients needing 1:1 critical care nursing care than the mean daily number of experienced critical care nursing staff.

RESULTS

Overall, data from 24 of the 47 Victorian ICUs were eligible for analysis. Insufficient ICU skill mix occurred on 10.3% (280/2725) days at 66.7% (16/24) of ICUs, most commonly during the peak phase from December to mid-February. The insufficient ICU skill mix was more likely to occur when there were more additional ICU beds open over the 'business-as-usual' number. Counterfactual analysis suggested that had there been no redeployment of staff to the ICU, reduced nursing ratios, with inability to provide 1:1 care, would have occurred on 15.2% (415/2725) days at 91.7% (22/24) ICUs.

CONCLUSION

The redeployment of nurses into the ICU was necessary. However, despite this, at times, some ICUs had insufficient staff to cope with the number and acuity of patients. Further research is needed to examine the impact of ICU nursing models of care on patient outcomes and on nurse outcomes.

Characteristics of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the first to fifth waves of infection: a report from the Japan COVID-19 Task Force

BACKGROUND

We aimed to elucidate differences in the characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring hospitalization in Japan, by COVID-19 waves, from conventional strains to the Delta variant.

METHODS

We used secondary data from a database and performed a retrospective cohort study that included 3261 patients aged ≥ 18 years enrolled from 78 hospitals that participated in the Japan COVID-19 Task Force between February 2020 and September 2021.

RESULTS

Patients hospitalized during the second (mean age, 53.2 years [standard deviation {SD}, ± 18.9]) and fifth (mean age, 50.7 years [SD ± 13.9]) COVID-19 waves had a lower mean age than those hospitalized during the other COVID-19 waves. Patients hospitalized during the first COVID-19 wave had a longer hospital stay (mean, 30.3 days [SD ± 21.5], p < 0.0001), and post-hospitalization complications, such as bacterial infections (21.3%, p < 0.0001), were also noticeable. In addition, there was an increase in the use of drugs such as remdesivir/baricitinib/tocilizumab/steroids during the latter COVID-19 waves. In the fifth COVID-19 wave, patients exhibited a greater number of presenting symptoms, and a higher percentage of patients required oxygen therapy at the time of admission. However, the percentage of patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation was the highest in the first COVID-19 wave and the mortality rate was the highest in the third COVID-19 wave.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified differences in clinical characteristics of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in each COVID-19 wave up to the fifth COVID-19 wave in Japan. The fifth COVID-19 wave was associated with greater disease severity on admission, the third COVID-19 wave had the highest mortality rate, and the first COVID-19 wave had the highest percentage of patients requiring mechanical ventilation.

Surging ICU during COVID-19 pandemic: an overview

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed great challenges to intensive care units (ICUs) across the globe. The objective of this review is to provide an overview on how ICU surging was managed during COVID-19 pandemic, with a special focus on papers published in the last 18 months.

RECENT FINDINGS

From the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was apparent that the biggest challenge was the inequity of access to an adequately equipped and staffed ICU bed. The first wave was overwhelming; large surge of patients required critical care, resources were limited and non-COVID-19 care processes were severely compromised. Various approaches were used to address ICU staffing shortage and to expand the physical ICU space capacity. Because of restrictions to family visitations in most ICUs, the pandemic posed a threat to communication and family-centered ICU care. The pandemic, especially during the first wave, was accompanied by a high level of apprehension in the community, many uncertainties about clinical course and therapy and an influx of speculations and misinformation.

SUMMARY

Although healthcare systems learned how to face some of the challenges with subsequent waves, the pandemic had persistent effects on healthcare systems.

Impact of ICU strain on outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute surge events result in health capacity strain, which can result in deviations from normal care, activation of contingencies and decisions related to resource allocation. This review discusses the impact of health capacity strain on patient centered outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

This manuscript discusses the lack of validated metrics for ICU strain capacity and a need for understanding the complex interrelationships of strain with patient outcomes. Recent work through the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has shown that acute surge events are associated with significant increase in hospital mortality. Though causal data on the differential impact of surge actions and resource availability on patient outcomes remains limited the overall signal consistently highlights the link between ICU strain and critical care outcomes in both normal and surge conditions.

SUMMARY

An understanding of ICU strain is fundamental to the appropriate clinical care for critically ill patients. Accounting for stain on outcomes in critically ill patients allows for minimization of variation in care and an ability of a given healthcare system to provide equitable, and quality care even in surge scenarios.

Avoidable intensive care unit resource use and costs of unvaccinated patients with COVID-19: a historical population-based cohort study

PURPOSE

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been proven effective at preventing poor outcomes from COVID-19; however, voluntary vaccination rates have been suboptimal. We assessed the potential avoidable intensive care unit (ICU) resource use and associated costs had unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 been fully vaccinated.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study of persons aged 12 yr or greater in Alberta (2021 population ~ 4.4 million) admitted to any ICU with COVID-19 from 6 September 2021 to 4 January 2022. We used publicly available aggregate data on COVID-19 infections, vaccination status, and health services use. Intensive care unit admissions, bed-days, lengths of stay, and costs were estimated for patients with COVID-19 and stratified by vaccination status.

RESULTS

In total, 1,053 patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 were unvaccinated, 42 were partially vaccinated, and 173 were fully vaccinated (cumulative incidence 230.6, 30.8, and 5.5 patients/100,000 population, respectively). Cumulative incidence rate ratios of ICU admission were 42.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.7 to 44.9) for unvaccinated patients and 5.6 (95% CI, 4.1 to 7.6) for partially vaccinated patients when compared with fully vaccinated patients. During the study period, 1,028 avoidable ICU admissions and 13,015 bed-days were recorded for unvaccinated patients and the total avoidable costs were CAD 61.3 million. The largest opportunity to avoid ICU bed-days and costs was in unvaccinated patients aged 50 to 69 yr.

CONCLUSIONS

Unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 had substantially greater rates of ICU admissions, ICU bed-days, and ICU-related costs than vaccinated patients did. This increased resource use would have been potentially avoidable had these unvaccinated patients been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.

Comparison of clinical characteristics and hospital mortality in critically ill patients without COVID-19 before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multicenter, retrospective, propensity score-matched study

Background

The high transmission and fatality rates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) strain intensive care resources and affect the treatment and prognosis of critically ill patients without COVID-19. Therefore, this study evaluated the differences in characteristics, clinical course, and prognosis of critically ill medical patients without COVID-19 before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included patients from three university-affiliated tertiary hospitals. Demographic data and data on the severity, clinical course, and prognosis of medical patients without COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) via the emergency room (ER) before (from January 1 to May 31, 2019) and during (from January 1 to May 31, 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic were obtained from electronic medical records. Propensity score matching was performed to compare hospital mortality between patients before and during the pandemic.

Results

This study enrolled 1161 patients (619 before and 542 during the pandemic). During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) 3 and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores, assessed upon ER and ICU admission, were significantly higher than those before the pandemic (p < 0.05). The lengths of stay in the ER, ICU, and hospital were also longer (p < 0.05). Finally, the hospital mortality rates were higher during the pandemic than before (215 [39.7%] vs. 176 [28.4%], p < 0.001). However, in the propensity score-matched patients, hospital mortality did not differ between the groups (p = 0.138). The COVID-19 pandemic did not increase the risk of hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.405, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.937–2.107, p = 0.100). SAPS 3, SOFA score, and do-not-resuscitate orders increased the risk of in-hospital mortality in the multivariate logistic regression model.

Conclusions

In propensity score-matched patients with similarly severe conditions, hospital mortality before and during the COVID-19 pandemic did not differ significantly. However, hospital mortality was higher during the COVID-19 pandemic in unmatched patients in more severe conditions. These findings imply collateral damage to non-COVID-19 patients due to shortages in medical resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, strategic management of medical resources is required to avoid these consequences.

Contributions and challenges of community pharmacists during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

Background

Healthcare services across the world have been deeply impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. In primary care, community pharmacists have had an important role in the frontline healthcare response to the pandemic.

Objectives

This study aimed to explore the experiences, contributions and perceived challenges of community pharmacists regarding the provision of healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with community pharmacists in France. Participants were recruited through a professional organization of pharmacists combined with a snowballing technique. Interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results

A total of 16 community pharmacists participated in the interviews. Study participants described providing a range of novel services in response to the pandemic on top of continuing their usual services. All participants described providing preventative services to reduce and mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2, such as education on hygiene and social distancing, delivery of face masks and hand sanitizer and adjusting pharmacy premises. Most respondents also described being involved in SARS-CoV-2 detection through screening and performing antigen testing in pharmacies. Participants reported being actively involved in COVID-19 vaccination by educating the general public about vaccines, facilitating their distribution to general practitioners as well as administering vaccines. Over half the respondents described rapidly changing guidelines and service users’ anxiety as challenges to the provision of healthcare services during the pandemic.

Conclusions

This study suggests that community pharmacists have significantly contributed to the response to the COVID-19 pandemic by ensuring continuity of pharmaceutical services and providing novel screening, testing and vaccination services. Their roles and responsibilities during the COVID-19 health crisis indicate that they can play an important role in the management of emerging infectious diseases.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40545-022-00438-8.

Telemedicine Intensive Care Unit (Tele-ICU) Implementation During COVID-19: A Scoping Review

Telemedicine intensive care unit (Tele-ICU) programs entail command centers staffed with intensivists and critical care nurses who electronically aid with and deliver real-time information to frontline clinicians. The benefits of Tele-ICU are numerous, but the barriers to it often prove insurmountable, accounting for slow adoption in rural and underserved areas where it is needed the most. Remote monitoring can quickly detect patient deterioration, while consultation provided by a remote intensivist expands the capabilities of smaller facilities. The emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought about a sense of urgency, paving the way for the successful adaptation of tele-intensive care concepts. The goal of this scoping review is to map out the available published data regarding healthcare professionals’ experiences with implementing Tele-ICU modalities during the COVID-19 pandemic. A primary literature search was performed on PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases from October 2020 to October 2021. Of the 1,083 records screened, 19 were identified as meeting our inclusion criteria and selected for the final scoping review. Five major areas of Tele-ICU use were identified: teleconsultation, telerounding, telemonitoring, family visitation via teleconference, and changing of hospital infrastructure. A heterogeneous mix of improvised Tele-ICU platforms emerged with a common theme of interdisciplinary and family collaboration in the care of critically ill patients. Existing Tele-ICU systems were expanded, and novel programs were launched. A groundbreaking national network in the U.S. (NETCCN) will standardize the deployment of Tele-ICU and expand its reach. Future research should focus on determining accurate costs and the most reliable forms of remote communication, physician compact agreement licensure, the practical composition of Tele-ICU teams, and standardized access to the electronic health record.

Deployment of Tele-ICU Respiratory Therapy and the Creation of an eRT Service Line

Penn Medicine launched a 24-7 telemedicine respiratory therapist (eRT) service as part of its tele–critical care medicine (tele-CCM) service serving seven hospitals and more than 320 critical care beds. Service line interventions were focused on protocolized evidence-based practices, safety, documentation compliance, and urgent emergent ad hoc clinical needs. Concomitantly, the eRTs were available to respond to urgent and emergent interventions on the basis of the clinical bedside situation. Their activity was triggered by Penn E-lert staff (serving the tele-ICUs), bedside staff, algorithmic trigger software, or the eRT’s own review of a patient’s clinical condition. A standardized data collection was deployed to gather information about the interventions. The value of the eRT service was defined in terms of estimated lives saved by implementing the standards of care earlier than the bedside staff would or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) algorithmic trigger and by intervening during emergent and urgent clinical request, improving care delivery, and complying with best clinical practices, and by the time freed for onsite staff to perform other duties. Between May 2020 and August 2021, eRTs registered 31,609 activities; 97.8% of interventions were related to the routine established workflows, while 1.9% were urgent and 0.3% emergent. In 51.2% of all eRT accomplished activities, no communication with other staff was needed. When communication did take place, eRTs connected with the bedside respiratory therapist in 36.7% of interactions, followed by house staff (7.2%), advanced practice providers (5.2%), and registered nurses (1.6%). The eRTs communicated via phone (81.4%), asynchronous text platform (16%), or tele-CCM software (1.4%). While prompted by staffing, safety, and logistics challenges during a Covid-19 surge, the resulting eRT service line has been well received and has become a part of the standard of care. Overall efficiency of respiratory care service delivery was increased as Penn retained staff and increased the flexibility of bedside therapists. Furthermore, the eRT service detected unfavorable practice patterns in ARDS treatment and intervened before the ARDS algorithmic trigger was activated or acted upon. Some of the tasks can be accomplished by the eRT in a shorter amount of time than it would take bedside staff. In addition, the remote staffing reduced personal protective equipment utilization. All of these gains translated into postpandemic time savings. Penn’s experience shows that the eRT care model can be transformed into a system-valued proposition and retained with sustained benefit beyond the pandemic surge.

External validation of the 4C Mortality Score for hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in the RECOVER network

OBJECTIVES

Estimating mortality risk in hospitalised SARS-CoV-2+ patients may help with choosing level of care and discussions with patients. The Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium Mortality Score (4C Score) is a promising COVID-19 mortality risk model. We examined the association of risk factors with 30-day mortality in hospitalised, full-code SARS-CoV-2+ patients and investigated the discrimination and calibration of the 4C Score. This was a retrospective cohort study of SARS-CoV-2+ hospitalised patients within the RECOVER (REgistry of suspected COVID-19 in EmeRgency care) network.

SETTING

99 emergency departments (EDs) across the USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients ≥18 years old, positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the ED, and hospitalised.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Death within 30 days of the index visit. We performed logistic regression analysis, reporting multivariable risk ratios (MVRRs) and calculated the area under the ROC curve (AUROC) and mean prediction error for the original 4C Score and after dropping the C reactive protein (CRP) component.

RESULTS

Of 6802 hospitalised patients with COVID-19, 1149 (16.9%) died within 30 days. The 30-day mortality was increased with age 80+ years (MVRR=5.79, 95% CI 4.23 to 7.34); male sex (MVRR=1.17, 1.05 to 1.28); and nursing home/assisted living facility residence (MVRR=1.29, 1.1 to 1.48). The 4C Score had comparable discrimination in the RECOVER dataset compared with the original 4C validation dataset (AUROC: RECOVER 0.786 (95% CI 0.773 to 0.799), 4C validation 0.763 (95% CI 0.757 to 0.769). Score-specific mortalities in our sample were lower than in the 4C validation sample (mean prediction error 6.0%). Dropping the CRP component from the 4C Score did not substantially affect discrimination and 4C risk estimates were now close (mean prediction error 0.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

We independently validated 4C Score as predicting risk of 30-day mortality in hospitalised SARS-CoV-2+ patients. We recommend dropping the CRP component of the score and using our recalibrated mortality risk estimates.

Drug-Free Nasal Spray as a Barrier against SARS-CoV-2 and Its Delta Variant: In Vitro Study of Safety and Efficacy in Human Nasal Airway Epithelia

The nasal epithelium is a key portal for infection by respiratory viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 and represents an important target for prophylactic and therapeutic interventions. In the present study, we test the safety and efficacy of a newly developed nasal spray (AM-301, marketed as Bentrio) against infection by SARS-CoV-2 and its Delta variant on an in vitro 3D-model of the primary human nasal airway epithelium. Safety was assessed in assays for tight junction integrity, cytotoxicity and cilia beating frequency. Efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 infection was evaluated in pre-viral load and post-viral load application on airway epithelium. No toxic effects of AM-301 on the nasal epithelium were found. Prophylactic treatment with AM-301 significantly reduced viral titer vs. controls over 4 days, reaching a maximum reduction of 99% in case of infection from the wild-type SARS-CoV-2 variant and more than 83% in case of the Delta variant. When AM-301 administration was started 24 h after infection, viral titer was reduced by about 12-folds and 3-folds on Day 4. The results suggest that AM-301 is safe and significantly decelerates SARS-CoV-2 replication in cell culture inhibition assays of prophylaxis (pre-viral load application) and mitigation (post-viral load application). Its physical (non-pharmaceutical) mechanism of action, safety and efficacy warrant additional investigations both in vitro and in vivo for safety and efficacy against a broad spectrum of airborne viruses and allergens.

Does Unprecedented ICU Capacity Strain, As Experienced During the COVID-19 Pandemic, Impact Patient Outcome?

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether patients admitted to an ICU during times of unprecedented ICU capacity strain, during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom, experienced a higher risk of death.

DESIGN

Multicenter, observational cohort study using routine clinical audit data.

SETTING

Adult general ICUs participating the Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre Case Mix Programme in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

PATIENTS

One-hundred thirty-thousand six-hundred eighty-nine patients admitted to 210 adult general ICUs in 207 hospitals.

INTERVENTIONS

Multilevel, mixed effects, logistic regression models were used to examine the relationship between levels of ICU capacity strain on the day of admission (typical low, typical, typical high, pandemic high, and pandemic extreme) and risk-adjusted hospital mortality.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In adjusted analyses, compared with patients admitted during periods of typical ICU capacity strain, we found that COVID-19 patients admitted during periods of pandemic high or pandemic extreme ICU capacity strain during the first wave had no difference in hospital mortality, whereas those admitted during the pandemic high or pandemic extreme ICU capacity strain in the second wave had a 17% (odds ratio [OR], 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.30) and 15% (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00-1.31) higher odds of hospital mortality, respectively. For non-COVID-19 patients, there was little difference in trend between waves, with those admitted during periods of pandemic high and pandemic extreme ICU capacity strain having 16% (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.08-1.25) and 30% (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.14-1.48) higher overall odds of acute hospital mortality, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients admitted to ICU during the pandemic, unprecedented levels of ICU capacity strain were significantly associated with higher acute hospital mortality, after accounting for differences in baseline characteristics. Further study into possible differences in the provision of care and outcome for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients is needed.

The Stress and Resilience Town Hall: A systems response to support the health workforce during COVID-19 and beyond

OBJECTIVE

The COVID-19 pandemic is a traumatic stressor resulting in anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, and burnout among healthcare workers. We describe an intervention to support the health workforce and summarize results from its 40-week implementation in a large, tri-state health system during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHOD

We conducted 121 virtual and interactive Stress and Resilience Town Halls attended by 3555 healthcare workers. Town hall participants generated 1627 stressors and resilience strategies that we coded and analyzed using rigorous qualitative methods (Kappa = 0.85).

RESULTS

We identify six types of stressors and eight types of resilience strategies reported by healthcare workers, how these changed over time, and how town halls were responsive to emerging health workforce needs. We show that town halls dedicated to groups working together yielded 84% higher mean attendance and more sharing of stressors and resilience strategies than those offered generally across the health system, and that specific stressors and strategies are reported consistently while others vary markedly over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The virtual and interactive Stress and Resilience Town Hall is an accessible, scalable, and sustainable intervention to build mutual support, wellness, and resilience among healthcare workers and within hospitals and health systems responding to emerging crises, pandemics, and disasters.

Unmanaged Pharmacogenomic and Drug Interaction Risk Associations with Hospital Length of Stay among Medicare Advantage Members with COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Unmanaged pharmacogenomic and drug interaction risk can lengthen hospitalization and may have influenced the severe health outcomes seen in some COVID-19 patients. To determine if unmanaged pharmacogenomic and drug interaction risks were associated with longer lengths of stay (LOS) among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, we retrospectively reviewed medical and pharmacy claims from 6025 Medicare Advantage members hospitalized with COVID-19. Patients with a moderate or high pharmacogenetic interaction probability (PIP), which indicates the likelihood that testing would identify one or more clinically actionable gene–drug or gene–drug–drug interactions, were hospitalized for 9% (CI: 4–15%; p < 0.001) and 16% longer (CI: 8–24%; p < 0.001), respectively, compared to those with low PIP. Risk adjustment factor (RAF) score, a commonly used measure of disease burden, was not associated with LOS. High PIP was significantly associated with 12–22% longer LOS compared to low PIP in patients with hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A greater drug–drug interaction risk was associated with 10% longer LOS among patients with two or three chronic conditions. Thus, unmanaged pharmacogenomic risk was associated with longer LOS in these patients and managing this risk has the potential to reduce LOS in severely ill patients, especially those with chronic conditions.

The impact of resource limitations on care delivery and outcomes: routine variation, the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and persistent shortage

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Resource limitation, or capacity strain, has been associated with changes in care delivery, and in some cases, poorer outcomes among critically ill patients. This may result from normal variation in strain on available resources, chronic strain in persistently under-resourced settings, and less commonly because of acute surges in demand, as seen during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies confirmed existing evidence that high ICU strain is associated with ICU triage decisions, and that ICU strain may be associated with ICU patient mortality. Studies also demonstrated earlier discharge of ICU patients during high strain, suggesting that strain may promote patient flow efficiency. Several studies of strain resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic provided support for the concept of adaptability - that the surge not only caused detrimental strain but also provided experience with a novel disease entity such that outcomes improved over time. Chronically resource-limited settings faced even more challenging circumstances because of acute-on-chronic strain during the pandemic.

SUMMARY

The interaction between resource limitation and care delivery and outcomes is complex and incompletely understood. The COVID-19 pandemic provides a learning opportunity for strain response during both pandemic and nonpandemic times.

Content and Communication of Inpatient Family Visitation Policies During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Sequential Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Inpatient health care facilities restricted inpatient visitation due to the COVID-19 pandemic. There is no existing evidence of how they communicated these policies to the public nor the impact of their communication choices on public perception.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to describe patterns of inpatient visitation policies during the initial peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States and the communication of these policies to the general public, as well as to identify communication strategies that maximize positive impressions of the facility despite visitation restrictions.

METHODS

We conducted a sequential, exploratory, mixed methods study including a qualitative analysis of COVID-19 era visitation policies published on Pennsylvania-based facility websites, as captured between April 30 and May 20, 2020 (ie, during the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States). We also conducted a factorial survey-based experiment to test how key elements of hospitals' visitation policy communication are associated with individuals' willingness to seek care in October 2020. For analysis of the policies, we included all inpatient facilities in Pennsylvania. For the factorial experiment, US adults were drawn from internet research panels. The factorial survey-based experiment presented composite policies that varied in their justification for restricted visitation, the degree to which the facility expressed ownership of the policy, and the inclusion of family-centered care support plans. Our primary outcome was participants' willingness to recommend the hypothetical facility using a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

We identified 104 unique policies on inpatient visitation from 363 facilities' websites. The mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level for the policies was 14.2. Most policies prohibited family presence (99/104, 95.2%). Facilities justified the restricted visitation policies on the basis of community protection (59/104, 56.7%), authorities' guidance or regulations (34/104, 32.7%), or scientific rationale (23/104, 22.1%). A minority (38/104, 36.5%) addressed how restrictive visitation may impair family-centered care. Most of the policies analyzed used passive voice to communicate restrictions. A total of 1321 participants completed the web-based survey. Visitation policy elements significantly associated with willingness to recommend the facility included justifications based on community protection (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.24-1.68) or scientific rationale (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.12-1.51), rather than those based on a governing authority. The facility expressed a high degree of ownership over the decision (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04-1.29), rather than a low degree of ownership; and inclusion of family-centered care support plans (OR 2.80, 95% CI 2.51-3.12), rather than no such support.

CONCLUSIONS

Health systems can immediately improve public receptiveness of restrictive visitation policies by emphasizing community protection, ownership over the facility's policy, and promoting family-centered care.

Family Presence for Critically Ill Patients During a Pandemic

Family engagement is a key component of high-quality critical care, with known benefits for patients, care teams, and family members themselves. The COVID-19 pandemic led to rapid enactment of prohibitions or restrictions on visitation that now persist, particularly for patients with COVID-19. Reevaluation of these policies in response to advances in knowledge and resources since the early pandemic is critical because COVID-19 will continue to be a public health threat for months to years, and future pandemics are likely. This article reviews rationales and evidence for restricting or permitting family members' physical presence and provides broad guidance for health care systems to develop and implement policies that maximize benefit and minimize risk of family visitation during COVID-19 and future similar public health crises.

Prevalence of Burnout Among Respiratory Therapists Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: Burnout is a major challenge in health care, but its prevalence has not been evaluated in practicing respiratory therapist (RTs). The purpose of this study was to identify RT burnout prevalence and factors associated with RT burnout.Methods: An online survey was administered to 26 centers in the United States and between January and March 2021. Validated, quantitative, cross-sectional surveys were used to measure burnout and leadership domains. The survey was sent to department directors and distributed by the department directors to staff. Data analysis was descriptive and logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate risk factors, expressed as odds ratios (OR), for burnout.Results: The survey was distributed to 3,010 RTs, and the response rate was 37%. Seventy-nine percent of respondents reported burnout, 10% with severe, 32% with moderate, and 37% with mild burnout. Univariate analysis revealed those with burnout worked more hours per week, worked more hours per week in the ICU, primarily cared for adult patients, primarily delivered care via RT protocols, reported inadequate RT staffing, reported being unable to complete assigned work, were more frequently exposed to COVID-19, had a lower leadership score, and fewer had a positive view of leadership. Logistic regression revealed burnout climate (OR 9.38, p<0.001), inadequate RT staffing (OR 2.08 to 3.19, p=0.004 to 0.05), being unable to complete all work (OR 2.14 to 5.57, p=0.003 to 0.20), and missing work for any reason were associated with increased risk of burnout (OR 1.96, p=0.007). Not providing patient care (OR 0.18, p=0.02) and a positive leadership score (0.55, p=0.02) were associated with decreased risk of burnout.Conclusion: Burnout was common among RTs in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Good leadership was protective against burnout while inadequate staffing, inability to complete work, and burnout climate were associated with burnout.