Increasing the precision of simulated percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy-a pilot prototype device development study

Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) is a bedside medical procedure which sites a new tracheostomy tube in the front of the neck. The critical first step is accurate placement of a needle through the neck tissues into the trachea. Misplacement occurs in around 5% of insertions, causing morbidity, mortality, and delays to recovery. We aimed to develop and evaluate a prototype medical device to improve precision of initial PDT-needle insertion. The Guidance for Tracheostomy (GiFT) system communicates the relative locations of intra-tracheal target sensor and PDT-needle sensor to the operator. In simulated "difficult neck" models, GiFT significantly improved accuracy (mean difference 10.0 mm, ANOVA p < 0.001) with ten untrained laboratory-based participants and ten experienced medical participants. GiFT resulted in slower time-to-target (mean difference 56.1 s, p < 0.001) than unguided attempts, considered clinically insignificant. Our proof-of-concept study highlights GiFT's potential to significantly improve PDT accuracy, reduce procedural complications and offer bedside PDT to more patients.

Development, feasibility testing, and preliminary evaluation of the Communication with an Artificial airway Tool (CAT): Results of the Crit-CAT pilot study

BACKGROUND

A purpose-built outcome measure for assessing communication effectiveness in patients with an artificial airway is needed.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to develop the Communication with an Artificial airway Tool (CAT) and to test the feasibility and to preliminary evaluate the clinical metrics of the tool.

METHODS

Eligible patients with an artificial airway in the Intensive Care Unit were enrolled in the pilot study (Crit-CAT). The CAT was administered at least twice before and after the communication intervention. Item correlation analysis was performed. Participant and family member acceptability ratings and feedback were solicited. A qualitative thematic analysis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients with a mean age of 53 years (standard deviation [SD]: 19.26) were included. The clinician-reported scale was administered on 50 attempts (100%) with a mean completion time of 4.5 (SD: 0.77) minutes. The patient-reported scale was administered on 46 out of 49 attempts (94%) and took a mean of 1.5 (SD: 0.39) minutes to complete. The CAT was feasible for use in the Intensive Care Unit, with patients with either an endotracheal or tracheostomy tube, whilst receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or not, and while using either verbal or nonverbal modes of communication. Preliminary establishment of responsiveness, validity, and reliability was made. The tool was acceptable to participants and their family members.

CONCLUSION

The clinician-reported and patient-reported components of the study were feasible for use. The CAT has the potential to enable quantifiable comparison of communication interventions for patients with an artificial airway. Future research is required to determine external validity and reliability.

Bubble-PAPR: a phase 1 clinical evaluation of the comfort and perception of a prototype powered air-purifying respirator for use by healthcare workers in an acute hospital setting

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to design and produce a low-cost, ergonomic, hood-integrated powered air-purifying respirator (Bubble-PAPR) for pandemic healthcare use, offering optimal and equitable protection to all staff. We hypothesised that participants would rate Bubble-PAPR more highly than current filtering face piece (FFP3) face mask respiratory protective equipment (RPE) in the domains of comfort, perceived safety and communication.

DESIGN

Rapid design and evaluation cycles occurred based on the identified user needs. We conducted diary card and focus group exercises to identify relevant tasks requiring RPE. Lab-based safety standards established against British Standard BS-EN-12941 and EU2016/425 covering materials; inward particulate leakage; breathing resistance; clean air filtration and supply; carbon dioxide elimination; exhalation means and electrical safety. Questionnaire-based usability data from participating front-line healthcare staff before (usual RPE) and after using Bubble-PAPR.

SETTING

Overseen by a trial safety committee, evaluation progressed sequentially through laboratory, simulated, low-risk, then high-risk clinical environments of a single tertiary National Health Service hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

15 staff completed diary cards and focus groups. 91 staff from a range of clinical and non-clinical roles completed the study, wearing Bubble-PAPR for a median of 45 min (IQR 30-80 (15-120)). Participants self-reported a range of heights (mean 1.7 m (SD 0.1, range 1.5-2.0)), weights (72.4 kg (16.0, 47-127)) and body mass indices (25.3 (4.7, 16.7-42.9)).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Preuse particulometer 'fit testing' and evaluation against standards by an independent biomedical engineer.Primary:Perceived comfort (Likert scale).Secondary: Perceived safety, communication.

RESULTS

Mean fit factor 16 961 (10 participants). Bubble-PAPR mean comfort score 5.64 (SD 1.55) vs usual FFP3 2.96 (1.44) (mean difference 2.68 (95% CI 2.23 to 3.14, p<0.001). Secondary outcomes, Bubble-PAPR mean (SD) versus FFP3 mean (SD), (mean difference (95% CI)) were: how safe do you feel? 6.2 (0.9) vs 5.4 (1.0), (0.73 (0.45 to 0.99)); speaking to other staff 7.5 (2.4) vs 5.1 (2.4), (2.38 (1.66 to 3.11)); heard by other staff 7.1 (2.3) vs 4.9 (2.3), (2.16 (1.45 to 2.88)); speaking to patients 7.8 (2.1) vs 4.8 (2.4), (2.99 (2.36 to 3.62)); heard by patients 7.4 (2.4) vs 4.7 (2.5), (2.7 (1.97 to 3.43)); all p<0.01.

CONCLUSIONS

Bubble-PAPR achieved its primary purpose of keeping staff safe from airborne particulate material while improving comfort and the user experience when compared with usual FFP3 masks. The design and development of Bubble-PAPR were conducted using a careful evaluation strategy addressing key regulatory and safety steps.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04681365.

Defining effective communication for critically ill patients with an artificial airway: An international multi-professional consensus

OBJECTIVES

To define effective communication and identify its key elements specific to critically ill patients with an artificial airway.

DESIGN

A modified Consensus Development Panel methodology.

SETTING

International video-conferences.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Definition of effective communication and it's key elements.

RESULTS

Eight experts across four international regions and three professions agreed to form the Consensus Development Panel together with a Chair and one person with lived experience who reviewed the outputs prior to finalisation. "Communication for critically ill adult patients with an artificial airway (endotracheal or tracheostomy tube) is defined as the degree in which a patient can initiate, impart, receive, and understand information, and can range from an ineffective to effective exchange of basic to complex information between the patient and the communication partner(s). Effective communication encompasses seven key elements including: comprehension, quantity, rate, effort, duration, independence, and satisfaction. In critically ill adults, communication is impacted by factors including medical, physical and cognitive status, delirium, fatigue, emotional status, the communication partner and the nature of the ICU environment (e.g., staff wearing personal protective equipment, noisy equipment, bright lights)." The panel agreed that communication occurs on a continuum from ineffective to effective for basic and complex communication.

CONCLUSION

We developed a definition and list of key elements which constitute effective communication for critically ill patients with an artificial airway. These can be used as the basis of standard terminology to support future research on the development of communication-related outcome measurement tools in this population.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

This study provides international multi-professional consensus terminology and a definition of effective communication which can be used in clinical practice. This standard definition and key elements of effective communication can be included in our clinical impressions of patient communication, and be used in discussion with the patient themselves, their families and the multi-professional team, to guide care, goal development and intervention.

Multidisciplinary management of laryngeal pathology identified in patients with COVID-19 following trans-laryngeal intubation and tracheostomy

Background

COVID-19 disease often requires invasive ventilatory support. Trans-laryngeal intubation of the trachea may cause laryngeal injury, possibly compounded by coronavirus infection. Fibreoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) provides anatomical and functional assessment of the larynx, guiding multidisciplinary management. Our aims were to observe the nature of laryngeal abnormalities in patients with COVID-19 following prolonged trans-laryngeal intubation and tracheostomy, and to describe their impact on functional laryngeal outcomes, such as tracheostomy weaning.

Methods

A retrospective observational cohort analysis was undertaken between March and December 2020, at a UK tertiary hospital. The Speech and Language Therapy team assessed patients recovering from COVID-19 with voice/swallowing problems identified following trans-laryngeal intubation or tracheostomy using FEES. Laryngeal pathology, treatments, and outcomes relating to tracheostomy and oral feeding were noted.

Results

Twenty-five FEES performed on 16 patients identified a median of 3 (IQR 2-4) laryngeal abnormalities, with 63% considered clinically significant. Most common pathologies were: oedema (n = 12, 75%); abnormal movement (n = 12, 75%); atypical lesions (n = 11, 69%); and erythema (n = 6, 38%). FEES influenced management: identifying silent aspiration (88% of patients who aspirated (n = 8)), airway patency issues impacting tracheostomy weaning (n = 8, 50%), targeted dysphagia therapy (n = 7, 44%); ENT referral (n = 6, 38%) and reflux management (n = 5, 31%).

Conclusions

FEES is beneficial in identifying occult pathologies and guiding management for laryngeal recovery. In our cohort, the incidence of laryngeal pathology was higher than a non-COVID-19 cohort with similar characteristics. We recommend multidisciplinary investigation and management of patients recovering from COVID-19 who required prolonged trans-laryngeal intubation and/or tracheostomy to optimise laryngeal recovery.

Implementation of an evidence-based accidental tracheostomy dislodgement bundle in a community hospital critical care unit

BACKGROUND

Tracheostomy dislodgment can lead to catastrophic neurological injury or death. A fresh tracheostomy amplifies the risk of such events, where an immature tract predisposes to false passage. Unfortunately, few resources exist to prepare healthcare professionals to manage this airway emergency.

AIM

To create and implement an accidental tracheostomy dislodgement (ATD) bundle to improve knowledge and comfort when responding to ATD.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A multidisciplinary team with expertise in tracheostomy developed a 3-part ATD bundle including (1) Tracheostomy Dislodgement Algorithm, (2) Head of Bed Tracheostomy Communication Tool and (3) Emergency Tracheostomy Kit. The team tested the bundle during the COVID-19 pandemic in a community hospital critical care unit with the engagement of nurses and Respiratory Care Practitioners. Baseline and post-implementation knowledge and comfort levels were measured using Dorton's Tracheotomy Education Self-Assessment Questionnaire, and adherence to protocol was assessed. Reporting follows the revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE).

RESULTS

Twenty-four participants completed pre-test and post-test questionnaires. The median knowledge score on the Likert scale increased from 4.0 (IQR = 1.0) pre-test to 5.0 (IQR = 1.0) post-test. The median comfort level score increased from 38.0 (IQR = 7.0) pre-test to 40.0 (IQR = 5.0) post-test). In patient rooms, adherence was 100% for the Head of Bed Tracheostomy Communication Tool and Emergency Tracheostomy Kit. The adherence rate for using the Dislodgement Algorithm was 55% in ICU and 40% in SCU.

DISCUSSION

This study addresses the void of tracheostomy research conducted in local community hospitals. The improvement in knowledge and comfort in managing ATD is reassuring, given the knowledge gap among practitioners demonstrated in prior literature. The ATD bundle assessed in this study represents a streamlined approach for bedside clinicians - definitive management of ATD should adhere to comprehensive multidisciplinary guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

ATD bundle implementation increased knowledge and comfort levels with managing ATD. Further studies must assess whether ATD bundles and other standardised approaches to airway emergencies reduce adverse events. Relevance to Clinical Practice A streamlined intervention bundle employed at the unit level can significantly improve knowledge and comfort in managing ATD, which may reduce morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients with tracheostomy.

Amplifying patient voices amid pandemic: Perspectives on tracheostomy care, communication, and connection

OBJECTIVE

To investigate perspectives of patients, family members, caregivers (PFC), and healthcare professionals (HCP) on tracheostomy care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

The cross-sectional survey investigating barriers and facilitators to tracheostomy care was collaboratively developed by patients, family members, nurses, speech-language pathologists, respiratory care practitioners, physicians, and surgeons. The survey was distributed to the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative's learning community, and responses were analyzed.

RESULTS

Survey respondents (n = 191) from 17 countries included individuals with a tracheostomy (85 [45 %]), families/caregivers (43 [22 %]), and diverse HCP (63 [33.0 %]). Overall, 94 % of respondents reported concern that patients with tracheostomy were at increased risk of critical illness from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19; 93 % reported fear or anxiety. With respect to prioritization of care, 38 % of PFC versus 16 % of HCP reported concern that patients with tracheostomies might not be valued or prioritized (p = 0.002). Respondents also differed in fear of contracting COVID-19 (69 % PFC vs. 49 % HCP group, p = 0.009); concern for hospitalization (55.5 % PFC vs. 27 % HCP, p < 0.001); access to medical personnel (34 % PFC vs. 14 % HCP, p = 0.005); and concern about canceled appointments (62 % PFC vs. 41 % HCP, p = 0.01). Respondents from both groups reported severe stress and fatigue, sleep deprivation, lack of breaks, and lack of support (70 % PFC vs. 65 % HCP, p = 0.54). Virtual telecare seldom met perceived needs.

CONCLUSION

PFC with a tracheostomy perceived most risks more acutely than HCP in this global sample. Broad stakeholder engagement is necessary to achieve creative, patient-driven solutions to maintain connection, communication, and access for patients with a tracheostomy.

Practice of tracheostomy in patients with acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19 - Insights from the PRoVENT-COVID study

Objective

Invasively ventilated patients with acute respiratory failure related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID–19) potentially benefit from tracheostomy. The aim of this study was to determine the practice of tracheostomy during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020 in the Netherlands, to ascertain whether timing of tracheostomy had an association with outcome, and to identify factors that had an association with timing.

Methods

Secondary analysis of the ‘PRactice of VENTilation in COVID–19’ (PRoVENT–COVID) study, a multicenter observational study, conducted from March 1, 2020 through June 1, 2020 in 22 Dutch intensive care units (ICU) in the Netherlands. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients receiving tracheostomy; secondary endpoints were timing of tracheostomy, duration of ventilation, length of stay in ICU and hospital, mortality, and factors associated with timing.

Results

Of 1023 patients, 189 patients (18.5%) received a tracheostomy at median 21 [17 to 28] days from start of ventilation. Timing was similar before and after online publication of an amendment to the Dutch national guidelines on tracheostomy focusing on COVID–19 patients (21 [17–28] vs. 21 [17–26] days). Tracheostomy performed ≤ 21 days was independently associated with shorter duration of ventilation (median 26 [21 to 32] vs. 40 [34 to 47] days) and higher mortality in ICU (22.1% vs. 10.2%), hospital (26.1% vs. 11.9%) and at day 90 (27.6% vs. 14.6%). There were no patient demographics or ventilation characteristics that had an association with timing of tracheostomy.

Conclusions

Tracheostomy was performed late in COVID–19 patients during the first wave of the pandemic in the Netherlands and timing of tracheostomy possibly had an association with outcome. However, prospective studies are needed to further explore these associations. It remains unknown which factors influenced timing of tracheostomy in COVID–19 patients.

Tracheostomy for COVID-19: evolving best practice

This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2021. Other selected articles can be found online at https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2021 . Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from https://link.springer.com/bookseries/8901 .

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice.

METHODS

Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ²) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable).

RESULTS

Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment.

CONCLUSION

Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice.

METHODS

Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ²) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable).

RESULTS

Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment.

CONCLUSION

Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

Critical Care Guidance for Tracheostomy Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Global, Multidisciplinary Approach

PURPOSE

Critical care nurses caring for patients with a tracheostomy are at high risk because of the predilection of SARS-CoV-2 for respiratory and mucosal surfaces. This review identifies patient-centered practices that ensure safety and reduce risk of infection transmission to health care workers during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

Consensus statements, guidelines, institutional recommendations, and scientific literature on COVID-19 and previous outbreaks were reviewed. A global interdisciplinary team analyzed and prioritized findings via electronic communications and video conferences to develop consensus recommendations.

RESULTS

Aerosol-generating procedures are commonly performed by nurses and other health care workers, most notably during suctioning, tracheostomy tube changes, and stoma care. Patient repositioning, readjusting circuits, administering nebulized medications, and patient transport also present risks. Standard personal protective equipment includes an N95/FFP3 mask with or without surgical masks, gloves, goggles, and gown when performing aerosol-generating procedures for patients with known or suspected COVID-19. Viral testing of bronchial aspirate via tracheostomy may inform care providers when determining the protective equipment required. The need for protocols to reduce risk of transmission of infection to nurses and other health care workers is evident.

CONCLUSION

Critical care nurses and multidisciplinary teams often care for patients with a tracheostomy who are known or suspected to have COVID-19. Appropriate care of these patients relies on safeguarding the health care team. The practices described in this review may greatly reduce risk of infectious transmission.

Oral Intubation Attempts in Patients With a Laryngectomy: A Significant Safety Threat

It is impossible to secure the airway of a patient with "neck-only" breathing transorally or transnasally. Surgical removal of the larynx (laryngectomy) or tracheal rerouting (tracheoesophageal diversion or laryngotracheal separation) creates anatomic discontinuity. Misguided attempts at oral intubation of neck breathers may cause hypoxic brain injury or death. We present national data from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, the American Head and Neck Society, and the United Kingdom's National Reporting and Learning Service. Over half of US otolaryngologist respondents reported instances of attempted oral intubations among patients with laryngectomy, with a mortality rate of 26%. UK audits similarly revealed numerous resuscitation efforts where misunderstanding of neck breather status led to harm or death. Such data underscore the critical importance of staff education, patient engagement, effective signage, and systems-based best practices to reliably clarify neck breather status and provide necessary resources for safe patient airway management.

Multidisciplinary Safety Recommendations After Tracheostomy During COVID-19 Pandemic: State of the Art Review

OBJECTIVE

In the chronic phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, questions have arisen regarding the care of patients with a tracheostomy and downstream management. This review addresses gaps in the literature regarding posttracheostomy care, emphasizing safety of multidisciplinary teams, coordinating complex care needs, and identifying and managing late complications of prolonged intubation and tracheostomy.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Google Scholar, institutional guidance documents.

REVIEW METHODS

Literature through June 2020 on the care of patients with a tracheostomy was reviewed, including consensus statements, clinical practice guidelines, institutional guidance, and scientific literature on COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 virology and immunology. Where data were lacking, expert opinions were aggregated and adjudicated to arrive at consensus recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Best practices in caring for patients after a tracheostomy during the COVID-19 pandemic are multifaceted, encompassing precautions during aerosol-generating procedures; minimizing exposure risks to health care workers, caregivers, and patients; ensuring safe, timely tracheostomy care; and identifying and managing laryngotracheal injury, such as vocal fold injury, posterior glottic stenosis, and subglottic stenosis that may affect speech, swallowing, and airway protection. We present recommended approaches to tracheostomy care, outlining modifications to conventional algorithms, raising vigilance for heightened risks of bleeding or other complications, and offering recommendations for personal protective equipment, equipment, care protocols, and personnel.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Treatment of patients with a tracheostomy in the COVID-19 pandemic requires foresight and may rival procedural considerations in tracheostomy in their complexity. By considering patient-specific factors, mitigating transmission risks, optimizing the clinical environment, and detecting late manifestations of severe COVID-19, clinicians can ensure due vigilance and quality care.

Speech-Language Pathology Guidance for Tracheostomy During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An International Multidisciplinary Perspective

Purpose As the COVID-19 pandemic has unfolded, there has been growing recognition of risks to frontline health care workers. When caring for patients with tracheostomy, speech-language pathologists have significant exposure to mucosal surfaces, secretions, and aerosols that may harbor the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This tutorial provides guidance on practices for safely performing patient evaluation and procedures, thereby reducing risk of infection. Method Data were collated through review of literature, guidelines, and consensus statements relating to COVID-19 and similar high-consequent infections, with a focus on mitigating risk of transmission to health care workers. Particular emphasis was placed on speech-language pathologists, nurses, and other allied health professionals. A multinational interdisciplinary team then analyzed findings, arriving at recommendations through consensus via electronic communications and video conference. Results Reports of transmission of infection to health care workers in the current COVID-19 pandemic and previous outbreaks substantiate the need for safe practices. Many procedures routinely performed by speech-language pathologists have a significant risk of infection due to aerosol generation. COVID-19 testing can inform level of protective equipment, and meticulous hygiene can stem spread of nosocomial infection. Modifications to standard clinical practice in tracheostomy are often required. Personal protective equipment, including either powered air-purifying respirator or N95 mask, gloves, goggles, and gown, are needed when performing aerosol-generating procedures in patients with known or suspected COVID-19 infection. Conclusions Speech-language pathologists are often called on to assist in the care of patients with tracheostomy and known or suspected COVID-19 infection. Appropriate care of these patients is predicated on maintaining the health and safety of the health care team. Careful adherence to best practices can significantly reduce risk of infectious transmission.

Multidisciplinary guidance for safe tracheostomy care during the COVID-19 pandemic: the NHS National Patient Safety Improvement Programme (NatPatSIP)

The COVID-19 pandemic is causing a significant increase in the number of patients requiring relatively prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation and an associated surge in patients who need a tracheostomy to facilitate weaning from respiratory support. In parallel, there has been a global increase in guidance from professional bodies representing staff who care for patients with tracheostomies at different points in their acute hospital journey, rehabilitation and recovery. Of concern are the risks to healthcare staff of infection arising from tracheostomy insertion and caring for patients with a tracheostomy. Hospitals are also facing extraordinary demands on critical care services such that many patients who require a tracheostomy will be managed outside established intensive care or head and neck units and cared for by staff with little tracheostomy experience. These concerns led NHS England and NHS Improvement to expedite the National Patient Safety Improvement Programme's 'Safe Tracheostomy Care' workstream as part of the NHS COVID-19 response. Supporting this workstream, UK stakeholder organisations involved in tracheostomy care were invited to develop consensus guidance based on: expert opinion; the best available published literature; and existing multidisciplinary guidelines. Topics with direct relevance for frontline staff were identified. This consensus guidance includes: infectivity of patients with respect to tracheostomy indications and timing; aerosol-generating procedures and risks to staff; insertion procedures; and management following tracheostomy.

From smartphone to bed-side: exploring the use of social media to disseminate recommendations from the National Tracheostomy Safety Project to front-line clinical staff

Traditional methods used to disseminate educational resources to front-line healthcare staff have several limitations. Social media may increase the visibility of these resources among targeted groups and communities. Our project aimed to disseminate key clinical messages from the National Tracheostomy Safety Project to those caring for patients with tracheostomies or laryngectomies. We commissioned an external media company to design educational material and devise a marketing strategy. We developed videos to communicate recommendations from the safety project and used Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn to deliver these to our target users. We recorded 629,270 impressions over a paid 12-week campaign. Our YouTube channel registered more than a five-fold increase in views and watch time during the campaign as compared with the previous year. Around two-thirds of views across all platforms were from peer-to-peer sharing. We spent £4140 on social media advertising, with each view and click costing £0.02 and £0.67, respectively. This intelligence-led approach using social media is an effective and efficient method to disseminate knowledge on the principles of safe tracheostomy care to front-line clinical staff. Similar strategies may be effective for other patient safety topics, especially when targeting groups that do not use medical journals or other traditional means of dissemination.

Cost Comparison of Single-Use Versus Reusable Bronchoscopes Used for Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy

BACKGROUND

Both single-use and reusable bronchoscopes are suitable for percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) to visualise the trachea during the insertion process. To determine the least costly option, the price of single-use bronchoscopes must be weighed against the estimated average cost of a bronchoscopy with reusable equipment. In the latter case, the acquisition cost must be spread over the equipment's useful life and other relevant costs, such as reprocessing and repair, must be included.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to calculate the cost of using single-use or reusable bronchoscopes per PDT procedure.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies comparing the costs of reusable and single-use bronchoscopes for PDT. Inclusion criteria were articles assessing the cost of single-use or reusable bronchoscopes, and where costs were divided into acquisition, reprocessing, and repair costs. A questionnaire regarding repair rates and costs for reusable bronchoscopes was sent to 366 hospitals in the US, UK, and Germany to supplement the identified literature.

RESULTS

Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Ninety-nine completed responses were received, of which 31 hospitals used reusable equipment for PDT. Literature research revealed an average acquisition cost of $US135 (SD 152) and reprocessing cost of $US123 (SD 128). Additionally, a combination of data from the literature and the questionnaires gave a repair cost per use of $US148 (SD 242), resulting in a total average cost of $US406 for reusable bronchoscopes and $US249 (SD 36) for single-use bronchoscopes per PDT procedure. Thus, the incremental cost per use of a reusable bronchoscope compared with a single-use bronchoscope was $US157.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that significant savings can be made by using single-use bronchoscopes to guide PDT in preference to reusable bronchoscopes. Results depend on hospital setting, the reprocessing procedures, annual bronchoscope procedures, individual repair cost, and repair rates.

Non-directed bronchial lavage is a safe method for sampling the respiratory tract in critically ill patient

Ventilated patients are at risk of acquiring ventilator-associated pneumonia. Various techniques are available for diagnosing ventilator-associated pneumonia including bronchoalveolar lavage, protected specimen brush and non-directed bronchoalveolar lavage. There is a paucity of evidence regarding the safety profile of these techniques, particularly non-directed bronchoalveolar lavage. This service evaluation aimed to establish whether non-directed bronchoalveolar lavage is a safe procedure. A prospective service evaluation of non-directed bronchoalveolar lavage on our adult intensive care unit was undertaken by a senior physiotherapist trained into carrying out the procedure, measuring pre- and post-procedure vital signs including heart rate (HR), tidal volume (V_T), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and pulse oximetry (SpO₂). Eighty-five episodes in 41 patients were included in the evaluation. There was a statistically significant difference between pre- and immediately post-procedure recordings for all vital signs measure. HR (min^-1), means (SD) 87.1 (16.4), 91.5 (16.5), 87.5 (15.9), 87.7 (15.7) respectively pre, immediately, 5 min after and 30 min after procedure (P < 0.01). SBP mmHg, means (SD) 133.9 (26.1), 142.1 (25.6), 136.9 (25.3), 134.8 (23.4) pre, immediately, 5 min and 30 min after procedure (P < 0.01). V_T mL, median (range) 0.523 (0.118-1.180), 0.512 (0.131-1.05), 0.519 (0.104-0.95), 0.534 (0.110-1.080) each pre, immediately, 5 min and 30 min post procedure (P < 0.05). SpO₂ %, median (range) 98 (89-100), 100 (96-100), 98 (92-100), 97 (90-100) again each pre-, immediately post, 5 and 30 min post-procedure time-points (P < 0.0001). The statistically significant difference was not detected between pre-, 5 or 30 min post-procedure time-points. None of the changes observed were clinically significant and no untoward events happened to any of the subjects included. Non-directed bronchoalveolar lavage is a safe and inexpensive procedure that can be carried out easily in an intensive care setting by a trained physiotherapist, avoiding the need for invasive bronchoscopy.

Assessment of scoring systems to describe the position of tracheostomy tubes within the airway - the lunar study

BACKGROUND

Malposition of tracheostomy tubes is difficult to detect at the bedside and may contribute to eventual device misplacement. Endoscopic examination can be undertaken via tracheoscopic (T-view) or trans-laryngeal (L-view) approach, offering more precise detail regarding positioning within the airway. The aims of this study were to evaluate inter-rater agreement between bespoke T and L view scoring systems and subsequently whether T-views could predict L-views.

METHODS

Adult intensive care unit patients with percutaneous or surgical tracheostomies were included and paired T and L-views of their tracheostomy tube within the airway were taken on up to four occasions. Images were later scored by five independent raters using bespoke scoring systems. The primary outcome was to determine the T and L view scoring system with the best inter-rater agreement, defined by weighted kappa and intra-class correlation coefficients. The secondary outcome was to assess agreement between T and L-view scoring systems.

RESULTS

Seventy-one T-views and 43 L-views were obtained from a total of 20 patients. Images were scored by five raters, resulting in 355 T-view scores, 215 L-view scores and 215 paired T and L-view scores for comparison. There was good inter-rater agreement (highest T-view k = 0.84, L-view k = 0.72). There was poor agreement between T and L-view scores for each of the paired images (highest k = 0.25) although extreme-to-extreme misclassification rates remained acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst our data demonstrated good inter-rater agreement between scoring systems, it is not possible to reliably predict the T-view orientation and position of a tracheostomy tube within the airway from the paired L-view.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01356719.

Multidisciplinary guidelines for the management of paediatric tracheostomy emergencies

Temporary and permanent tracheostomies are required in children to manage actual or anticipated long-term ventilatory support, to aid secretion management or to manage fixed upper airway obstruction. Tracheostomies may be required from the first few moments of life, with the majority performed in children < 4 years of age. Although similarities with adult tracheostomies are apparent, there are key differences when managing the routine and emergency care of children with tracheostomies. The National Tracheostomy Safety Project identified the need for structured guidelines to aid multidisciplinary clinical decision making during paediatric tracheostomy emergencies. These guidelines describe the development of a bespoke emergency management algorithm and supporting resources. Our aim is to reduce the frequency, nature and severity of paediatric tracheostomy emergencies through preparation and education of staff, parents, carers and patients.

Safety and feasibility of above cuff vocalisation for ventilator-dependant patients with tracheostomies

Introduction

Temporary tracheostomy is commonly used in patients admitted to intensive care units. Cuffed tubes prevent laryngeal airflow, preventing vocalisation. Sub-glottic suction tubes such as the 'Blue Line Ultra Suctionaid™' are used primarily to remove sub-glottic secretions, but retrograde gas flows via the suction port can facilitate above cuff vocalisation. The aims were to assess whether patients could achieve an audible voice using above cuff vocalisation, to demonstrate the safe use of the Blue Line Ultra Suctionaid™ tracheostomy tube for above cuff vocalisation, and to assess potential benefits of above cuff vocalisation for communication, secretion management and swallowing.

Methods

Our study (Reference 15/NW/0464, IRAS 178997) recruited adult intensive care unit patients who were alert, able to participate in an above cuff vocalisation trial and dependent on an inflated Blue Line Ultra Suctionaid™ cuff for ventilatory support. Consenting participants underwent fibreoptic endoscopic assessment of swallow by experienced Speech & Language Therapy staff with and without above cuff vocalisation. Clinical and fibreoptic endoscopic assessment of swallow, assessment of voice quality, swallowing and secretion management were recorded and scored. Median differences between paired observations and scores were analysed with and without above cuff vocalisation. Adverse events were identified by follow up fibreoptic endoscopic assessment of swallow and patient accounts.

Results

Ten patients completed the study. Above cuff vocalisation was used for a median of 15 min, during a median of nine episodes, over a median of three days. Above cuff vocalisation resulted in an audible voice in eight of the 10 patients, during 66 out of 91 above cuff vocalisation attempts. There improvements in unstimulated dry cough and swallow frequency and aspiration ratings measured by fibreoptic endoscopic assessment of swallow. No complications were reported or observed in 66 attempts with only one episode terminated prematurely.

Conclusions

Above cuff vocalisation can achieve effective, safe, well-tolerated vocalisation in ventilator-dependant intensive care unit patients. Above cuff vocalisation has the potential to aid earlier, more effective communication and may improve laryngeal function and rehabilitation.