The US Strategic National Stockpile Ventilators in Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Comparison of Functionality and Analysis Regarding the Emergency Purchase of 200,000 Devices

BACKGROUND

Early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there was serious concern that the United States would encounter a shortfall of mechanical ventilators. In response, the US government, using the Defense Production Act, ordered the development of 200,000 ventilators from 11 different manufacturers. These ventilators have different capabilities, and whether all are able to support COVID-19 patients is not evident.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Evaluate ventilator requirements for affected COVID-19 patients, assess the clinical performance of current US Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) ventilators employed during the pandemic, and finally, compare ordered ventilators' functionality based on COVID-19 patient needs.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Current published literature, publicly available documents, and lay press articles were reviewed by a diverse team of disaster experts. Data were assembled into tabular format, which formed the basis for analysis and future recommendations.

RESULTS

COVID-19 patients often develop severe hypoxemic acute respiratory failure and adult respiratory defense syndrome (ARDS), requiring high levels of ventilator support. Current SNS ventilators were unable to fully support all COVID-19 patients, and only approximately half of newly ordered ventilators have the capacity to support the most severely affected patients; ventilators with less capacity for providing high-level support are still of significant value in caring for many patients.

INTERPRETATION

Current SNS ventilators and those on order are capable of supporting most but not all COVID-19 patients. Technologic, logistic, and educational challenges encountered from current SNS ventilators are summarized, with potential next-generation SNS ventilator updates offered.

Determination of Brain Death/Death by Neurologic Criteria: The World Brain Death Project

IMPORTANCE

There are inconsistencies in concept, criteria, practice, and documentation of brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC) both internationally and within countries.

OBJECTIVE

To formulate a consensus statement of recommendations on determination of BD/DNC based on review of the literature and expert opinion of a large multidisciplinary, international panel.

PROCESS

Relevant international professional societies were recruited to develop recommendations regarding determination of BD/DNC. Literature searches of the Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE databases included January 1, 1992, through April 2020 identified pertinent articles for review. Because of the lack of high-quality data from randomized clinical trials or large observational studies, recommendations were formulated based on consensus of contributors and medical societies that represented relevant disciplines, including critical care, neurology, and neurosurgery.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Based on review of the literature and consensus from a large multidisciplinary, international panel, minimum clinical criteria needed to determine BD/DNC in various circumstances were developed.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Prior to evaluating a patient for BD/DNC, the patient should have an established neurologic diagnosis that can lead to the complete and irreversible loss of all brain function, and conditions that may confound the clinical examination and diseases that may mimic BD/DNC should be excluded. Determination of BD/DNC can be done with a clinical examination that demonstrates coma, brainstem areflexia, and apnea. This is seen when (1) there is no evidence of arousal or awareness to maximal external stimulation, including noxious visual, auditory, and tactile stimulation; (2) pupils are fixed in a midsize or dilated position and are nonreactive to light; (3) corneal, oculocephalic, and oculovestibular reflexes are absent; (4) there is no facial movement to noxious stimulation; (5) the gag reflex is absent to bilateral posterior pharyngeal stimulation; (6) the cough reflex is absent to deep tracheal suctioning; (7) there is no brain-mediated motor response to noxious stimulation of the limbs; and (8) spontaneous respirations are not observed when apnea test targets reach pH <7.30 and Paco2 ≥60 mm Hg. If the clinical examination cannot be completed, ancillary testing may be considered with blood flow studies or electrophysiologic testing. Special consideration is needed for children, for persons receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and for those receiving therapeutic hypothermia, as well as for factors such as religious, societal, and cultural perspectives; legal requirements; and resource availability.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This report provides recommendations for the minimum clinical standards for determination of brain death/death by neurologic criteria in adults and children with clear guidance for various clinical circumstances. The recommendations have widespread international society endorsement and can serve to guide professional societies and countries in the revision or development of protocols and procedures for determination of brain death/death by neurologic criteria, leading to greater consistency within and between countries.

Expanding Acute Care Nurse Practitioner and Clinical Nurse Specialist Education

Programs educating advanced practice nurses (APNs), including acute care nurse practitioners (ACNPs) and clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) may struggle with the degree to which technical and cognitive skills necessary and unique to the care of critically ill patients should be incorporated within training programs, and the best ways these skills can be synthesized and retained for clinical practice. This article describes the critical care technical skills training mechanisms and use of a High-Fidelity Human Simulation (HFHS) Laboratory in the ACNP and CNS programs at the University of Pittsburgh School of Nursing. The mechanisms for teaching invasive procedures are reviewed including an abbreviated course syllabus and documentation tools. The use of HFHS is discussed as a measure to provide students with technical and cognitive preparation to manage critical incidents. The HFHS Laboratory, scenario development and implementation, and the debriefing process are discussed. Critical care technical skills training and the use of simulation in the curriculum have had a favorable response from students and preceptors at the University of Pittsburgh School of Nursing, and have enhanced faculty's ability to prepare APNs.

The impact of cardiac complications on outcome in the SAH population

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of cardiac complications (CdCs) on outcomes in patients with acute subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighty-one adult aneurysmal SAH patients with a fisher grade >1 and/or a Hunt and Hess grade >2 were recruited for this study. CdCs were defined as electrocardiogram (ECG) changes, myocardial necrosis, arrythmias, or pulmonary edema. Outcomes were assessed at 3, 6 and 12 months by telephone interview using the Modified Rankin Scale (MRS), Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), Barthel Index and Medical Outcome study Short Form-36 (SF-36).

RESULTS

The CdCs occurred in 33% of patients. The most common CdCs were arrythmias and pulmonary edema (30%). There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups. At 3 months there was a significant difference in the Barthel (P = 0.007) and the SF-36 (P = 0.014) with trends in the GOS (P = 0.049) and the MRS (P = 0.063). At 6 months a significant difference remained in the SF-36 (P = 0.028) and a trend in the Barthel (P = 0.069).

CONCLUSION

Results show that CdCs may negatively impact outcomes in SAH patients up to 6 months following hemorrhage.

Care activities and outcomes of patients cared for by acute care nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and resident physicians: a comparison

BACKGROUND

Little information is available on the practice of acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants in acute care settings.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the care activities performed by acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants and the outcomes of their patients with the care activities and patients' outcomes of resident physicians.

METHODS

Sixteen acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants and a matched group of resident physicians were studied during a 14-month period. Data on the subjects' daily activities and on patients' outcomes were collected 4 times.

RESULTS

Compared with the acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants, residents cared for patients who were older and sicker, cared for more patients, worked more hours, took a more active role in patient rounds, and spent more time in lectures and conferences. The nurse practitioners and physician assistants were more likely than the residents to discuss patients with bedside nurses and to interact with patients' families. They also spent more time in research and administrative activities. Few of the acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants performed invasive procedures on a regular basis. Outcomes were assessed for 187 patients treated by the acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants and for 202 patients treated by the resident physicians. Outcomes did not differ markedly for patients treated by either group. The acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants were more likely than the residents to include patients' social history in the admission notes.

CONCLUSIONS

The tasks and activities performed by acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants are similar to those performed by resident physicians. However, residents treat patients who are sicker and older than those treated by acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Patients' outcomes are similar for both groups of subjects.

Care activities and outcomes of patients cared for by acute care nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and resident physicians: a comparison

BACKGROUND: Little information is available on the practice of acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants in acute care settings. OBJECTIVES: To compare the care activities performed by acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants and the outcomes of their patients with the care activities and patients' outcomes of resident physicians. METHODS: Sixteen acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants and a matched group of resident physicians were studied during a 14-month period. Data on the subjects' daily activities and on patients' outcomes were collected 4 times. RESULTS: Compared with the acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants, residents cared for patients who were older and sicker, cared for more patients, worked more hours, took a more active role in patient rounds, and spent more time in lectures and conferences. The nurse practitioners and physician assistants were more likely than the residents to discuss patients with bedside nurses and to interact with patients' families. They also spent more time in research and administrative activities. Few of the acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants performed invasive procedures on a regular basis. Outcomes were assessed for 187 patients treated by the acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants and for 202 patients treated by the resident physicians. Outcomes did not differ markedly for patients treated by either group. The acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants were more likely than the residents to include patients' social history in the admission notes. CONCLUSIONS: The tasks and activities performed by acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants are similar to those performed by resident physicians. However, residents treat patients who are sicker and older than those treated by acute care nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Patients' outcomes are similar for both groups of subjects.

Comparison of toxicity and survival following intraperitoneal recombinant interleukin-2 for persistent ovarian cancer after platinum: twenty-four-hour versus 7-day infusion

PURPOSE

To compare the toxicity, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy seen in ovarian cancer patients treated with escalating doses of intraperitoneal (I.P.) interleukin-2 (IL-2) by two different infusion schedules.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-five patients were sequentially entered onto a phase I/II study in groups of four at fixed dosage tiers of 6 x 10(4), 6 x 10(5), 6 x 10(6), and 3 x 10(7) IU/m2/d in either of two schedules: (A) intermittent weekly infusions of 24 hours' duration; or (B) alternating continuous 7-day infusions followed by 7-day intervals without therapy. Eligibility criteria included > or = six courses of prior platinum-based chemotherapy and laparotomy-confirmed persistent or recurrent ovarian cancer.

RESULTS

Forty-one eligible patients received I.P. IL-2 and were assessable for toxicity, but six patients were not assessable for response, which left 35 patients assessable for response. Significant locoregional dose-limiting toxicity was seen with the 7-day infusions (including bowel perforation), with 600,000 IU/m2 as the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), but catheter infection was the only significant complication seen with the 24-hour infusions, for which an MTD was not established. Among 35 assessable patients, there were six laparotomy-confirmed complete responses (CRs) and three partial responses, for an overall response rate of 25.7% (nine of 35). The median survival time of the cohort was 13.7 months and the overall 5-year survival probability was 13.9%. For the nine patients who demonstrated responses (six on the 24-hour infusion and three on the 7-day infusion), the median survival time has not been reached (range, 27 to 90+ months).

CONCLUSION

I.P. IL-2 is better tolerated as a weekly infusion as compared with a 7-day infusion and demonstrates evidence of possible long-term efficacy in a modest number of patients. A randomized trial is indicated to determine if the prolonged survival seen in this study is a due to I.P. IL-2 therapy or other factors that cannot be controlled for in a single-arm study.

Credentialing and privileging: insight into the process for acute-care nurse practitioners

Acute-care nurse practitioners must be knowledgeable of the mechanisms whereby their scope of practice is defined and regulated, and through which professional competence is ensured. The mechanisms whereby hospitals determine scope and practice parameters is through credentialing and the delineation of clinical privileges. This article supplies background for the influences to the credentialing and privileging process and provides insight into how the process is conducted. The potential future trend of economic credentialing is discussed briefly. Acute-care nurse practitioners are encouraged to negotiate for delineation of clinical privileges that are consistent with their professional and legal scope of practice, educational and individual capabilities, and the safe delivery of quality patient care. It is important that the process not be misused to erect barriers to practice, resulting in underserving of patient and organizational needs.

Current questions with regard to acute care nurse practitioner preparation and role implementation

The role of the acute care nurse practitioner is being implemented in acute and tertiary care settings. As the role evolves, questions arise. Some of these questions relate to: 1) whether a need for the role has been clearly established; 2) whether the scope of acute care nurse practitioner practice has been identified distinctly; 3) the adequacy of educational preparation; 4) certification versus licensure; and 5) the nature of the relation between this role and other forms of advanced practice nursing. In this article, the authors identify and discuss some of these questions, provide information regarding current status, and postulate further potential resolutions.

Acute care nurse practitioner curriculum: content and development process

Curriculum development for preparation of acute care nurse practitioners requires a comprehensive process. To develop a program for their preparation at a large university, the faculty examined needs of the target patient population and care delivery system; scope of acute care nurse practitioner practice; current guidelines for the education of primary care nurse practitioners; evolving guidelines for the didactic and clinical education of acute care nurse practitioners; educational requirements of governing or licensing and certifying bodies; and placement of this new role within the existing healthcare team structure. A curriculum was then developed using a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach.

Acute care nurse practitioner curriculum: content and development process

Curriculum development for preparation of acute care nurse practitioners requires a comprehensive process. To develop a program for their preparation at a large university, the faculty examined needs of the target patient population and care delivery system; scope of acute care nurse practitioner practice; current guidelines for the education of primary care nurse practitioners; evolving guidelines for the didactic and clinical education of acute care nurse practitioners; educational requirements of governing or licensing and certifying bodies; and placement of this new role within the existing healthcare team structure. A curriculum was then developed using a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach.