The Minnesota Medical Operations Coordination Center: A COVID-19 Statewide Response to Ensure Access to Critical Care and Medical-Surgical Beds.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 led to unprecedented inpatient capacity challenges, particularly in ICUs, which spurred development of statewide or regional placement centers for coordinating transfer (load-balancing) of adult patients needing intensive care to hospitals with remaining capacity. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do Medical Operations Coordination Centers (MOCC) augment patient placement during times of severe capacity challenges? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The Minnesota MOCC was established with a focus on transfer of adult ICU and medical-surgical patients; trauma, cardiac, stroke, burn, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cases were excluded. The center operated within one health care system's bed management center, using a dedicated 24/7 telephone number. Major health care systems statewide and two tertiary centers in a neighboring state participated, sharing information on system status, challenges, and strategies. Patient volumes and transfer data were tracked; client satisfaction was evaluated through an anonymous survey. RESULTS: From August 1, 2020, through March 31, 2022, a total of 5,307 requests were made, 2,008 beds identified, 1,316 requests canceled, and 1,981 requests were unable to be fulfilled. A total of 1,715 patients had COVID-19 (32.3%), and 2,473 were negative or low risk for COVID-19 (46.6%). COVID-19 status was unknown in 1,119 (21.1%). Overall, 760 were patients on ventilators (49.1% COVID-19 positive). The Minnesota Critical Care Coordination Center placed most patients during the fall 2020 surge with the Minnesota Governor's stay-at-home order during the peak. However, during the fall 2021 surge, only 30% of ICU patients and 39% of medical-surgical patients were placed. Indicators characterizing severe surge include the number of Critical Care Coordination Center requests, decreasing placements, longer placement times, and time series analysis showing significant request-acceptance differences. INTERPRETATION: Implementation of a large-scale Minnesota MOCC program was effective at placing patients during the first COVID-19 pandemic fall 2020 surge and was well regarded by hospitals and health systems. However, under worsening duress of limited resources during the fall 2021 surge, placement of ICU and medical-surgical patients was greatly decreased.

Development of a national audit tool for juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a BSPAR project funded by the Health Care Quality Improvement Partnership.

Objective: Timely access to holistic multidisciplinary care is the core principle underpinning management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Data collected in national clinical audit programmes fundamentally aim to improve health outcomes of disease, ensuring clinical care is equitable, safe and patient-centred. The aim of this study was to develop a tool for national audit of JIA in the UK. Methods: A staged and consultative methodology was used across a broad group of relevant stakeholders to develop a national audit tool, with reference to pre-existing standards of care for JIA. The tool comprises key service delivery quality measures assessed against two aspects of impact, namely disease-related outcome measures and patient/carer reported outcome and experience measures. Results: Eleven service-related quality measures were identified, including those that map to current standards for commissioning of JIA clinical services in the UK. The three-variable Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score and presence/absence of sacro-iliitis in patients with enthesitis-related arthritis were identified as the primary disease-related outcome measures, with presence/absence of uveitis a secondary outcome. Novel patient/carer reported outcomes and patient/carer reported experience measures were developed and face validity confirmed by relevant patient/carer groups. Conclusion: A tool for national audit of JIA has been developed with the aim of benchmarking current clinical practice and setting future standards and targets for improvement. Staged implementation of this national audit tool should facilitate investigation of variability in levels of care and drive quality improvement. This will require engagement from patients and carers, clinical teams and commissioners of JIA services.

Cross sectional, qualitative thematic analysis of patient perspectives of disease impact in juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated uveitis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic health conditions in children can have a significant impact on their quality of life. The aim of this study was to explore the subjective experience of children and young people being treated for chronic, non-infectious uveitis associated with a systemic disease such as juvenile idiopathic arthritis. METHODS: A semi-structured interview was conducted with 10 children and young people aged between 6 and 18 years of age and their parents. RESULTS: Preliminary thematic analysis indicated that both the treatment and complications of the disorder have a significant impact on the quality of life and emotional well-being of patients, not only in terms of the discomfort experienced but also in perceptions of social isolation, anxiety and sense of injustice. CONCLUSION: This study shows that themes including "impact on school", "social factors" and "emotional reactions" are important domains influencing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in children with chronic uveitis. Inclusion of questions relating to these domains should be considered in future uveitis-specific tools examining HRQoL in these patients.

The safety and efficacy of noncorticosteroid triple immunosuppressive therapy in the treatment of refractory chronic noninfectious uveitis in childhood.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of noncorticosteroid triple immunosuppressive therapy in the treatment of refractory chronic noninfectious childhood uveitis. METHODS: Subjects were retrospectively selected from a database. Patients were included if they were diagnosed with chronic, noninfectious uveitis at 16 years of age or under and treated with triple immunosuppressive therapy for at least 6 months (following failure of a combination of 2 immunosuppressants). Patient demographics, diagnoses, duration of uveitis, drug dosages, active joint inflammation, and ophthalmologic data were recorded. Efficacy outcomes for triple therapy were recorded at 6 months. RESULTS: Thirteen patients with bilateral uveitis were included. Using Standardized Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) criteria, at 6 months only 11 eyes (42%) had a 2-step improvement in anterior chamber cell inflammation (n = 26). In addition, 2 patients required additional oral corticosteroid treatment. There were 4 significant infectious adverse events during a total of 21.9 patient-years (PY) on triple therapy (0.18 events per PY). CONCLUSION: In this group of children with refractory uveitis, addition of a third immunosuppressive agent did not confer substantial benefit in redressing ocular inflammation and was associated with significant infections in a minority of patients.

Safety and efficacy of US-guided CS injection into temporomandibular joints in children with active JIA.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of US-guided CS injection done by a paediatric rheumatologist into the TM joints (TMJs) in children with JIA. METHODS: Children with JIA presenting to the rheumatology clinic were assessed for TMJ arthritis. Triamcinolone hexacetonide was injected in children with active arthritis assessed by MRI using US guidance under general anaesthesia by the same paediatric rheumatologist trained in the procedure. Efficacy and safety were assessed post-injection by patient-guided symptoms and physical examination. RESULTS: Thirty-eight children (34 girls) with JIA who had TMJ injection done between January 2009 and January 2011 were included in the analysis. Mean age was 12.25 (± 3.55) (range 5-18) years. The mean disease duration was 4.54 (± 2.73) (range 1.5-11.1) years. Symptoms pre-injection were pain in 17/38 (44.7%), jaw deviation in 14/38 (36.8%), restricted jaw movement in 13/38 (34.2%) and chewing dysfunction in 7/38 (18.4%). Five (12.5%) children had micrognathia. A total of 63 joints were injected. The injection was efficacious in 58/63 (92.06%) joints. All 17 (100%) children had resolution of pain, and chewing dysfunction improved in 5/7 (71.4%). Jaw deviation improved in 13/14 (92.8%). In the 5/63 (7.9%) injections that were not efficacious, two children with both TMJs injected (four joints) had persisting stiffness with chewing dysfunction and one had persistent jaw deviation. One child developed a scar at the site of injection. CONCLUSION: US-guided CS injection into the TMJ done by a paediatric rheumatologist trained in the procedure is safe with a high rate of success.