RESUMEN
Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is a form of intensive life support that has seen increasing use globally to improve outcomes for patients who experience out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Hospitals with advanced critical care capabilities may be interested in launching an ECPR program to offer this support to the patients they serve; however, to do so, they must first consider the significant investment of resources necessary to start and sustain the program. The existing literature describes many single-center ECPR programs and often focuses on inpatient care and patient outcomes in hospitals with cardiac surgery capabilities. However, building a successful ECPR program and using this technology to support an individual patient experiencing refractory cardiac arrest secondary to a shockable rhythm depends on efficient out-of-hospital and emergency department (ED) management. This article describes the process of implementing 2 intensivist-led ECPR programs with limited cardiac surgery capability. We focus on emergency medical services and ED clinician roles in identifying patients, mobilizing resources, initiation and management of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in the ED, and ongoing efforts to improve ECPR program quality. Each center experienced a significant learning curve to reach goals of arrest-to-flow times of cannulation for ECPR. Building consensus from multidisciplinary stakeholders, including out-of-hospital stakeholders; establishing shared expectations of ECPR outcomes; and ensuring adequate resource support for ECPR activation were all key lessons in improving our ECPR programs.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: While emergency physicians are familiar with the management of hypoxemic respiratory failure, management of mechanical ventilation and advanced therapies for oxygenation in the emergency department have become essential during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. OBJECTIVE: We review the current evidence on hypoxemia in COVID-19 and place it in the context of known evidence-based management of hypoxemic respiratory failure in the emergency department. DISCUSSION: COVID-19 causes mortality primarily through the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), with hypoxemia arising from shunt, a mismatch of ventilation and perfusion. Management of patients developing ARDS should focus on mitigating derecruitment and avoiding volutrauma or barotrauma. CONCLUSIONS: High flow nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation have a more limited role in COVID-19 because of the risk of aerosolization and minimal benefit in severe cases, but can be considered. Stable patients who can tolerate repositioning should be placed in a prone position while awake. Once intubated, patients should be managed with ventilation strategies appropriate for ARDS, including targeting lung-protective volumes and low pressures. Increasing positive end-expiratory pressure can be beneficial. Inhaled pulmonary vasodilators do not decrease mortality but may be given to improve refractory hypoxemia. Prone positioning of intubated patients is associated with a mortality reduction in ARDS and can be considered for patients with persistent hypoxemia. Neuromuscular blockade should also be administered in patients who remain dyssynchronous with the ventilator despite adequate sedation. Finally, patients with refractory severe hypoxemic respiratory failure in COVID-19 should be considered for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Adulto , COVID-19/terapia , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Humanos , Respiración Artificial , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapia , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/virología , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/virologíaRESUMEN
Patients with refractory respiratory and cardiac failure may present to noncardiac surgery centers. Prior studies have demonstrated that acute care surgeons, intensivists, and emergency medicine physicians can safely cannulate and manage patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Harborview Medical Center (Harborview) and Hennepin County Medical Center (Hennepin) are both urban, county-owned, level 1 trauma centers that implemented ECMO without direct, on-site cardiac surgery or perfusion support. Both centers 1) use an ECMO specialist model staffed by specially trained nurses and respiratory therapists and 2) developed comparable training curricula for ECMO specialists, intensivists, surgeons, and trainees. Each program began with venovenous ECMO to provide support for refractory hypoxemic respiratory failure and subsequently expanded to venoarterial ECMO support. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created an impetus for restructuring, with each program creating a consulting service to facilitate ECMO delivery across multiple intensive care units (ICUs) and to promote fellow and resident training and experience. Both Harborview and Hennepin, urban county hospitals 1,700 miles apart in the United States, independently implemented and operate adult ECMO programs without involvement from cardiovascular surgery or perfusion services. This experience further supports the role of ECMO specialists in the delivery of extracorporeal life support.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Cardíacos , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/educación , Hospitales de Condado , COVID-19/terapia , PerfusiónRESUMEN
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has emerged in the COVID-19 pandemic as a potentially beneficial yet scare resource for treating critically ill patients, with variable allocation across the United States. The existing literature has not addressed barriers patients may face in access to ECMO as a result of healthcare inequity. We present a novel patient-centered framework of ECMO access, providing evidence for potential bias and opportunities to mitigate this bias at every stage between a marginalized patient's initial presentation to treatment with ECMO. While equitable access to ECMO support is a global challenge, this piece focuses primarily on patients in the United States with severe COVID-19-associated ARDS to draw from current literature on VV-ECMO for ARDS and does not address issues that affect ECMO access on a more international scale.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Humanos , Pandemias , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Shift work is associated with sleep disorders, which impair alertness and increase risk of chronic physical and mental health disease. In health care workers, shift work and its associated sleep loss decrease provider wellness and can compromise patient care. Pharmacological sleep aids or substances such as alcohol are often used to improve sleep with variable effects on health and well-being. OBJECTIVE: We tested whether use of noise-masking earbuds can improve reported sleep quality, sleepiness, and stress level in health care shift workers, and increase alertness and reaction time post night shift. METHODS: Emergency medicine resident physicians were recruited for a prospective, single-subject design study. Entrance surveys on current sleep habits were completed. For 14 days, participants completed daily surveys reporting sleep aid use and self-rated perceived sleepiness, tension level, and last nights' sleep quality using an 8-point Likert scale. After overnight shifts, 3-minute psychomotor vigilance tests (PVT) measuring reaction time were completed. At the end of 14 days, participants were provided noise-masking earbuds, which they used in addition to their baseline sleep regimens as they were needed for sleep for the remainder of the study period. Daily sleep surveys, post-overnight shift PVT, and earbud use data were collected for an additional 14 days. A linear mixed effects regression model was used to assess changes in the pre- and postintervention outcomes with participants serving as their own controls. RESULTS: In total, 36 residents were recruited, of whom 26 participants who completed daily sleep surveys and used earbuds at least once during the study period were included in the final analysis. The median number of days of earbud use was 5 (IQR 2-9) days of the available 14 days. On days when residents reported earbud use, previous nights' sleep quality increased by 0.5 points (P<.001, 95% CI 0.23-0.80), daily sleepiness decreased by 0.6 points (P<.001, 95% CI -0.90 to -0.34), and total daily tension decreased by 0.6 points (P<.001, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.32). These effects were more pronounced in participants who reported worse-than-average preintervention sleep scores. CONCLUSIONS: Nonpharmacological noise-masking interventions such as earbuds may improve daily sleepiness, tension, and perceived sleep quality in health care shift workers. Larger-scale studies are needed to determine this interventions' effect on other populations of shift workers' post-night shift alertness, users' long-term physical and mental health, and patient outcomes.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has accelerated rapidly for patients in severe cardiac or respiratory failure. As a result, ECMO networks are being developed across the world using a "hub and spoke" model. Current guidelines call for all patients transported on ECMO to be accompanied by a physician during transport. However, as ECMO centers and networks grow, the increasing number of transports will be limited by this mandate. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare rates of adverse events occurring during transport of ECMO patients with and without an additional clinician, defined as a physician, nurse practitioner (NP), or physician assistant (PA). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of all adults transported while cannulated on ECMO from 2011-2018 via ground and air between 21 hospitals in the northeastern United States, comparing transports with and without additional clinicians. The primary outcome was the rate of major adverse events, and the secondary outcome was minor adverse events. RESULTS: Over the seven-year study period, 93 patients on ECMO were transported. Twenty-three transports (24.7%) were accompanied by a physician or other additional clinician. Major adverse events occurred in 21.5% of all transports. There was no difference in the total rate of major adverse events between accompanied and unaccompanied transports (P = .91). Multivariate analysis did not demonstrate any parameter as being predictive of major adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In a retrospective cohort study of transports of ECMO patients, there was no association between the overall rate of major adverse events in transport and the accompaniment of an additional clinician. No variables were associated with major adverse events in either cohort.
Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Médicos , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Adulto , Ambulancias , Humanos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Emergency department (ED) visits related to opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased nearly twofold over the last decade. Treatment with buprenorphine has been demonstrated to decrease opioid-related overdose deaths. In this study, we aimed to better understand ED clinicians' attitudes toward the initiation of buprenorphine treatment in the ED. METHODS: We performed a mixed-methods study consisting of a survey of 174 ED clinicians (attending physicians, residents, and physician assistants) and semi-structured interviews with 17 attending emergency physicians at a tertiary-care academic hospital. RESULTS: A total of 93 ED clinicians (53% of those contacted) completed the survey. While 80% of respondents agreed that buprenorphine should be administered in the ED for patients requesting treatment, only 44% felt that they were prepared to discuss medication for addiction treatment. Compared to clinicians with fewer than five years of practice, those with greater experience were less likely to approve of ED-initiated buprenorphine. In our qualitative analysis, physicians had differing perspectives on the role that the ED should play in treating OUD. Most physicians felt that a buprenorphine-based intervention in the ED would be feasible with institutional support, including training opportunities, protocol support within the electronic health record, counseling and support staff, and a robust referral system for outpatient follow-up. CONCLUSION: ED clinicians' perception of buprenorphine varied by years of practice and training level. Most ED clinicians did not feel prepared to initiate buprenorphine in the ED. Qualitative interviews identified several addressable barriers to ED-initiated buprenorphine.
Asunto(s)
Actitud del Personal de Salud , Buprenorfina/uso terapéutico , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides , Adulto , Sobredosis de Droga/mortalidad , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/métodos , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia/tendencias , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Antagonistas de Narcóticos , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/epidemiología , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/psicología , Trastornos Relacionados con Opioides/terapia , Tiempo de Tratamiento , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Although bronchiolitis is a common reason for infant hospitalization, significant heterogeneity persists in its management. The American Academy of Pediatrics currently recommends that inhaled albuterol not be used in routine care of children with bronchiolitis. Our objective was to identify factors associated with pre-admission (e.g., emergency department or primary care) use of albuterol among infants hospitalized for bronchiolitis. METHODS: We analyzed data from a 17-center observational study of 1,016 infants (age <1 year) hospitalized with bronchiolitis between 2011-2014. Pre-admission albuterol use was ascertained by chart review, and data were available for 1,008 (99%) infants. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify infant characteristics independently associated with pre-admission albuterol use. RESULTS: Half of the infants (n=508) received at least one albuterol treatment before admission. Across the 17 hospitals, pre-admission albuterol use ranged from 23-84%. In adjusted analysis, independent predictors of albuterol use were the following: age ≥2 months (age 2.0-5.9 months [odds ratio (OR) 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) {1.45-3.01}] and age 6.0-11.9 months [OR 2.89, 95% CI {1.99-4.19}]); prior use of a bronchodilator (OR 1.89, 95% CI [1.24-2.90]); and presence of wheezing documented in pre-admission chart (OR 3.94, 95% CI [2.61-5.93]). By contrast, albuterol use was less likely among those with ≥7 days since the start of breathing problem (OR 0.66, 95% CI [0.44-1.00]) and parent-reported fever (OR 0.75, 95% CI [0.58-0.96]). CONCLUSION: Variation in pre-admission albuterol use suggests that local practice had a strong influence on use, but that patient characteristics also influenced the decision. While we agree with current guidelines in recommending against albuterol for all infants with bronchiolitis, our understanding of possible subgroups of responders may improve through investigation of infants with the identified characteristics.