Boarding in the emergency department: challenges and mitigation strategies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Herein, we conducted a review of the literature to better understand the issue of prolonged emergency department (ED) boarding by providing an overview of the current evidence on the available causes, consequences, and mitigation strategies. RECENT FINDINGS: Severely ill patients awaiting transfer to intensive care units (ICU) imposes additional burdens on the emergency care team from both a clinical and management perspective. The reasons for prolonged ED boarding are multifactorial. ED boarding compromises patients' safety and outcomes, and is associated with increased team burnout and dissatisfaction. Mitigation strategies include the optimization of patients' flow, the establishment of resuscitative care units, deployment of mobile critical care teams, and improvements in training. Staffing adjustments, changes in hospital operations, and quality improvement initiatives are required to improve this situation, while active bed management and implementation of capacity command centers may also help. SUMMARY: Considering the characteristics of healthcare systems, such as funding mechanisms, organizational structures, delivery models, access and quality of care, the challenge of ED boarding of critically ill patients requires a nuanced and adaptable approach. Solutions are complex but must involve the entirety of the hospital system, emergency department, staff adjustment, and education.

Telemedicine for emergency patient rescue.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article summarizes recent developments in the application of telemedicine, specifically tele-critical care (TCC), toward enhancing patient care during various types of emergencies and patient rescue scenarios when there are limited resources in terms of staff expertise (i.e., knowledge, skills, and abilities), staffing numbers, space, and supplies due to patient location (e.g., a non-ICU bed, the emergency department, a rural hospital) or patient volume as in pandemic surges. RECENT FINDINGS: The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the need for rapidly scalable and agile healthcare delivery systems. During the pandemic, clinicians and hospital systems adopted telemedicine for various applications. Taking advantage of technological improvements in cellular networks and personal mobile devices, and despite the limited outcomes literature to support its use, telemedicine was rapidly adopted to address the fundamental challenge of exposure in outpatient settings, emergency departments, patient follow-up, and home-based monitoring. A critical recognition was that the modality of care (e.g., remote vs. in-person) was less important than access to care, regardless of the patient outcomes. This fundamental shift, facilitated by policies that followed emergency declarations, provided an opportunity to maintain and, in many cases, expand and improve clinical practices and hospital systems by bringing expertise to the patient rather than the patient to the expertise. In addition to using telemedicine to maintain patient access to healthcare, TCC was harnessed to provide local clinicians, forced to manage critically ill patients beyond their normal scope of practice or experience, access to remote expertise (physician, nursing, respiratory therapist, pharmacist). These practices supported decades of literature from the telemedicine community describing the effectiveness of telemedicine in improving patient care and the many challenges defining its value. SUMMARY: In this review, we summarize numerous examples of innovative care delivery systems that have utilized telemedicine, focusing on 'mobile' TCC technology solutions to effectively deliver the best care to the patient regardless of patient location. We emphasize how a 'paradigm of better' can enhance the entirety of the healthcare system.

The 4 S's of Disaster Management Framework: A Case Study of the 2022 Pediatric Tripledemic Response in a Community Hospital.

Most children in the United States present to community hospitals for emergency department (ED) care. Those who are acutely ill and require critical care are stabilized and transferred to a tertiary pediatric hospital with intensive care capabilities. During the fall of 2022 "tripledemic," with a marked increase in viral burden, there was a nationwide surge in pediatric ED patient volume. This caused ED crowding and decreased availability of pediatric hospital intensive care beds across the United States. As a result, there was an inability to transfer patients who were critically ill out, and the need for prolonged management increased at the community hospital level. We describe the experience of a Massachusetts community ED during this surge, including the large influx in pediatric patients, the increase in those requiring critical care, and the total number of critical care hours as compared with the same time period (September to December) in 2021. To combat these challenges, the pediatric ED leadership applied a disaster management framework based on the 4 S's of space, staff, stuff, and structure. We worked collaboratively with general emergency medicine leadership, nursing, respiratory therapy, pharmacy, local clinicians, our regional health care coalition, and emergency medical services (EMS) to create and implement the pediatric surge strategy. Here, we present the disaster framework strategy, the interventions employed, and the barriers and facilitators for implementation in our community hospital setting, which could be applied to other community hospital facing similar challenges.

Clinical Full-Time Equivalent in PICUs: Survey of the U.S. Pediatric Critical Care Chiefs Network, 2020-2022.

OBJECTIVES: To inform workforce planning for pediatric critical care (PCC) physicians, it is important to understand current staffing models and the spectrum of clinical responsibilities of physicians. Our objective was to describe the expected workload associated with a clinical full-time equivalent (cFTE) in PICUs across the U.S. Pediatric Critical Care Chiefs Network (PC3N). DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: PICUs participating in the PC3N. SUBJECTS: PICU division chiefs or designees participating in the PC3N from 2020 to 2022. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A series of three surveys were used to capture unit characteristics and clinical responsibilities for an estimated 1.0 cFTE intensivist. Out of a total of 156 PICUs in the PC3N, the response rate was 46 (30%) to all three distributed surveys. Respondents used one of four models to describe the construction of a cFTE-total clinical hours, total clinical shifts, total weeks of service, or % full-time equivalent. Results were stratified by unit size. The model used for construction of a cFTE did not vary significantly by the total number of faculty nor the total number of beds. The median (interquartile range) of clinical responsibilities annually for a 1.0 cFTE were: total clinical hours 1750 (1483-1858), total clinical shifts 142 (129-177); total weeks of service 13.0 (11.3-16.0); and total night shifts 52 (36-60). When stratified by unit size, larger units had fewer nights or overnight hours, but covered more beds per shift. CONCLUSIONS: This survey of the PC3N (2020-2022) provides the most contemporary description of clinical responsibilities associated with a cFTE physician in PCC. A 1.0 cFTE varies depending on unit size. There is no correlation between the model used to construct a cFTE and the associated clinical responsibilities.

Assessing quality of critical care during an ongoing health emergency-a novel approach to evaluate quality of care at Lebanese public ICUs during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Quality of care has been systematically monitored in hospitals in high-income countries to ensure adequate care. However, in low- and middle-income countries, quality indicators are not readily measured. The primary aim of this study was to assess to what extent it was feasible to monitor the quality of intensive care in an ongoing health emergency, and the secondary aim was to assess a quality of care intervention (twinning project) focused on Intensive Care Unit (ICU) quality of care in public hospitals in Lebanon. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study nested within an intervention implemented by the World Health Organization (WHO) together with partners. To assess the quality of care throughout the project, a monitoring system framed in the Donabedian model and included structure, process, and outcome indicators was developed and implemented. Data collection consisted of a checklist performed by external healthcare workers (HCWs) as well as collection of data from all admitted patients performed by each unit. The association between the number of activities within the interventional project and ICU mortality was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 1679 patients were admitted to five COVID-19 ICUs during the study period. The project was conducted fully across four out of five hospitals. In these hospitals, a significant reduction in ICU mortality was found (OR: 0.83, P < 0.05, CI: 0.72-0.96). CONCLUSION: We present a feasible way to assess quality of care in ICUs and how it can be used in assessing a quality improvement project during ongoing crises in resource-limited settings. By implementing a quality of care intervention in Lebanon's public hospitals, we have shown that such initiatives might contribute to improvement of ICU care. The observed association between increased numbers of project activities and reduced ICU mortality underscores the potential of quality assurance interventions to improve outcomes for critically ill patients in resource-limited settings. Future research is needed to expand this model to be applicable in similar settings.

Regionalization of Critical Care in the United States: Current State and Proposed Framework From the Academic Leaders in Critical Care Medicine Task Force of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.

OBJECTIVES: The Society of Critical Care Medicine convened its Academic Leaders in Critical Care Medicine taskforce on February 22, 2016, during the 45th Critical Care Congress to develop a series of consensus papers with toolkits for advancing critical care organizations in North America. The goal of this article is to propose a framework based on the expert opinions of critical care organization leaders and their responses to a survey, for current and future critical care organizations, and their leadership in the health system to design and implement successful regionalization for critical care in their regions. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: Members of the workgroup convened monthly via teleconference with the following objectives: to 1) develop and analyze a regionalization survey tool for 23 identified critical care organizations in the United States, 2) assemble relevant medical literature accessed using Medline search, 3) use a consensus of expert opinions to propose the framework, and 4) create groups to write the subsections and assemble the final product. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The most prevalent challenges for regionalization in critical care organizations remain a lack of a strong central authority to regulate and manage the system as well as a lack of necessary infrastructure, as described more than a decade ago. We provide a framework and outline a nontechnical approach that the health system and their critical care medicine leadership can adopt after considering their own structure, complexity, business operations, culture, and the relationships among their individual hospitals. Transforming the current state of regionalization into a coordinated, accountable system requires a critical assessment of administrative and clinical challenges and barriers. Systems thinking, business planning and control, and essential infrastructure development are critical for assisting critical care organizations. CONCLUSIONS: Under the value-based paradigm, the goals are operational efficiency and patient outcomes. Health systems that can align strategy and operations to assist the referral hospitals with implementing regionalization will be better positioned to regionalize critical care effectively.

Severe maternal morbidity: admission shift from intensive care unit to obstetric high-dependency unit.

BACKGROUND: To study temporal trends of intensive care unit (ICU) admission in obstetric population after the introduction of obstetric high-dependency unit (HDU). METHODS: This is a retrospective study of consecutive obstetric patients admitted to the ICU/HDU in a provincial referral center in China from January 2014 to December 2019. The collected information included maternal demographic characteristics, indications for ICU and HDU admission, the length of ICU stay, the total length of in-hospital stay and APACHE II score. Chi-square and ANOVA tests were used to determine statistical significance. The temporal changes were assessed with chi-square test for linear trend. RESULTS: A total of 40,412 women delivered and 447 (1.11%) women were admitted to ICU in this 6-year period. The rate of ICU admission peaked at 1.59% in 2016 and then dropped to 0.67% in 2019 with the introduction of obstetric HDU. The average APACHE II score increased significantly from 6.8 to 12.3 (P < 0.001) and the average length of ICU stay increased from 1.7 to 7.1 days (P < 0.001). The main indications for maternal ICU admissions were hypertensive disorders in pregnancy (39.8%), cardiac diseases (24.8%), and other medical disorders (21.5%); while the most common reasons for referring to HDU were hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (46.5%) and obstetric hemorrhage (43.0%). The establishment of HDU led to 20% reduction in ICU admission, which was mainly related to obstetric indications. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of HDU helps to reduce ICU utilization in obstetric population.

Human factors in ECLS - A keystone for safety and quality - A narrative review for ECLS providers.

INTRODUCTION: Although the technology used for extracorporeal life support (ECLS) has improved greatly in recent years, the application of these devices to the patient is quite complex and requires extensive training of team members both individually and together. Human factors is an area that addresses the activities, contexts, environments, and tools which interact with human behavior in determining overall system performance. HYPOTHESIS: Analyses of the cognitive behavior of ECLS teams and individual members of these teams with respect to the occurrence of human errors may identify additional opportunities to enhance safety in delivery of ECLS. RESULTS: The aim of this article is to support health-care practitioners who perform ECLS, or who are starting an ECLS program, by establishing standards for the safe and efficient use of ECLS with a focus on human factor issues. Other key concepts include the importance of ECLS team leadership and management, as well as controlling the environment and the system to optimize patient care. CONCLUSION: Expertise from other industries is extrapolated to improve patient safety through the application of simulation training to reduce error propagation and improve outcomes.

Mitigating Inequities and Saving Lives with ICU Triage during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The burdens of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic have fallen disproportionately on disadvantaged groups, including the poor and Black, Latinx, and Indigenous communities. There is substantial concern that the use of existing ICU triage protocols to allocate scarce ventilators and critical care resources-most of which are designed to save as many lives as possible-may compound these inequities. As governments and health systems revisit their triage guidelines in the context of impending resource shortages, scholars have advocated a range of alternative allocation strategies, including the use of a random lottery to give all patients in need an equal chance of ICU treatment. However, both the save-the-most-lives approach and random allocation are seriously flawed. In this Perspective, we argue that ICU triage policies should simultaneously promote population health outcomes and mitigate health inequities. These ethical goals are sometimes in conflict, which will require balancing the goals of maximizing the number of lives saved and distributing health benefits equitably across society. We recommend three strategies to mitigate health inequities during ICU triage: introducing a correction factor into patients' triage scores to reduce the impact of baseline structural inequities; giving heightened priority to individuals in essential, high-risk occupations; and rejecting use of longer-term life expectancy and categorical exclusions as allocation criteria. We present a practical triage framework that incorporates these strategies and attends to the twin public health goals of promoting population health and social justice.

Humanizing the intensive care unit experience in a comprehensive cancer center: A patient- and family-centered improvement study.

OBJECTIVES: Improving family-centered outcomes is a priority in oncologic critical care. As part of the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Collaborative, we implemented patient- and family-centered initiatives in a comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team was created to implement the initiatives. We instituted an open visitation policy (OVP) that revamped the use of the two-way communication boards and enhanced the waiting room experience by hosting ICU family-centered events. To assess the initiatives' effects, we carried out pre-intervention (PRE) and post-intervention (POST) family/caregiver and ICU practitioner surveys. RESULTS: A total of 159 (PRE = 79, POST = 80) family members and 147 (PRE = 95, POST = 52) ICU practitioners participated. Regarding the decision-making process, family members felt more included (40.5% vs. 68.8%, p < 0.001) and more supported (29.1% vs. 48.8%, p = 0.011) after the implementation of the initiatives. The caregivers also felt more control over the decision-making process in the POST survey (34.2% vs. 56.3%, p = 0.005). Although 33% of the ICU staff considered OVP was beneficial for the ICU, 41% disagreed and 26% were neutral. Only half of them responded that OVP was beneficial for patients and 63% agreed that OVP was beneficial for families. Half of the practitioners agreed that OVP resulted in additional work for staff. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Our project effectively promoted patient- and family-centered care. The families expressed satisfaction with the communication of information and the decision-making process. However, the ICU staff felt that the initiatives increased their work load. Further research is needed to understand whether making this project universal or introducing additional novel practices would significantly benefit patients admitted to the ICU and their family.

Managing intensive care admissions when there are not enough beds during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.

The surge in cases of severe COVID-19 has resulted in clinicians triaging intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in places where demand has exceeded capacity. In order to assist difficult triage decisions, clinicians require clear guidelines on how to prioritise patients. Existing guidelines show significant variability in their development, interpretation, implementation and an urgent need for a robust synthesis of published guidance. To understand how to manage which patients are admitted to ICU, and receive mechanical ventilatory support, during periods of high demand during the COVID-19 pandemic, a systematic review was performed. Databases of indexed literature (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Global Health) and grey literature (Google.com and MedRxiv), published from 1 January until 2 April 2020, were searched. Search terms included synonyms of COVID-19, ICU, ventilation, and triage. Only formal written guidelines were included. There were no exclusion criteria based on geographical location or publication language. Quality appraisal of the guidelines was performed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument II (AGREE II) and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument Recommendation EXcellence (AGREE REX) appraisal tools, and key themes related to triage were extracted using narrative synthesis. Of 1902 unique records identified, nine relevant guidelines were included. Six guidelines were national or transnational level guidance (UK, Switzerland, Belgium, Australia and New Zealand, Italy, and Sri Lanka), with one state level (Kansas, USA), one international (Extracorporeal Life Support Organization) and one specific to military hospitals (Department of Defense, USA). The guidelines covered several broad themes: use of ethical frameworks, criteria for ICU admission and discharge, adaptation of criteria as demand changes, equality across health conditions and healthcare systems, decision-making processes, communication of decisions, and guideline development processes. We have synthesised the current guidelines and identified the different approaches taken globally to manage the triage of intensive care resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is limited consensus on how to allocate the finite resource of ICU beds and ventilators, and a lack of high-quality evidence and guidelines on resource allocation during the pandemic. We have developed a set of factors to consider when developing guidelines for managing intensive care admissions, and outlined implications for clinical leads and local implementation.

Rationale, Methodological Quality, and Reporting of Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trials in Critical Care Medicine: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Compared with individual-patient randomized controlled trials, cluster randomized controlled trials have unique methodological and ethical considerations. We evaluated the rationale, methodological quality, and reporting of cluster randomized controlled trials in critical care studies. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register were performed. STUDY SELECTION: We included all cluster randomized controlled trials conducted in adult, pediatric, or neonatal critical care units from January 2005 to September 2019. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened citations, reviewed full texts, protocols, and supplements of potentially eligible studies, abstracted data, and assessed methodology of included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: From 1,902 citations, 59 cluster randomized controlled trials met criteria. Most focused on quality improvement (24, 41%), antimicrobial therapy (9, 15%), or infection control (9, 15%) interventions. Designs included parallel-group (25, 42%), crossover (21, 36%), and stepped-wedge (13, 22%). Concealment of allocation was reported in 21 studies (36%). Thirteen studies (22%) reported at least one method of blinding. The median total sample size was 1,660 patients (interquartile range, 813-4,295); the median number of clusters was 12 (interquartile range, 5-24); and the median patients per cluster was 141 (interquartile range, 54-452). Sample size calculations were reported in 90% of trials, but only 54% met Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidance for sample size reporting. Twenty-seven of the studies (46%) identified a fixed number of available clusters prior to trial commencement, and only nine (15%) prespecified both the number of clusters and patients required to detect the expected effect size. Overall, 36 trials (68%) achieved the total prespecified sample size. When analyzing data, 44 studies (75%) appropriately adjusted for clustering when analyzing the primary outcome. Only 12 (20%) reported an intracluster coefficient (median 0.047 [interquartile range, 0.01-0.13]). CONCLUSIONS: Cluster randomized controlled trials in critical care typically involve a small and fixed number of relatively large clusters. The reporting of key methodological aspects of these trials is often inadequate.

Nosocomial Infection.

OBJECTIVE: The first 70 years of critical care can be considered a period of "industrial revolution-like" advancement in terms of progressing the understanding and care of critical illness. Unfortunately, like the industrial revolution's impact on the environment, advancing ICU care of increasingly elderly, immunosuppressed, and debilitated individuals has resulted in a greater overall burden and complexity of nosocomial infections within modern ICUs. Given the rapid evolution of nosocomial infections, the authors provide an updated review. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: We searched PubMed and OVID for peer-reviewed literature dealing with nosocomial infections in the critically ill, as well as the websites of government agencies involved with the reporting and prevention of nosocomial infections. Search terms included nosocomial infection, antibiotic resistance, microbiome, antibiotics, and intensive care. DATA EXTRACTION AND DATA SYNTHESIS: Nosocomial infections in the ICU setting are evolving in multiple domains including etiologic pathogens plus novel or emerging pathogens, prevalence, host risk factors, antimicrobial resistance, interactions of the host microbiome with nosocomial infection occurrence, and understanding of pathogenesis and prevention strategies. Increasing virulence and antimicrobial resistance of nosocomial infections mandate increasing efforts toward their prevention. CONCLUSIONS: Nosocomial infections are an important determinant of outcome for patients in the ICU setting. Systematic research aimed at improving the prevention and treatment of nosocomial infections is still needed.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Rescue Therapies.

The history of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the Society of Critical Care Medicine have much in common, as many of the founders of the Society of Critical Care Medicine focused on understanding and improving outcomes from cardiac arrest. We review the history, the current, and future state of cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Long-Term Sustainability and Acceptance of Antimicrobial Stewardship in Intensive Care: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate long-term uptake of an antimicrobial stewardship audit-and-feedback program along with potential predictors of stewardship suggestions and acceptance across a diverse ICU population. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: An urban, academic medical institution. PATIENTS: Patients admitted to an ICU who received an antimicrobial stewardship program suggestion between June 2010 and September 2019. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The antimicrobial stewardship program provided 7,749 antibiotic assessments over the study period and made a suggestion to alter therapy in 2,826 (36%). Factors associated with a higher likelihood of receiving a suggestion to alter therapy included shorter hospital length of stay prior to antimicrobial stewardship program review (odds ratio 1.15 for ≤ 5 d; 95% CI 1.00-1.32), admission to cardiovascular (1.37; 1.06-1.76) or burn surgery (1.88; 1.50-2.36) versus general medicine, and preceding duration of antibiotic use greater than 5 days (1.33; 1.10-1.60). Assessment of aminoglycosides (2.91; 1.85-4.89), carbapenems (1.93; 1.54-2.41), and vancomycin (2.71; 2.19-3.36) versus ceftriaxone was more likely to result in suggestions to alter therapy. The suggestion acceptance rate was 67% (1,895/2,826), which was stable throughout the study period. Admission to a level 3 ICU was associated with higher likelihood of acceptance of suggestions (1.50; 1.14-1.97). Factors associated with lower acceptance rates were admission to burn surgery (0.64; 0.45-0.91), treatment of pneumonia (0.64; 0.42-0.97 for community-acquired and 0.65; 0.44-0.94 for ventilator-acquired), unknown source of infection (0.66; 0.48-0.92), and suggestion types of "narrow spectrum" (0.65; 0.45-0.94), "change formulation of antibiotic" (0.42; 0.27-0.64), or "change agent of therapy" (0.63; 0.40-0.97) versus "change of dose". CONCLUSIONS: An antimicrobial stewardship program implemented over a decade resulted in sustained suggestion and acceptance rates. These findings support the need for a persistent presence of audit-and-feedback over time with more frequent suggestions to alter potentially nephrotoxic agents, increased efforts toward specialized care units, and further work approaching infectious sources that are typically treated without pathogen confirmation and identification.

Variation in Initial U.S. Hospital Responses to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has strained many healthcare systems. In response, U.S. hospitals altered their care delivery systems, but there are few data regarding specific structural changes. Understanding these changes is important to guide interpretation of outcomes and inform pandemic preparedness. We sought to characterize emergency responses across hospitals in the United States over time and in the context of local case rates early in the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. DESIGN: We surveyed hospitals from a national acute care trials group regarding operational and structural changes made in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic from January to August 2020. We collected prepandemic characteristics and changes to hospital system, space, staffing, and equipment during the pandemic. We compared the timing of these changes with county-level coronavirus disease 2019 case rates. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: U.S. hospitals participating in the Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury Network Coronavirus Disease 2019 Observational study. Site investigators at each hospital collected local data. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty-five sites participated (94% response rate). System-level changes (incident command activation and elective procedure cancellation) occurred at nearly all sites, preceding rises in local case rates. The peak inpatient census during the pandemic was greater than the prior hospital bed capacity in 57% of sites with notable regional variation. Nearly half (49%) expanded ward capacity, and 63% expanded ICU capacity, with nearly all bed expansion achieved through repurposing of clinical spaces. Two-thirds of sites adapted staffing to care for patients with coronavirus disease 2019, with 48% implementing tiered staffing models, 49% adding temporary physicians, nurses, or respiratory therapists, and 30% changing the ratios of physicians or nurses to patients. CONCLUSIONS: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic prompted widespread system-level changes, but front-line clinical care varied widely according to specific hospital needs and infrastructure. Linking operational changes to care delivery processes is a necessary step to understand the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on patient outcomes.

Growth and changes in the pediatric medical subspecialty workforce pipeline.

BACKGROUND: To inform discussions of pediatric subspecialty workforce adequacy and characterize its pipeline, we examined trends in first-year fellows in the 14 American Board of Pediatrics (ABP)-certified pediatric medical subspecialties, 2001-2018. METHODS: Data were obtained from the ABP Certification Management System. We determined, within each subspecialty, the annual number of first-year fellows. We assessed for changes in the population using variables available throughout the study period (gender, medical school location, program region, and program size). We fit linear trendlines and calculated χ2 statistics. RESULTS: The number of first-year pediatric medical subspecialty fellows increased from 751 in 2001 to 1445 in 2018. Fields with the growth of 3 or more fellows per year were Cardiology, Critical Care, Emergency Medicine, Gastroenterology, Neonatology, and Hematology Oncology (P value <0.05 for all). The number of fellows entering Adolescent Medicine, Child Abuse, Infectious Disease, and Nephrology increased at a rate of 0.5 fellows or fewer per year. Female American Medical Graduates represented the largest and growing proportions of several subspecialties. Distribution of programs by region and size were relatively consistent over time, but varied across subspecialties. CONCLUSIONS: The number of pediatricians entering medical subspecialty fellowship training is uneven and patterns of growth differ between subspecialties. IMPACT: The number of individuals entering fellowship training has increased between 2001 and 2018. Growth in the number of first-year fellows is uneven. Fields with the greatest growth: Critical Care, Emergency Medicine, and Neonatology. Fields with limited growth: Adolescent Medicine, Child Abuse, Infectious Disease, and Nephrology. Concerns about the pediatric medical subspecialty workforce are not explained by the number of individuals entering the fellowship.

Protocol Use in Surgical Intensive Care Units.

BACKGROUND: Protocols are common in intensive care, however the association between protocol prevalence and outcomes in surgical ICU patients is unclear. We hypothesized that ICUs in a multicenter database using more protocols had better outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a 2-d prevalence study with 30-d follow up, on surgical and trauma patients in ICUs at 42 trauma centers. Use of forty clinical protocols was queried. Protocol prevalence was categorized by quartile into Low (first), Moderate (second and third), or High (fourth) use ICUs. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes were ventilator, ICU, and hospital days, mechanical ventilation, tracheostomy, renal replacement, transfusion, and hospital-acquired infections. RESULTS: Data from 1044 surgical and trauma patients were analyzed. Protocol use was not different for "closed" (n = 20), "open" (n = 9), or "semi-open" (n = 13) ICUs (P= 0.20). Thirty-day in-hospital mortality was 8.4%, and not associated with number of protocols (OR 1.01 [95% CI 0.98-1.03], P= 0.65). There was no statistically significant difference between High and Low use ICUs for ventilator days (OR 0.86; 0.52-1.43), tracheostomy (OR 0.8; 0.47-1.38), renal replacement therapy (OR 0.66; 0.04-9.82), transfusion (OR 0.95; 0.58-1.57), or hospital-acquired infections (OR 1.07; 0.67-1.7). Higher mortality was seen in open (versusclosed; OR 1.74 [1.05-2.89], P= 0.033), and surgical/trauma (versustrauma; OR 1.86 [1.33-2.61]; P< 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter observational study of surgical ICU patients, no association was found between the number of protocols used and patient outcomes.

Knowledge translation tools to guide care of non-intubated patients with acute respiratory illness during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Providing optimal care to patients with acute respiratory illness while preventing hospital transmission of COVID-19 is of paramount importance during the pandemic; the challenge lies in achieving both goals simultaneously. Controversy exists regarding the role of early intubation versus use of non-invasive respiratory support measures to avoid intubation. This review summarizes available evidence and provides a clinical decision algorithm with risk mitigation techniques to guide clinicians in care of the hypoxemic, non-intubated, patient during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although aerosolization of droplets may occur with aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMP), including high flow nasal oxygen and non-invasive ventilation, the risk of using these AGMP is outweighed by the benefit in carefully selected patients, particularly if care is taken to mitigate risk of viral transmission. Non-invasive support measures should not be denied for conditions where previously proven effective and may be used even while there is suspicion of COVID-19 infection. Patients with de novo acute respiratory illness with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 may also benefit. These techniques may improve oxygenation sufficiently to allow some patients to avoid intubation; however, patients must be carefully monitored for signs of increased work of breathing. Patients showing signs of clinical deterioration or high work of breathing not alleviated by non-invasive support should proceed promptly to intubation and invasive lung protective ventilation strategy. With adherence to these principles, risk of viral spread can be minimized.

COVID-19: What we've done well and what we could or should have done better-the 4 Ps.

The current coronavirus pandemic has impacted heavily on ICUs worldwide. Although many hospitals and healthcare systems had plans in place to manage multiple casualties as a result of major natural disasters or accidents, there was insufficient preparation for the sudden, massive influx of severely ill patients with COVID-19. As a result, systems and staff were placed under immense pressure as everyone tried to optimize patient management. As the pandemic continues, we must apply what we have learned about our response, both good and bad, to improve organization and thus patient care in the future.