White Paper on Early Critical Care Services in Low Resource Settings.

This White Paper has been formally accepted for support by the International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM) and by the World Federation of Intensive and Critical Care (WFICC), put forth by a multi-specialty group of intensivists and emergency medicine providers from low- and low-middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HiCs) with the aim of 1) defining the current state of caring for the critically ill in low-resource settings (LRS) within LMICs and 2) highlighting policy options and recommendations for improving the system-level delivery of early critical care services in LRS. LMICs have a high burden of critical illness and worse patient outcomes than HICs, hence, the focus of this White Paper is on the care of critically ill patients in the early stages of presentation in LMIC settings. In such settings, the provision of early critical care is challenged by a fragmented health system, costs, a health care workforce with limited training, and competing healthcare priorities. Early critical care services are defined as the early interventions that support vital organ function during the initial care provided to the critically ill patient-these interventions can be performed at any point of patient contact and can be delivered across diverse settings in the healthcare system and do not necessitate specialty personnel. Currently, a single "best" care delivery model likely does not exist in LMICs given the heterogeneity in local context; therefore, objective comparisons of quality, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness between varying models are difficult to establish. While limited, there is data to suggest that caring for the critically ill may be cost effective in LMICs, contrary to a widely held belief. Drawing from locally available resources and context, strengthening early critical care services in LRS will require a multi-faceted approach, including three core pillars: education, research, and policy. Education initiatives for physicians, nurses, and allied health staff that focus on protocolized emergency response training can bridge the workforce gap in the short-term; however, each country's current human resources must be evaluated to decide on the duration of training, who should be trained, and using what curriculum. Understanding the burden of critical Illness, best practices for resuscitation, and appropriate quality metrics for different early critical care services implementation models in LMICs are reliant upon strengthening the regional research capacity, therefore, standard documentation systems should be implemented to allow for registry use and quality improvement. Policy efforts at a local, national and international level to strengthen early critical care services should focus on funding the building blocks of early critical care services systems and promoting the right to access early critical care regardless of the patient's geographic or financial barriers. Additionally, national and local policies describing ethical dilemmas involving the withdrawal of life-sustaining care should be developed with broad stakeholder representation based on local cultural beliefs as well as the optimization of limited resources.

Assessment of Patient Safety Culture in a Pediatric Department.

Background An assessment of the prevalent culture needs to be the first step when building patient safety programs in healthcare organizations to achieve high-quality health care. Objective To conduct a baseline assessment of patient safety culture, to provide insight into the factors that contribute to patient safety, and to use the information to make improvements.  Methods The Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (PSC) questionnaire was conducted from October through December 2020 at the Brookdale Hospital Medical Center (BHMC) Pediatric departments (Pediatric Inpatient Unit, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit [NICU], Pediatric Intensive Care Unit [PICU], and Pediatric Emergency Department) and four community-based ambulatory pediatric practices (Brookdale Family Care Centers [BFCC]). The percentages of positive responses on the 12 patient-safety dimensions and the summation of PSC and two outcomes (overall patient safety grade and adverse events reported in the past year) were assessed. Factors associated with PSC aggregate score were analyzed. Results From the 385 emails that were sent, 136 surveys were considered for analysis. This gives us a response rate of 35.3%. Most of the participants were nurses (58%) with direct contact with patients (94.2%). Most respondents did not report any events (60.7%), whereas 30.3% reported 1-2 events in the past year. The patient safety composites with the highest positive scores were teamwork within units (78%), supervisor/manager expectations and actions promoting patient safety (71.2%), and organizational learning--continuous improvement (66.8%). The composites with the lowest scores were non-punitive response to error (35.9%) and staffing (38%). Conclusions All of our composite measures, with the exception of teamwork within units, appear to be low, which means that all the other composite measures require interventions for improvement of overall safety culture. In order for healthcare leaders and policymakers to establish a culture of safety and improvement, they must create a climate of open communication, continuous learning, and eliminate the fear of blame and punitive feedback.