Development of an intensive care unit resource assessment survey for the care of critically ill patients in resource-limited settings.

PURPOSE: Capacity to provide critical care in resource-limited settings is poorly understood because of lack of data about resources available to manage critically ill patients. Our objective was to develop a survey to address this issue. METHODS: We developed and piloted a cross-sectional self-administered survey in 9 resource-limited countries. The survey consisted of 8 domains; specific items within domains were modified from previously developed survey tools. We distributed the survey by e-mail to a convenience sample of health care providers responsible for providing care to critically ill patients. We assessed clinical sensibility and test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Nine of 15 health care providers responded to the survey on 2 separate occasions, separated by 2 to 4 weeks. Clinical sensibility was high (3.9-4.9/5 on assessment tool). Test-retest reliability for questions related to resource availability was acceptable (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.99; mean (SD) of weighted κ values = 0.67 [0.19]). The mean (SD) time for survey completion survey was 21 (16) minutes. CONCLUSIONS: A reliable cross-sectional survey of available resources to manage critically ill patients can be feasibly administered to health care providers in resource-limited settings. The survey will inform future research focusing on access to critical care where it is poorly described but urgently needed.

A survey on critical care resources and practices in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Timely and appropriate care is the key to achieving good outcomes in acutely ill patients, but the effectiveness of critical care may be limited in resource-limited settings. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to understand how to implement best practices in intensive care units (ICU) in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) and to develop a point-of-care training and decision-support tool. METHODS: An internationally representative group of clinicians performed a 22-item capacity-and-needs assessment survey in a convenience sample of 13 ICU in Eastern Europe (4), Asia (4), Latin America (3), and Africa (2), between April and July 2012. Two ICU were from low-income, 2 from low-middle-income, and 9 from upper-middle-income countries. Clinician respondents were asked about bed capacity, patient characteristics, human resources, available medications and equipment, access to education, and processes of care. RESULTS: Thirteen clinicians from each of 13 hospitals (1 per ICU) responded. Surveyed hospitals had median of 560 (interquartile range [IQR]: 232, 1,200) beds. ICU had a median of 9 (IQR: 7, 12) beds and treated 40 (IQR: 20, 67) patients per month. Many ICU had ≥ 1 staff member with some formal critical care training (n = 9, 69%) or who completed Fundamental Critical Care Support (n = 7, 54%) or Advanced Cardiac Life Support (n = 9, 69%) courses. Only 2 ICU (15%) used any kind of checklists for acute resuscitation. Ten (77%) ICU listed lack of trained staff as the most important barrier to improving the care and outcomes of critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS: In a convenience sample of 13 ICU from LMIC, specialty-trained staff and standardized processes of care such as checklists are frequently lacking. ICU needs-assessment evaluations should be expanded in LMIC as a global priority, with the goal of creating and evaluating context-appropriate checklists for ICU best practices.

Global burden of influenza as a cause of cardiopulmonary morbidity and mortality.

Severe acute respiratory infections, including influenza, are a leading cause of cardiopulmonary morbidity and mortality worldwide. Until recently, the epidemiology of influenza was limited to resource-rich countries. Emerging epidemiological reports characterizing the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, however, suggest that influenza exerts an even greater toll in low-income, resource-constrained environments where it is the cause of 5% to 27% of all severe acute respiratory infections. The increased burden of disease in this setting is multifactorial and likely is the result of higher rates of comorbidities such as human immunodeficiency virus, decreased access to health care, including vaccinations and antiviral medications, and limited healthcare infrastructure, including oxygen therapy or critical care support. Improved global epidemiology of influenza is desperately needed to guide allocation of life-saving resources, including vaccines, antiviral medications, and direct the improvement of basic health care to mitigate the impact of influenza infection on the most vulnerable populations.

Critical care and the global burden of critical illness in adults.

Critical care has evolved from treatment of poliomyelitis victims with respiratory failure in an intensive care unit to treatment of severely ill patients irrespective of location or specific technology. Population-based studies in the developed world suggest that the burden of critical illness is higher than generally appreciated and will increase as the population ages. Critical care capacity has long been needed in the developing world, and efforts to improve the care of the critically ill in these settings are starting to occur. Expansion of critical care to handle the consequences of an ageing population, natural disasters, conflict, inadequate primary care, and higher-risk medical therapies will be challenged by high costs at a time of economic constraint. To meet this challenge, investigators in this discipline will need to measure the global burden of critical illness and available critical-care resources, and develop both preventive and therapeutic interventions that are generalisable across countries.

Clinical review: critical care in the global context--disparities in burden of illness, access, and economics.

World health care expenditures exceed US $4 trillion. However, there is marked variation in global health care spending, from upwards of US $7,000 per capita in the US to under US $25 per capita in most of sub-Saharan Africa. In developed countries, care of the critically ill comprises a large proportion of health care spending; however, in developing countries, with a greater burden of both illness and critical illness, there is little infrastructure to provide care for these patients. There is sparse research to inform the needs of critically ill patients, but often basic requirements such as trained personnel, medications, oxygen, diagnostic and therapeutic equipment, reliable power supply, and safe transportation are unavailable. Why should this be a focus of intensivists of the developed world? Nearly all of those dying in developing countries would be our patients without the accident of latitude. Tailored to the needs of the region, the provision of critical care has a role, even in the context of limited preventive and primary care. Internationally and locally driven solutions are needed. We can help by recognizing the '10/90 gap' that is pervasive within global health care and our profession by educating ourselves of needs, contacting and collaborating with colleagues in the developing world, and advocating that our professional societies and funding agencies consider an increasingly global perspective in education and research.