Moral Injury in Health Care: Identification and Repair in the COVID-19 Era.

Frontline health-care workers experienced moral injury long before COVID-19, but the pandemic highlighted how pervasive and damaging this psychological harm can be. Moral injury occurs when individuals violate or witness violations of deeply held values and beliefs. We argue that a continuum exists between moral distress, moral injury, and burnout. Distinguishing these experiences highlights opportunities for intervention and moral repair, and may thwart progression to burnout.

Latent Class Analysis Reveals COVID-19-related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Subgroups with Differential Responses to Corticosteroids.

Rationale: Two distinct subphenotypes have been identified in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but the presence of subgroups in ARDS associated with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is unknown. Objectives: To identify clinically relevant, novel subgroups in COVID-19-related ARDS and compare them with previously described ARDS subphenotypes. Methods: Eligible participants were adults with COVID-19 and ARDS at Columbia University Irving Medical Center. Latent class analysis was used to identify subgroups with baseline clinical, respiratory, and laboratory data serving as partitioning variables. A previously developed machine learning model was used to classify patients as the hypoinflammatory and hyperinflammatory subphenotypes. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between subgroups. Heterogeneity of treatment effect for corticosteroid use in subgroups was tested. Measurements and Main Results: From March 2, 2020, to April 30, 2020, 483 patients with COVID-19-related ARDS met study criteria. A two-class latent class analysis model best fit the population (P = 0.0075). Class 2 (23%) had higher proinflammatory markers, troponin, creatinine, and lactate, lower bicarbonate, and lower blood pressure than class 1 (77%). Ninety-day mortality was higher in class 2 versus class 1 (75% vs. 48%; P < 0.0001). Considerable overlap was observed between these subgroups and ARDS subphenotypes. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RT-PCR cycle threshold was associated with mortality in the hypoinflammatory but not the hyperinflammatory phenotype. Heterogeneity of treatment effect to corticosteroids was observed (P = 0.0295), with improved mortality in the hyperinflammatory phenotype and worse mortality in the hypoinflammatory phenotype, with the caveat that corticosteroid treatment was not randomized. Conclusions: We identified two COVID-19-related ARDS subgroups with differential outcomes, similar to previously described ARDS subphenotypes. SARS-CoV-2 PCR cycle threshold had differential value for predicting mortality in the subphenotypes. The subphenotypes had differential treatment responses to corticosteroids.

Stress-Related Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients with Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Stress-related mucosal bleeding (SRMB) occurs in approximately 2-4% of critically ill patients. Patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) have a (diffuse) space-occupying lesion, are critically ill, often require mechanical ventilation, and frequently receive anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy after aneurysm embolization, all of which may be risk factors for SRMB. However, no studies have evaluated SRMB in patients with aSAH. Aims of the study were to determine the incidence of SRMB in aSAH patients, evaluate the effect of acid suppression on SRMB, and identify specific risk factors for SRMB. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational study conducted across 17 centers. Each center reviewed up to 50 of the most recent cases of aSAH. Patients with length of stay (LOS) < 48 h or active GI bleeding on admission were excluded. Variables related to demographics, aSAH severity, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, provision of SRMB prophylaxis, adverse events, intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital LOS were collected for the first 21 days of admission or until hospital discharge, whichever came first. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. A multivariate logistic regression modeling was utilized to examine the relationship between specific risk factors and the incidence of clinically important GI bleeding in patients with aSAH. RESULTS: A total of 627 patients were included. The overall incidence of clinically important GI bleeding was 4.9%. Of the patients with clinically important GI bleeding, 19 (61%) received pharmacologic prophylaxis prior to evidence of GI bleeding, while 12 (39%) were not on pharmacologic prophylaxis at the onset of GI bleeding. Patients who received an acid suppressant agent were less likely to experience GI bleeding than patients who did not receive pharmacologic prophylaxis prior to evidence of bleeding (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18-0.83). The multivariate regression analysis identified any instance of elevated intracranial pressure, creatinine clearance < 60 ml/min and the incidence of cerebral vasospasm as specific risk factors associated with GI bleeding. Cerebral vasospasm has not previously been described as a risk for GI bleeding (OR 2.5 95% CI 1.09-5.79). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically important GI bleeding occurred in 4.9% of patients with aSAH, similar to the general critical care population. Risk factors associated with GI bleeding were prolonged mechanical ventilation (> 48 h), creatinine clearance < 60 ml/min, presence of coagulopathy, elevation of intracranial pressure, and cerebral vasospasm. Further prospective research is needed to confirm this observation within this patient population.

Correction to: Standards for Neurologic Critical Care Units: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals from The Neurocritical Care Society.

The authors note that there is a discrepancy between the text of the paper and Table 2 regarding physician subspecialty certification requirements in neurocritical care for Level II centers.

Standards for Neurologic Critical Care Units: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals from The Neurocritical Care Society.

Neurocritical care is a distinct subspecialty focusing on the optimal management of acutely ill patients with life-threatening neurologic and neurosurgical disease or with life-threatening neurologic manifestations of systemic disease. Care by expert healthcare providers to optimize neurologic recovery is necessary. Given the lack of an organizational framework and criteria for the development and maintenance of neurological critical care units (NCCUs), this document is put forth by the Neurocritical Care Society (NCS). Recommended organizational structure, personnel and processes necessary to develop a successful neurocritical care program are outlined. Methods: Under the direction of NCS Executive Leadership, a multidisciplinary writing group of NCS members was formed. After an iterative process, a framework was proposed and approved by members of the writing group. A draft was then written, which was reviewed by the NCS Quality Committee and NCS Guidelines Committee, members at large, and posted for public comment. Feedback was formally collated, reviewed and incorporated into the final document which was subsequently approved by the NCS Board of Directors.

Screening of living organ donors for endemic infections: Understanding the challenges and benefits of enhanced screening.

Living organ donor candidates are screened for medical and psychosocial contraindications to donation. One important goal of this process is to prevent donor-derived infectious diseases transmissions. These transmissions are exceptionally rare, but have the potential to cause significant morbidity and mortality. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network now requires each recovery hospital to develop a protocol for evaluating living donors for tuberculosis and other geographically-defined endemic pathogens, including Trypanosoma cruzi (the causative pathogen of Chagas' disease), Strongyloides stercoralis, and West Nile Virus (WNV), in addition to universal screening for blood-borne pathogens. Enhanced screening requirements were developed in response to the changing epidemiology and endemicity of these diseases, as well as recent case reports of donor-derived disease transmission. Living organ donor disease screening presents a number of unique challenges to clinicians and policy-makers, including deciding which donors to test, which testing modality to use, when to test, and appropriate interpretation of results. This review will analyze the epidemiology of T. cruzi, S. stercoralis, and WNV, the assays available for screening for these diseases, and the subsequent impact on the living organ donor process . This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Systematic Quality Assessment of Published Antishivering Protocols.

Shivering is a common side effect of targeted temperature modulation and general anesthesia. Antishivering strategies often employ a stepwise approach involving both pharmacological and physical interventions. However, approaches to treat shivering are often empiric and vary widely across care environments. We evaluated the quality of published antishivering protocols and guidelines with respect to methodological rigor, reliability, and consistency of recommendations.Using 4 medical databases, we identified 4027 publications that addressed shivering therapy, and excluded 3354 due to lack of relevance. After applying predefined eligibility criteria with respect to minimal protocol standards, 18 protocols/guidelines remained. Each was assessed using a modified Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (mAGREE II) instrument containing 23 quality items within 6 domains (maximal score 23). Among 18 protocols/guidelines, only 3 incorporated systematically reviewed recommendations, whereas 15 merely targeted practice standardization. Fifteen of 18 protocols/guidelines addressed shivering during therapeutic cooling in which skin counterwarming and meperidine were most commonly cited. However, their mAGREE II scores were within the lowest tertile (1 to 7 points) and the median for all 18 protocols was 5. The quality domains most commonly absent were stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, and editorial independence. Three of 18 protocols/guidelines addressed postanesthetic antishivering. Of these, the American Society of Anesthesiologists guidelines recommending forced-air warming and meperidine received the highest mAGREE II score (14 points), whereas the remaining 2 recommendations had low scores (<5 points).Current published antishivering protocols/guidelines lack methodological rigor, reliability, and strength, and even the highest scoring of the 18 protocols/guidelines fulfilled only 60% of quality items. To be consistent with evidence-based protocol/guideline development processes, future antishivering treatment algorithms should increase methodological rigor and transparency.

National Survey of Patient Safety Experiences in Hospital Medicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals were caring for increasing numbers of patients with a novel and highly contagious respiratory illness, forcing adaptations in care delivery. The objective of this study was to understand the impact of these adaptations on patient safety in hospital medicine. METHODS: The authors conducted a nationwide survey to understand patient safety challenges experienced by hospital medicine clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was distributed to members of the Society of Hospital Medicine via an e-mail listserv. It consisted of closed- and open-ended questions to elicit respondents' experience in five domains: error reporting and communication, staffing, equipment, personal protective equipment (PPE) and isolation practices, and infrastructure. Quantitative questions were reported as counts and percentages; qualitative responses were coded and analyzed for relevant themes. RESULTS: Of 196 total responses, 167 respondents (85.2%) were attending physicians and 85 (43.8%) practiced at teaching hospitals. Safety concerns commonly identified included nursing shortages (71.0%), limiting patient interactions to conserve PPE (61.9%), and feeling that one was practicing in a more hazardous environment (61.4%). In free-text responses, clinicians described poor outcomes and patient decompensation due to provider and equipment shortages, as well as communication lapses and diagnostic errors resulting from decreased patient contact and the need to follow isolation protocols. CONCLUSION: Efforts made to accommodate shortages in staff and equipment, adapt to limited PPE, and enforce isolation policies had unintended consequences that affected patient safety and created a more hazardous environment characterized by less efficient care, respiratory decompensations, diagnostic errors, and poor communication with patients.

Examining medication ordering errors using AHRQ network of patient safety databases.

BACKGROUND: Studies examining the effects of computerized order entry (CPOE) on medication ordering errors demonstrate that CPOE does not consistently prevent these errors as intended. We used the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Network of Patient Safety Databases (NPSD) to investigate the frequency and degree of harm of reported events that occurred at the ordering stage, characterized by error type. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of safety events reported by healthcare systems in participating patient safety organizations from 6/2010 through 12/2020. All medication and other substance ordering errors reported to NPSD via common format v1.2 between 6/2010 through 12/2020 were analyzed. We aggregated and categorized the frequency of reported medication ordering errors by error type, degree of harm, and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 12 830 errors were reported during the study period. Incorrect dose accounted for 3812 errors (29.7%), followed by incorrect medication 2086 (16.3%), and incorrect duration 765 (6.0%). Of 5282 events that reached the patient and had a known level of severity, 12 resulted in death, 4 resulted in severe harm, 45 resulted in moderate harm, 341 resulted in mild harm, and 4880 resulted in no harm. CONCLUSION: Incorrect dose and incorrect drug orders were the most commonly reported and harmful types of medication ordering errors. Future studies should aim to develop and test interventions focused on CPOE to prevent medication ordering errors, prioritizing wrong-dose and wrong-drug errors.

Critical Care Clinicians' Experiences of Patient Safety During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: It is unknown how hospital- and systems-level factors have impacted patient safety in the intensive care unit (ICU) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to understand how the pandemic has exacerbated preexisting patient safety issues and created novel patient safety challenges in ICUs in the United States. METHODS: We performed a national, multi-institutional, mixed-methods survey of critical care clinicians to elicit experiences related to patient safety during the pandemic. The survey was disseminated via email through the Society of Critical Care Medicine listserv. Data were reported as valid percentages, compared by COVID caseload and peak of the pandemic; free-text responses were analyzed and coded for themes. RESULTS: We received 335 survey responses. On general patient safety, 61% felt that conditions were more hazardous when compared with the prepandemic period. Those who took care of mostly COVID-19 patients were more likely to perceive that care was more hazardous (odds ratio, 4.89; 95% CI, 2.49-9.59) compared with those who took care of mostly non-COVID-19 or no COVID-19 patients. In free-text responses, providers identified patient safety risks related to pandemic adaptations, such as ventilator-related lung injury, medication and diagnostic errors, oversedation, oxygen device removal, and falls. CONCLUSIONS: Increased COVID-19 case burden was significantly associated with perceptions of a less safe patient care environment by frontline ICU clinicians. Results of the qualitative analysis identified specific patient safety hazards in ICUs across the United States as downstream consequences of hospital and provider strain during periods of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Withdrawal of Left Ventricular Assist Devices: A Retrospective Analysis from a Single Institution.

Background: When left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy no longer is able to achieve patients' desired quality of life, withdrawal of LVAD therapy (WLVAD) may be requested. Objectives: To evaluate factors associated with WLVAD, including the time taken before WLVAD. Setting/Subjects: Sixty-two patients who newly underwent initial LVAD therapy during January 1, 2010 and October 30, 2018 and subsequently underwent WLVAD by December 31, 2018 were divided into those who participated in the decision of WLVAD (defined as PT+, n = 14), and those who could not participate in the decision because of the medical reasons (defined as PT-, n = 48). Measurements: Time to WLVAD in PT+ and PT- was defined as WD_PT+ (days between patients' request and WLVAD) and WD_PT- (days between when patients became unable to express themselves and WLVAD), respectively. Circumstances around WLVAD, including location of death and use of palliative care (PC), were reviewed. Results: Mean age at WLVAD was 65.4 ± 10.1 years and 52 (83.9%) were men. Median days on LVAD support was 166.5 days (interquartile range = 838). The majority of WLVAD occurred in the intensive care unit (ICU) (83.6%) but less frequent in PT+ than in PT- (64.3% vs. 89.4%, p = 0.041). The median number of PC visits in the last month was higher in PT+ than in PT- (4.5 vs. 0.5, p = 0.005). The median WD_PT+ was 5.5 days and was significantly shorter in the ICU (1 day vs. 46 days, p = 0.013). The median WD_PT- was 5.5 days and tended to be shorter in the ICU (4 days vs. 13 days, p = 0.072). A multivariate analysis showed that male gender and ICU setting were both negatively associated with WD_PT- (p = 0.025 for men, p = 0.005 for ICU setting). Conclusions: The majority of WLVAD occurred in the ICU and required PC involvement. Time to WLVAD was shorter in the ICU. Requests for WLVAD directly made by patients, especially in a non-ICU setting, seemed to have posed more difficulty.