Challenges and Approaches to High-Level Isolation Unit Staffing and Just-in-Time Training: A Meeting Report.

In November 2022, the National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center hosted a virtual session with global high-level isolation unit (HLIU) representatives to discuss HLIU staffing challenges and approaches. Takeaways are relevant to healthcare institutions seeking solutions to recruit and retain their healthcare workforce amid unprecedented global staffing shortages.

The Utility and Sustainability of US Ebola Treatment Centers during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: In response to the 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) designated 56 US hospitals as Ebola treatment centers (ETCs) with high-level isolation capabilities. We aimed to determine ongoing sustainability of ETCs and identify how ETC capabilities have impacted hospital, local, and regional COVID-19 readiness and response. DESIGN: An electronic survey included both qualitative and quantitative questions and was structured into two sections: operational sustainability and role in the COVID-19 response. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The survey was distributed to site representatives from the 56 originally designated ETCs; 37 (66%) responded. METHODS: Data were coded and analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of the 37 responding ETCs, 33 (89%) reported they were still operating while 4 had decommissioned. ETCs that maintain high-level isolation capabilities incurred a mean of $234,367 in expenses per year. All but one ETC reported that existing capabilities (e.g., trained staff, infrastructure) before COVID-19 positively affected their hospital, local, and regional COVID-19 readiness and response (e.g., ETCs trained staff, donated supplies, and shared developed protocols). CONCLUSIONS: Existing high-level isolation capabilities and expertise developed following the 2014-2016 EVD epidemic were leveraged by ETCs to assist hospital-wide readiness for COVID-19 and support response for other local and regional hospitals However, ETCs face continued challenges in sustaining those capabilities for high-consequence infectious diseases.

An Updated Review of Literature for Air Medical Evacuation High-Level Containment Transport During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: In 2019, our team conducted a literature review of air medical evacuation high-level containment transport (AE-HLCT) of patients infected with high-consequence pathogens. Since that publication, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in numerous air medical evacuations. We re-examined the new literature associated with AE-HLCTs to determine new innovations developed as a result of the pandemic. METHODS: A literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE from February 2019 to October 2021. The authors screened abstracts for the inclusion criteria and reviewed full articles if the abstract was relevant to the aim. RESULTS: Our search criteria yielded 19 publications. Many of the early transports of patients with COVID-19 used established protocols for AE-HLCT, which were built from the most recent transports of patients with Ebola virus disease. Innovations from the identified articles are subdivided into preflight considerations, in-flight operations, and postflight operations. CONCLUSION: Lessons gleaned from AE-HLCTs of patients with COVID-19 in the early weeks of the pandemic, when little was known about transmission or the severity of the novel disease, have advanced the field of AE-HLCT. Teams that had never conducted such transports now have experience and processes. However, more research into AE-HLCT is needed, including research related to single-patient portable isolation units as well as containerized/multipatient transportation systems.

Treating Workers as Essential Too: An Ethical Framework for Public Health Interventions to Prevent and Control COVID-19 Infections among Meat-processing Facility Workers and Their Communities in the United States.

Meat is a multi-billion-dollar industry that relies on people performing risky physical work inside meat-processing facilities over long shifts in close proximity. These workers are socially disempowered, and many are members of groups beset by historic and ongoing structural discrimination. The combination of working conditions and worker characteristics facilitate the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Workers have been expected to put their health and lives at risk during the pandemic because of government and industry pressures to keep this "essential industry" producing. Numerous interventions can significantly reduce the risks to workers and their communities; however, the industry's implementation has been sporadic and inconsistent. With a focus on the U.S. context, this paper offers an ethical framework for infection prevention and control recommendations grounded in public health values of health and safety, interdependence and solidarity, and health equity and justice, with particular attention to considerations of reciprocity, equitable burden sharing, harm reduction, and health promotion. Meat-processing workers are owed an approach that protects their health relative to the risks of harms to them, their families, and their communities. Sacrifices from businesses benefitting financially from essential industry status are ethically warranted and should acknowledge the risks assumed by workers in the context of existing structural inequities.

Emergency preparedness: What is the future?

Emergency preparedness programs have evolved over the last several decades as communities have responded to natural, intentional, and accidental disasters. This evolution has resulted in a comprehensive all-hazards approach centered around 4 fundamental phases spanning the entire disaster life cycle: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. Increasing frequency of outbreaks and epidemics of emerging and reemerging infectious diseases in the last decade has emphasized the significance of healthcare emergency preparedness programs, but the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has tested healthcare facilities' emergency plans and exposed vulnerabilities in healthcare emergency preparedness on a scale unexperienced in recent history. We review the 4 phases of emergency management and explore the lessons to be learned from recent events in enhancing health systems capabilities and capacities to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from biological threats or events, whether it be a pandemic or a single case of an unknown infectious disease. A recurring cycle of assessing, planning, training, exercising, and revising is vital to maintaining healthcare system preparedness, even in absence of an immediate, high probability threat. Healthcare epidemiologists and infection preventionists must play a pivotal role in incorporating lessons learned from the pandemic into emergency preparedness programs and building more robust preparedness plans.

Best practices of highly infectious decedent management: Consensus recommendations from an international expert workshop.

With the increasing number of highly infectious disease incidents, outbreaks, and pandemics in our society (e.g., Ebola virus disease, Lassa fever, coronavirus diseases), the need for consensus and best practices on highly infectious decedent management is critical. In January 2020, a workshop of subject matter experts from across the world convened to discuss highly infectious live patient transport and highly infectious decedent management best practices. This commentary focuses on the highly infectious decedent management component of the workshop. The absence of guidance or disparate guidance on highly infectious decedent management can increase occupational safety and health risks for death care sector workers. To address this issue, the authorship presents these consensus recommendations on best practices in highly infectious decedent management, including discussion of what is considered a highly infectious decedent; scalability and storage for casualty events; integration of key stakeholders; infection control and facility considerations; transport; care and autopsy; psychological, ethical, and cultural considerations as well as multi-national care perspectives. These consensus recommendations are not intended to be exhaustive but rather to underscore this overlooked area and serve as a starting point for much-needed conversations.

Institutional policies and readiness in management of critical illness among patients with viral hemorrhagic fever.

OBJECTIVE: In response to the 2013-2016 Ebola virus disease outbreak, the US government designated certain healthcare institutions as Ebola treatment centers (ETCs) to better prepare for future emerging infectious disease outbreaks. This study investigated ETC experiences and critical care policies for patients with viral hemorrhagic fever (VHF). DESIGN: A 58-item questionnaire elicited information on policies for 9 critical care interventions, factors that limited care provision, and innovations developed to deliver care. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The questionnaire was sent to 82 ETCs. METHODS: We analyzed ordinal and categorical data pertaining to the ETC characteristics and descriptive data about their policies and perceived challenges. Statistical analyses assessed whether ETCs with experience caring for VHF patients were more likely to have critical care policies than those that did not. RESULTS: Of the 27 ETCs who responded, 17 (63%) were included. Among them, 8 (47%) reported experience caring for persons under investigation or confirmed cases of VHF. Most felt ready to provide intubation, chest compressions, and renal replacement therapy to these patients. The factors most cited for limiting care were staff safety and clinical futility. Innovations developed to better provide care included increased simulation training and alternative technologies for procedures and communication. CONCLUSIONS: There were broad similarities in critical care policies and limitations among institutions. There were several interventions, namely ECMO and cricothyrotomy, which few institutions felt ready to provide. Future studies could identify obstacles to providing these interventions and explore policy changes after increased experience with novel infectious diseases, such as COVID-19.

Using a Critical Safety Behavior Scoring Tool for Just-in-Time Training for N95 Respirator Use.

BACKGROUND: Historically, health care workers (HCWs) have exhibited marginal adherence to proper N95 respirator use. During the COVID-19 pandemic, HCWs with little to no prior training on N95 respirator use are relying on N95s as their primary respiratory protection. There is a need for simple, effective, and easily implementable just-in-time training (JITT) interventions to improve N95 respirator-related safety behavior. This study investigated two JITT interventions. METHODS: A pilot experimental pretest posttest study design was used to evaluate two training interventions for N95 respirator donning/doffing performance at a Midwestern hospital system. HCW participants were randomly assigned to an intervention: one used a 4-minute instructional video alone, while the other used the same video but added a video reflection intervention (participant watched and scored a video of their own performance). All performances were scored using a 10-point Critical Safety Behavior Scoring Tool (CSBST). FINDINGS: Sixty-two HCWs participated (32 video alone, 30 video reflection). The two groups' CSBST scores were not significantly different at pretest. Averaged participant scores on the CSBST improved immediately following both interventions. Scores were significantly higher on the posttest for the reflective practice intervention (p<.05). Years of experience and frequency of N95 respirator use did not predict pre or post scores. CONCLUSIONS/APPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE: We provide evidence to support the use of a time-efficient JITT intervention to improve HCW N95 respirator donning/doffing practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Hospital safety professionals should consider this type of training for HCWs required to wear respiratory protection.

A pilot study of core body temperatures in healthcare workers wearing personal protective equipment in a high-level isolation unit.

Personal protective equipment used by healthcare workers to mitigate disease transmission risks while caring for patients with high-consequence infectious diseases can impair normal body cooling mechanisms and exacerbate physiological strain. Symptoms of heat strain (e.g., cognitive impairment, confusion, muscle cramping) are especially harmful in the high-risk environment of high-consequence infectious disease care. In this pilot study, the core body temperatures of healthcare workers were assessed using an ingestible, wireless-transmission thermometer while performing patient care tasks common to a high-level isolation unit setting in powered air purifying respirator (PAPR)-level. The objective was to determine the potential for occupational health hazard due to heat stress in an environmentally controlled unit. Maximum core temperatures of the six participants ranged from 37.4 °C (99.3 °F) to 39.9 °C (103.8°F) during the 4-hr shift; core temperatures of half (n = 3) of the participants exceeded 38.5 °C (101.3 °F), the upper core temperature limit. Future investigations are needed to identify other heat stress risks both in and outside of controlled units. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic offers unique opportunities for field-based research on risks of heat stress related to personal protective equipment in healthcare workers that can lead to both short- and long-term innovations in this field.

Leveraging a Preexisting Global Infectious Disease Network for Local Decision Making During a Pandemic.

Emerging infectious disease epidemics require a rapid response from health systems; however, evidence-based consensus guidelines are generally absent early in the course of events. Formed in 2017 by 5 high-level isolation units spanning 3 continents, the experience of the Global Infectious Disease Preparedness Network (GIDPN) early in the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides a model for accelerating best practice development and improving decision-making in health emergencies. The network served as a platform for real-time, open and transparent information-sharing during unknowns of an active outbreak by clinicians caring for patients, by researchers conducting clinical trials and transmission and infection prevention studies, and by teams advising local and national policy makers. Shared knowledge led to earlier adoption of some treatment modalities as compared to most peer institutions and to implementation of protocols prior to incorporation into national guidelines. GIDPN and similar networks are integral in enhancing preparedness for and response to future epidemics/pandemics.

A Rapid-Response Survey of Essential Workers in Midwestern Meatpacking Plants: Perspectives on COVID-19 Response in the Workplace

The meatpacking industry has faced significant challenges in maintaining a safe and healthy working environment for its employees during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has resulted in worker illness and death, temporary closures of facilities, reductions in production capacity, and consequences throughout the supply chain. We sought to explore the concerns and perceptions of COVID-19 among meatpacking workers in the Midwestern part of the U.S. We conducted an online survey of meatpacking workers in Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri between May 7 and 25, 2020. A total of 585 workers participated (M = 41.3 years, SD = 10.3). More than 72% of workers believed that they were at "high risk" for contracting COVID-19, but less than one half had been tested (42%). Most workers (83%) reported that their employer had instituted some safety measures, but less than one half reported physical distancing on the line (39%), slowing down the line (34%), additional paid time off (28%), or restructuring of shifts (20%). Enforceable standards are needed in the meatpacking industry to reduce COVID-19 transmission. Culturally and linguistically tailored education, paid sick leave, and restructuring of work can reduce the risks of COVID-19 transmission. Transparency on workplace transmission rates is essential to developing strategies to mitigate occupational risks and foster worker trust.

Expansion of simulation and extended reality for undergraduate health professions education: A call to action.

In the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic limited access for many health professions students to clinical settings amid concerns about availability of appropriate personal protective equipment as well as the desire to limit exposure in these high-risk settings. Furthermore, the pandemic led to a need to cancel clinics and inpatient rotations, with a major impact on training for health professions and interprofessional health delivery, the long-term effects of which are currently unknown. While problematic, this also presents an opportunity to reflect on challenges facing the traditional clinical training paradigm in a rapidly changing and complex health care system and develop sustainable, high-quality competency-based educational models that incorporate rapidly progressing technologies. We call for pilot studies to explore specific simulation-based inpatient and outpatient clinical rotations for professional and interprofessional training.

Invisible No More: The Impact of COVID-19 on Essential Food Production Workers.

From the farms to the packing plants, essential workers in critical food production industries keep food on our tables while risking their and their families' health and well-being to bring home a paycheck. They work in essential industries but are often invisible. The disparities illuminated by COVID-19 are not new. Instead, they are the result of years of inequities built into practices, policies, and systems that reinforce societal power structures. As a society, we are now at an antagonizing moment where we can change our collective trajectory to focus forward and promote equity and justice for workers in agriculture and food-related industries. To that end, we describe our experience and approach in addressing COVID-19 outbreaks in meat processing facilities, which included three pillars of action based on public health ethics and international human rights: (1) worksite prevention and control, (2) community-based prevention and control, and (3) treatment. Our approach can be translated to promote the health, safety, and well-being of the broader agricultural workforce.

Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission among Meat Processing Workers in Nebraska, USA, and Effectiveness of Risk Mitigation Measures.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has severely impacted the meat processing industry in the United States. We sought to detail demographics and outcomes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections among workers in Nebraska meat processing facilities and determine the effects of initiating universal mask policies and installing physical barriers at 13 meat processing facilities. During April 1-July 31, 2020, COVID-19 was diagnosed in 5,002 Nebraska meat processing workers (attack rate 19%). After initiating both universal masking and physical barrier interventions, 8/13 facilities showed a statistically significant reduction in COVID-19 incidence in <10 days. Characteristics and incidence of confirmed cases aligned with many nationwide trends becoming apparent during this pandemic: specifically, high attack rates among meat processing industry workers, disproportionately high risk of adverse outcomes among ethnic and racial minority groups and men, and effectiveness of using multiple prevention and control interventions to reduce disease transmission.

Can You Catch It? Lessons Learned and Modification of ED Triage Symptom- and Travel-Screening Strategy.

INTRODUCTION: Efficient identification and isolation of patients with communicable diseases limits exposure to health care workers, other patients, and visitors. In August 2014, our team developed and implemented an algorithm to triage suspected cases of Ebola virus disease in a midwestern United States emergency department and outpatient clinics based on patient travel history and symptoms. Here, we present the lessons learned and modifications to update the tool. METHODS: Two strategies were developed and utilized to properly identify, isolate, and inform on patients with suspected highly hazardous communicable diseases: 1) a robust electronic symptom and travel screen with decision support tools in the electronic medical record, and 2) the availability of workflow protocols for Ebola virus disease, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) once a person under investigation is identified. After action reports provided opportunities to modify the algorithm and improve the identification and isolation processes. RESULTS: Since our screening and travel electronic medical record inception 5 years ago, modifications changed iteratively to further enhance the screening process. Since 2018, staff have identified 5 patients at risk for MERS; in all cases, identification occurred during the check-in process. Exposure investigations in the emergency department decreased significantly after algorithm implementation in January 2019, from 30 in 2018 to 0 in 2019. DISCUSSION: Although highly hazardous communicable diseases like Ebola virus disease and MERS are of concern due to their mortality rates and limited treatment options, these same concepts may be applied to the early identification and isolation of patients suspected of having more common communicable diseases like measles and influenza, emphasizing the importance of protocol-based screening in the healthcare environment.