Wellness and Coping of Physicians Who Worked in ICUs During the Pandemic: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional North American Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Few surveys have focused on physician moral distress, burnout, and professional fulfilment. We assessed physician wellness and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey using four validated instruments. SETTING: Sixty-two sites in Canada and the United States. SUBJECTS: Attending physicians (adult, pediatric; intensivist, nonintensivist) who worked in North American ICUs. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analysed 431 questionnaires (43.3% response rate) from 25 states and eight provinces. Respondents were predominantly male (229 [55.6%]) and in practice for 11.8 ± 9.8 years. Compared with prepandemic, respondents reported significant intrapandemic increases in days worked/mo, ICU bed occupancy, and self-reported moral distress (240 [56.9%]) and burnout (259 [63.8%]). Of the 10 top-ranked items that incited moral distress, most pertained to regulatory/organizational ( n = 6) or local/institutional ( n = 2) issues or both ( n = 2). Average moral distress (95.6 ± 66.9), professional fulfilment (6.5 ± 2.1), and burnout scores (3.6 ± 2.0) were moderate with 227 physicians (54.6%) meeting burnout criteria. A significant dose-response existed between COVID-19 patient volume and moral distress scores. Physicians who worked more days/mo and more scheduled in-house nightshifts, especially combined with more unscheduled in-house nightshifts, experienced significantly more moral distress. One in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We identified four coping profiles (active/social, avoidant, mixed/ambivalent, infrequent) that were associated with significant differences across all wellness measures. CONCLUSIONS: Despite moderate intrapandemic moral distress and burnout, physicians experienced moderate professional fulfilment. However, one in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We highlight potentially modifiable factors at individual, institutional, and regulatory levels to enhance physician wellness.

A call for collaboration and consensus on training for endotracheal intubation in the medical intensive care unit.

Endotracheal intubation (EI) is a potentially lifesaving but high-risk procedure in critically ill patients. While the ACGME mandates that trainees in pulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM) achieve competence in this procedure, there is wide variation in EI training across the USA. One study suggests that 40% of the US PCCM trainees feel they would not be proficient in EI upon graduation. This article presents a review of the EI training literature; the recommendations of a national group of PCCM, anesthesiology, emergency medicine, and pediatric experts; and a call for further research, collaboration, and consensus guidelines.

Effectiveness of implementing a wake up and breathe program on sedation and delirium in the ICU.

OBJECTIVES: Mechanically ventilated critically ill patients receive significant amounts of sedatives and analgesics that increase their risk of developing coma and delirium. We evaluated the impact of a "Wake-up and Breathe Protocol" at our local ICU on sedation and delirium. DESIGN: A pre/post implementation study design. SETTING: A 22-bed mixed surgical and medical ICU. PATIENTS: Seven hundred two consecutive mechanically ventilated ICU patients from June 2010 to January 2013. INTERVENTIONS: Implementation of daily paired spontaneous awakening trials (daily sedation vacation plus spontaneous breathing trials) as a quality improvement project. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After implementation of our program, there was an increase in the mean Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale scores on weekdays of 0.88 (p < 0.0001) and an increase in the mean Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale scores on weekends of 1.21 (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for age, race, gender, severity of illness, primary diagnosis, and ICU, the incidence and prevalence of delirium did not change post implementation of the protocol (incidence: 23% pre vs 19.6% post; p = 0.40; prevalence: 66.7% pre vs 55.3% post; p = 0.06). The combined prevalence of delirium/coma decreased from 90.8% pre protocol implementation to 85% postimplementation (odds ratio, 0.505; 95% CI, 0.299-0.853; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a "Wake Up and Breathe Program" resulted in reduced sedation among critically ill mechanically ventilated patients but did not change the incidence or prevalence of delirium.

Eye on the Prize: Patient Outcomes Research in Medical Education.

The overarching goal of medical education is to train clinicians who achieve and maintain competence in patient care. Although the field of medical education research has acknowledged the importance of education on clinical practices and outcomes, most research endeavors continue to focus on learner-centered outcomes, such as knowledge and attitudes. The absence of clinical and patient-centered outcomes in pulmonary and critical care medicine medical education research has been attributed to barriers at multiple levels, including financial, methodological, and practical considerations. This Perspective explores clinical outcomes relevant to pulmonary and critical care medicine educational research and offers strategies and solutions that educators can use to accomplish what many consider the "prize" of medical education research: an understanding of how our educational initiatives impact the health of patients.

Build It and They Shall Come: Medical Education Communities of Practice.

Background: Producing scholarship in education is essential to the career development of a clinician-educator. Challenges to scholarly production include a lack of resources, time, expertise, and collaborators. Objective: To develop communities of practice for education scholarship through an international society to increase community and academic productivity. Methods: We developed multi-institutional scholarship pods within the American Thoracic Society through the creation of a working group (2017-2019). Pods met virtually, and meetings were goal focused to advance education scholarship within their area of interest. To understand the impact of these scholarship pods, we surveyed pod leaders and members in 2021 and analyzed the academic productivity of each pod via a survey of pod leaders and a review of the PubMed index. Results: Nine pods were created, each with an assigned educational topic. The survey had a response rate of 76.6%. The perceived benefits were the opportunity to meet colleagues with similar interests at other institutions, production of scholarly work, and engagement in new experiences. The main challenges were difficulty finding times to meet because of competing clinical demands and aligning times among pod members. Regarding academic productivity, eight publications, four conference presentations, and one webinar/podcast were produced by six of the nine pods. Conclusion: The development of communities of practice resulted in increased multi-site collaboration, with boosted academic productivity as well as an enhanced sense of belonging. Multiple challenges remain but can likely be overcome with accountability, early discussion of roles and expectations, and clear delegation of tasks and authorship.