Amplifying patient voices amid pandemic: Perspectives on tracheostomy care, communication, and connection.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate perspectives of patients, family members, caregivers (PFC), and healthcare professionals (HCP) on tracheostomy care during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The cross-sectional survey investigating barriers and facilitators to tracheostomy care was collaboratively developed by patients, family members, nurses, speech-language pathologists, respiratory care practitioners, physicians, and surgeons. The survey was distributed to the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative's learning community, and responses were analyzed. RESULTS: Survey respondents (n = 191) from 17 countries included individuals with a tracheostomy (85 [45 %]), families/caregivers (43 [22 %]), and diverse HCP (63 [33.0 %]). Overall, 94 % of respondents reported concern that patients with tracheostomy were at increased risk of critical illness from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19; 93 % reported fear or anxiety. With respect to prioritization of care, 38 % of PFC versus 16 % of HCP reported concern that patients with tracheostomies might not be valued or prioritized (p = 0.002). Respondents also differed in fear of contracting COVID-19 (69 % PFC vs. 49 % HCP group, p = 0.009); concern for hospitalization (55.5 % PFC vs. 27 % HCP, p < 0.001); access to medical personnel (34 % PFC vs. 14 % HCP, p = 0.005); and concern about canceled appointments (62 % PFC vs. 41 % HCP, p = 0.01). Respondents from both groups reported severe stress and fatigue, sleep deprivation, lack of breaks, and lack of support (70 % PFC vs. 65 % HCP, p = 0.54). Virtual telecare seldom met perceived needs. CONCLUSION: PFC with a tracheostomy perceived most risks more acutely than HCP in this global sample. Broad stakeholder engagement is necessary to achieve creative, patient-driven solutions to maintain connection, communication, and access for patients with a tracheostomy.

Global Tracheostomy Collaborative: data-driven improvements in patient safety through multidisciplinary teamwork, standardisation, education, and patient partnership.

There is growing recognition of the need for a coordinated, systematic approach to caring for patients with a tracheostomy. Tracheostomy-related adverse events remain a pervasive global problem, accounting for half of all airway-related deaths and hypoxic brain damage in critical care units. The Global Tracheostomy Collaborative (GTC) was formed in 2012 to improve patient safety and quality of care, emphasising knowledge, skills, teamwork, and patient-centred approaches. Inspired by quality improvement leads in Australia, the UK, and the USA, the GTC implements and disseminates best practices across hospitals and healthcare trusts. Its database collects patient-level information on quality, safety, and organisational efficiencies. The GTC provides an organising structure for quality improvement efforts, promoting safety of paediatric and adult patients. Successful implementation requires instituting key drivers for change that include effective training for health professionals; multidisciplinary team collaboration; engagement and involvement of patients, their families, and carers; and data collection that allows tracking of outcomes. We report the history of the collaborative, its database infrastructure and analytics, and patient outcomes from more than 6500 patients globally. We characterise this patient population for the first time at such scale, reporting predictors of adverse events, mortality, and length of stay indexed to patient characteristics, co-morbidities, risk factors, and context. In one example, the database allowed identification of a previously unrecognised association between bleeding and mortality, reflecting ability to uncover latent risks and promote safety. The GTC provides the foundation for future risk-adjusted benchmarking and a learning community that drives ongoing quality improvement efforts worldwide.

Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21): Factor Structure in Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: To confirm the construct validity of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21 (DASS-21) by investigating the fit of published factor structures in a sample of adults with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (posttraumatic amnesia > 24 hours). PARTICIPANTS: Archival data from 504 patient records at the Brain Injury Rehabilitation Unit at Liverpool Hospital, Australia. Participants were aged between 16 and 71 years and were engaged in a specialist rehabilitation program. MAIN MEASURE: The DASS-21. RESULTS: Two of the 6 models had adequate fit using structural equation modeling. The data best fit Henry and Crawford's quadripartite model, which comprised a Depression, Anxiety and Stress factor, as well as a General Distress factor. The data also adequately fit Lovibond and Lovibond's original 3-factor model, and the internal consistencies of each factor were very good (α = 0.82-0.90). CONCLUSION: This study confirms the structure and construct validity of the DASS-21 and provides support for its use as a screening tool in traumatic brain injury rehabilitation.

Multidisciplinary Tracheostomy Quality Improvement in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Building a Global Learning Community.

OBJECTIVES: To report experience with a global multidisciplinary tracheostomy e-learning initiative. METHODS: An international multidisciplinary panel of experts convened to build a virtual learning community for tracheostomy care, comprising a web-based platform, five distance learning (interactive webinar) sessions, and professional discourse over 12 months. Structured pre- and post-webinar surveys were disseminated to global participants including otolaryngologists, intensivists, nurses, allied health professionals, and patients/caregivers. Data were collected on audio-visual fidelity, demographics, and pre- and post-tutorial assessments regarding experience and skill acquisition. Participants reported confidence levels for NICU, pediatric, adult, and family care, as well as technical skills, communication, learning, assessment, and subdomains. RESULTS: Participants from 197 institutions in 22 countries engaged in the virtual education platform, including otolaryngologists, speech pathologists, respiratory therapists, specialist nurses, patients, and caregivers. Significant improvements were reported in communication (P < .0001), clinical assessments (P < .0001), and clinical governance (P < .0001), with positive impact on pediatric decannulation (P = .0008), adult decannulation (P = .04), and quality improvement (P < .0001). Respondents reported enhanced readiness to integrate knowledge into practice. Barriers included time zones, internet bandwidth, and perceived difficulty of direct clinical translation of highly technical skills. Participants rated the implementation highly in terms of length, ability for discussion, satisfaction, applicability to professional practice, and expertise of discussants (median scores: 4, 4, 4, 4 and 5 out of 5). CONCLUSIONS: Virtual learning has dominated the education landscape during COVID-19 pandemic, but few data are available on its effectiveness. This study demonstrated feasibility of virtual learning for disseminating best practices in tracheostomy, engaging a diverse, multidisciplinary audience. Learning of complex technical skills proved a hurdle, however, suggesting need for hands-on experience for technical mastery. While interactive videoconferencing via webinar affords an engaging and scalable strategy for sharing knowledge, further investigation is needed on clinical outcomes to define effective strategies for experiential online learning and virtual in-service simulations.