COVID-19 Pandemic Simulation Modelling in Anaesthesia Residency Training to Predict Delays and Workforce Deficiencies: A Case Study of the Singapore Residency Training Program.

Background COVID-19 has been the worst pandemic of this century, resulting in economic, social, and educational disruptions. Residency training is no exception, with training restrictions delaying the progression and graduation of residents. We sought to utilize simulation modelling to predict the impact on future cohorts in the event of repeated and prolonged movement restrictions due to COVID-19 and future pandemics of a similar nature. Method A Delphi study was conducted to determine key Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-International (ACGME-I) training variables affected by COVID-19. Quantitative resident datasets on these variables were collated and analysed from 2018 to 2021. Using the Vensim® software (Ventana Systems, Inc., Harvard, MA), historical resident data and pandemic progression delays were used to create a novel simulation model to predict future progression delay. Various durations of delay were also programmed into the software to simulate restrictions of varying severity that would impact resident progression. Results Using the model with scenarios simulating varying pandemic length, we found that the estimated average delay for residents in each accredited year ranged from an increase of one month for year 2 residents to more than three months for year 4 residents. Movement restrictions lasting a year would require up to six years before the program returned to a pre-pandemic equilibrium. Conclusion Systems dynamic modelling can be used to predict delays in residency training programs during a pandemic. The impact on the workforce can thus be projected, allowing residency programs to institute mitigating measures to avoid progression delay.

Correction: Expanding the utility of the ROX index among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261234.].

Expanding the utility of the ROX index among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

BACKGROUND: Delaying intubation in patients who fail high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) may result in increased mortality. The ROX index has been validated to predict HFNC failure among pneumonia patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF), but little information is available for non-pneumonia causes. In this study, we validate the ROX index among AHRF patients due to both pneumonia or non-pneumonia causes, focusing on early prediction. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study in eight Singapore intensive care units from 1 January 2015 to 30 September 2017. All patients >18 years who were treated with HFNC for AHRF were eligible and recruited. Clinical parameters and arterial blood gas values at HFNC initiation and one hour were recorded. HFNC failure was defined as requiring intubation post-HFNC initiation. RESULTS: HFNC was used in 483 patients with 185 (38.3%) failing HFNC. Among pneumonia patients, the ROX index was most discriminatory in pneumonia patients one hour after HFNC initiation [AUC 0.71 (95% CI 0.64-0.79)], with a threshold value of <6.06 at one hour predicting HFNC failure (sensitivity 51%, specificity 80%, positive predictive value 61%, negative predictive value 73%). The discriminatory power remained moderate among pneumonia patients upon HFNC initiation [AUC 0.65 (95% CI 0.57-0.72)], non-pneumonia patients at HFNC initiation [AUC 0.62 (95% CI 0.55-0.69)] and one hour later [AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.56-0.70)]. CONCLUSION: The ROX index demonstrated moderate discriminatory power among patients with either pneumonia or non-pneumonia-related AHRF at HFNC initiation and one hour later.

Predictors and outcomes of high-flow nasal cannula failure following extubation: A multicentre observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite adhering to criteria for extubation, up to 20% of intensive care patients require re-intubation, even with use of post-extubation high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). This study aims to identify independent predictors and outcomes of extubation failure in patients who failed post-extubation HFNC. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre observational study involving 9 adult intensive care units (ICUs) across 5 public hospitals in Singapore. We included patients extubated to HFNC following spontaneous breathing trials. We compared patients who were successfully weaned off HFNC with those who failed HFNC (defined as re-intubation ≤7 days following extubation). Generalised additive logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for failed HFNC. RESULTS: Among 244 patients (mean age: 63.92±15.51 years, 65.2% male, median APACHE II score 23.55±7.35), 41 (16.8%) failed HFNC; hypoxia, hypercapnia and excessive secretions were primary reasons. Stroke was an independent predictor of HFNC failure (odds ratio 2.48, 95% confidence interval 1.83-3.37). Failed HFNC, as compared to successful HFNC, was associated with increased median ICU length of stay (14 versus 7 days, P<0.001), ICU mortality (14.6% versus 2.0%, P<0.001) and hospital mortality (29.3% versus 12.3%, P=0.006). CONCLUSION: Post-extubation HFNC failure, especially in patients with stroke as a comorbidity, remains a clinical challenge and predicts poorer clinical outcomes. Our observational study highlights the need for future prospective trials to better identify patients at high risk of post-extubation HFNC failure.