Critical Care Staffing in Pandemics and Disasters: A Consensus Report From a Subcommittee of the Task Force for Mass Critical Care - Systems Strategies to Sustain the Health Care Workforce.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented mental health disturbances, burnout, and moral distress among health care workers, affecting their ability to care for themselves and their patients. RESEARCH QUESTION: In health care workers, what are key systemic factors and interventions impacting mental health and burnout? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The Workforce Sustainment subcommittee of the Task Force for Mass Critical Care (TFMCC) utilized a consensus development process, incorporating evidence from literature review with expert opinion through a modified Delphi approach to determine factors affecting mental health, burnout, and moral distress in health care workers, to propose necessary actions to help prevent these issues and enhance workforce resilience, sustainment, and retention. RESULTS: Consolidation of evidence gathered from literature review and expert opinion resulted in 197 total statements that were synthesized into 14 major suggestions. These suggestions were organized into three categories: (1) mental health and well-being for staff in medical settings; (2) system-level support and leadership; and (3) research priorities and gaps. Suggestions include both general and specific occupational interventions to support health care worker basic physical needs, lower psychological distress, reduce moral distress and burnout, and foster mental health and resilience. INTERPRETATION: The Workforce Sustainment subcommittee of the TFMCC offers evidence-informed operational strategies to assist health care workers and hospitals plan, prevent, and treat the factors affecting health care worker mental health, burnout, and moral distress to improve resilience and retention following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Assessment of a Comparative Bayesian-Enhanced Population-Based Decision Model for COVID-19 Critical Care Prediction in the Dominican Republic Social Security Affiliates.

INTRODUCTION: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a major health concern worldwide. This study aims to develop a Bayesian model to predict critical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Sensitivity and specificity were obtained from previous meta-analysis studies. The complex vulnerability index (IVC-COV2 index for its abbreviation in Spanish) was used to set the pretest probability. Likelihood ratios were integrated into a Fagan nomogram for posttest probabilities, and IVC-COV2 + National Early Warning Score (NEWS) values and CURB-65 scores were generated. Absolute and relative diagnostic gains (RDGs) were calculated based on pretest and posttest differences. RESULTS: The IVC-COV2 index was derived from a population of 1,055,746 individuals and was based on mortality in high-risk (71.97%), intermediate-risk (26.11%), and low-risk (1.91%) groups. The integration of models in which IVC-COV2 intermediate + NEWS ≥ 5 and CURB-65 > 2 led to a "number needed to (NNT) diagnose" that was slightly improved in the CURB-65 model (2 vs. 3). A comparison of diagnostic gains revealed that neither the positive likelihood ratio (P = 0.62) nor the negative likelihood ratio (P = 0.95) differed significantly between the IVC-COV2 NEWS model and the CURB-65 model. CONCLUSION: According to the proposed mathematical model, the combination of the IVC-COV2 intermediate score and NEWS or CURB-65 score yields superior results and a greater predictive value for the severity of illness. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first population-based/mathematical model developed for use in COVID-19 critical care decision-making.

Racial and gender disparities in violent trauma: Results from the NEMSIS database.

BACKGROUND: Barriers to EMS care can result in suboptimal outcomes and preventable morbidity and mortality. Large EMS databases such as the National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS) dataset provide valuable data on the relative incidence of such barriers to care. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis was performed using the NEMSIS database. Cases of violent trauma were collected based on gender and racial group. Each group was analyzed for the ratio of cases that involved an EMS barrier to care. Chi-square testing was used to assess associations, and the relative risk was used as the measure of strength of association. For all tests, statistical significance was set at the 0.05 level. RESULTS: 719,812 cases of violent trauma were analyzed using the NEMSIS dataset. EMS encountered barriers to care for white and non-white patients was found to be 4.9% and 4.0% respectively. The difference between groups was found to be 0.9% (95% CI [0.7%, 1.1%] p < 0.0001). RR was 1.23 for white patients (95% CI [1.19, 1.26]), and 0.82 (95% CI [0.79, 0.84]) for non-white. EMS barriers to care for male and female patients was found to be 6.03% and 3.34%, respectively. The difference between groups was found to be 2.7% (95% CI [2.6%, 2.8%] p < 0.0001). RR for male patients was 1.80 (95% Cl [1.76, 1.84]) while RR for female patients was 0.55 (95% CI [0.54, 0.57]). CONCLUSIONS: Racially white patients and male patients have a statistically significant higher risk of encountering an EMS barrier to care in cases of violent trauma.

A Descriptive Analysis of Traction Splint Utilization and IV Analgesia by Emergency Medical Services.

Study Objectives Traction splinting has been the prehospital treatment of midshaft femur fracture as early as the battlefield of the First World War (1914-1918). This study is the assessment of these injuries and the utilization of a traction splint (TS) in blunt and penetrating trauma, as well as intravenous (IV) analgesia utilization by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) in Miami, Florida (USA). METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients who sustained a midshaft femur fracture in the absence of multiple other severe injuries or severe physiologic derangement, as defined by an injury severity score (ISS) <20 and a triage revised trauma score (T-RTS)≥10, who presented to an urban, Level 1 trauma center between September 2008 and September 2013. The EMS patient care reports were assessed for physical exam findings and treatment modality. Data were analyzed descriptively and statistical differences were assessed using odds ratios and Z-score with significance set at P≤.05. RESULTS: There were 170 patients studied in the cohort. The most common physical exam finding was a deformity +/- shortening and rotation in 136 patients (80.0%), followed by gunshot wound (GSW) in 22 patients (13.0%), pain or tenderness in four patients (2.4%), and no findings consistent with femur fracture in three patients (1.7%). The population was dichotomized between trauma type: blunt versus penetrating. Of 134 blunt trauma patients, 50 (37.0%) were immobilized in traction, and of the 36 penetrating trauma victims, one (2.7%) was immobilized in traction. Statistically significant differences were found in the application of a TS in blunt trauma when compared to penetrating trauma (OR=20.83; 95% CI, 2.77-156.8; P <.001). Intravenous analgesia was administered to treat pain in only 35 (22.0%) of the patients who had obtainable IV access. Of these patients, victims of blunt trauma were more likely to receive IV analgesia (OR=6.23; 95% CI, 1.42-27.41; P=.0067). CONCLUSION: Although signs of femur fracture are recognized in the majority of cases of midshaft femur fracture, only 30% of patients were immobilized using a TS. Statistically significant differences were found in the utilization of a TS and IV analgesia administration in the setting of blunt trauma when compared to penetrating trauma. Nackenson J , Baez AA , Meizoso JP . A descriptive analysis of traction splint utilization and IV analgesia by Emergency Medical Services.Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017;32(6):631-635.