Critical care capacity and care bundles on medical wards in Malawi: a cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: As low-income countries (LICs) shoulder a disproportionate share of the world's burden of critical illnesses, they must continue to build critical care capacity outside conventional intensive care units (ICUs) to address mortality and morbidity, including on general medical wards. A lack of data on the ability to treat critical illness, especially in non-ICU settings in LICs, hinders efforts to improve outcomes. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the cross-sectional Malawi Emergency and Critical Care (MECC) survey, administered from January to February 2020, to a random sample of nine public sector district hospitals and all four central hospitals in Malawi. This analysis describes inputs, systems, and barriers to care in district hospitals compared to central hospital medical wards, including if any medical wards fit the World Federation of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine (WFSICCM) definition of a level 1 ICU. We grouped items into essential care bundles for service readiness compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: From the 13 hospitals, we analysed data from 39 medical ward staff members through staffing, infrastructure, equipment, and systems domains. No medical wards met the WFSICCM definition of level 1 ICU. The most common barriers in district hospital medical wards compared to central hospital wards were stock-outs (29%, Cl: 21% to 44% vs 6%, Cl: 0% to 13%) and personnel shortages (40%, Cl: 24% to 67% vs 29%, Cl: 16% to 52%) but central hospital wards reported a higher proportion of training barriers (68%, Cl: 52% to 73% vs 45%, Cl: 29% to 60%). No differences were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Despite current gaps in resources to consistently care for critically ill patients in medical wards, this study shows that with modest inputs, the provision of simple life-saving critical care is within reach. Required inputs for care provision can be informed from this study.

Critical Care Units in Malawi: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: The global burden of critical illness falls disproportionately outside high-income countries. Despite younger patient populations with similar or lower disease severity, critical illness outcomes are poor outside high-income countries. A lack of data limits attempts to understand and address the drivers of critical care outcomes outside high-income countries. Objectives: We aim to characterize the organization, available resources, and service capacity of public sector critical care units in Malawi and identify barriers to improving care. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of the Malawi Emergency and Critical Care Survey, a cross-sectional study performed from January to February 2020 at all four central hospitals and a simple random sample of nine out of 24 public sector district hospitals in Malawi, a predominantly rural, low-income country of 19.6 million in southern Africa. Data from critical care units were used to characterize resources, processes, and barriers to care. Findings: There were four HDUs and four ICUs across the 13 hospitals in the Malawi Emergency and Critical Care Survey sample. The median critical care beds per 1,000,000 catchment was 1.4 (IQR: 0.9 to 6.7). Absent equipment was the most common barrier in HDUs (46% [95% CI: 32% to 60%]). Stockouts was the most common barriers in ICUs (48% [CI: 38% to 58%]). ICUs had a median 3.0 (range: 2 to 8) functional ventilators per unit and reported an ability to perform several quality mechanical ventilation interventions. Conclusions: Although significant gaps exist, Malawian critical care units report the ability to perform several complex clinical processes. Our results highlight regional inequalities in access to care and support the use of process-oriented questions to assess critical care capacity. Future efforts should focus on basic critical care capacity outside of urban areas and quantify the impact of context-specific variables on critical care mortality.

Characteristics and impact of bedside procedure services in the United States: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Bedside procedure services are increasingly employed within internal medicine departments to meet clinical needs and improve trainee education. Published literature on these largely comprises single-center studies; an updated systematic review is needed to synthesize available data. PURPOSE: This review examined published literature on the structure and function of bedside procedure services and their impact on clinical and educational outcomes (PROSPERO ID: 192466). DATA SOURCES: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework, multiple databases were searched for publications from 2000 to 2021. STUDY SELECTION, DATA EXTRACTION, AND DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirteen single-center studies were identified, including 12 observational studies and 1 randomized trial. Data were synthesized in tabular and narrative format. Services were typically staffed by hospitalists or pulmonologists. At a minimum, each offered paracentesis, thoracentesis, and lumbar puncture. While there was considerable heterogeneity in service structures, these broadly fit either Model A (service performing the procedure) or Model B (service supervising the primary team). Procedure services led to increases in procedure volumes and self-efficacy among medical residents. Assessment of clinical outcomes was limited by heterogeneous definitions of complication rates and by sparse head-to-head data involving suitable comparators. Published data pointed to high success rates, low complication rates, and high patient satisfaction, with a recent study also demonstrating a decreased length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: There are relatively few published studies describing the characteristics of bedside procedure services and their impact on clinical and educational outcomes. Limited data point to considerable heterogeneity in service design, a positive impact on medical trainees, and a positive impact on patient-related outcomes.

Applying the WHO-ICRC BEC course to train emergency and inpatient healthcare workers in Sierra Leone early in the COVID-19 outbreak.

BACKGROUND: Treating critical illness in resource-limited settings during disease outbreaks is feasible and can save lives. Lack of trained healthcare workers is a major barrier to COVID-19 response. There is an urgent need to train healthcare workers to manage COVID-19. The World Health Organization and International Committee of the Red Cross's Basic Emergency Care course could provide a framework to cross-train personnel for COVID-19 care while strengthening essential health services. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study evaluating the Basic Emergency Care course for healthcare workers from emergency and inpatient units at two hospitals in Sierra Leone, a low-income country in West Africa. Baseline, post-course, and six month assessments of knowledge and confidence were completed. Questions on COVID-19 were added at six months. We compared change from baseline in knowledge scores and proportions of participants "very comfortable" with course skills using paired Student's t-tests and McNemar's exact tests, respectively. RESULTS: We enrolled 32 participants of whom 31 completed pre- and post-course assessments. Six month knowledge and confidence assessments were completed by 15 and 20 participants, respectively. Mean knowledge score post-course was 85% (95% CI: 82% to 88%), which was increased from baseline (53%, 48% to 57%, p-value < 0.001). There was sustained improvement from baseline at six months (73%, 67% to 80%, p-value 0.001). The percentage of participants who were "very comfortable" performing skills increased from baseline for 27 of 34 skills post-training and 13 skills at six months. Half of respondents strongly agreed the course improved ability to manage COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of the Basic Emergency Care course to train emergency and inpatient healthcare workers with lasting impact. The timing of the study, at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, provided an opportunity to illustrate the strategic overlap between building human resource capacity for long-term health systems strengthening and COVID-19. Future efforts should focus on integration with national training curricula and training of the trainers for broader dissemination and implementation at scale.

The Malawi emergency and critical care survey: A cross-sectional national facility assessment.

BACKGROUND: Data on emergency and critical care (ECC) capacity in low-income countries (LICs) are needed to improve outcomes and make progress towards realizing the goal of Universal Health Coverage. METHODS: We developed a novel research instrument to assess public sector ECC capacity and service readiness in LICs. From January 20th to February 18th, 2020 we administered the instrument at all four central hospitals and a simple random sample of nine of 24 district hospitals in Malawi, a landlocked and predominantly rural LIC of 19·1 million people in Southern Africa. The instrument contained questions on the availability of key resources across three domains and was administered to hospital administrators and clinicians from outpatient departments, emergency departments, and inpatient units. Results were used to generate an ECC Readiness Score, with a possible range of 0 to 1, for each facility. FINDINGS: A total of 114 staff members across 13 hospitals completed interviews for this study. Three (33%) district hospitals and all four central hospitals had ECC Readiness Scores above 0·5 (p-value 0·070). Absent equipment was identified as the most common barrier to ECC Readiness. Central hospitals had higher median ECC Readiness Scores with less variability 0·82 (interquartile range: 0·80-0·89) than district hospitals (0·33, 0·23 to 0·50, p-value 0·021). INTERPRETATION: This is the first study to employ a systematic approach to assessing ECC capacity and service readiness at both district and central hospitals in Malawi and provides a framework for measuring ECC capacity in other LICs. Prior ECC assessments potentially overestimated equipment availability and our methodology may provide a more accurate approach. There is an urgent need for investments in ECC services, particularly at district hospitals which are more accessible to Malawi's predominantly rural population. These findings highlight the need for long-term investments in health systems strengthening and underscore the importance of understanding capacity in LIC settings to inform these efforts. FUNDING: Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Department of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Critical care service delivery across healthcare systems in low-income and low-middle-income countries: protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Critical care in low-income and low-middle income countries (LLMICs) is an underdeveloped component of the healthcare system. Given the increasing growth in demand for critical care services in LLMICs, understanding the current capacity to provide critical care is imperative to inform policy on service expansion. Thus, our aim is to describe the provision of critical care in LLMICs with respect to patients, providers, location of care and services and interventions delivered. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE for full-text original research articles available in English describing critical care services that specify the location of service delivery and describe patients and interventions. We will restrict our review to populations from LLMICs (using 2016 World Bank classifications) and published from 1 January 2008 to 1 January 2020. Two-reviewer agreement will be required for both title/abstract and full text review stages, and rate of agreement will be calculated for each stage. We will extract data regarding the location of critical care service delivery, the training of the healthcare professionals providing services, and the illnesses treated according to classification by the WHO Universal Health Coverage Compendium. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Reviewed and exempted by the Stanford University Office for Human Subjects Research and IRB on 20 May 2020. The results of this review will be disseminated through scholarly publication and presentation at regional and international conferences. This review is designed to inform broader WHO, International Federation for Emergency Medicine and partner efforts to strengthen critical care globally. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019146802.

Combating information chaos: a case for collaborative clinical guidelines in a pandemic.

The speed and scale of new information during the COVID-19 pandemic required a new approach toward developing best practices and evidence-based clinical guidance. To address this need, we produced COVIDProtocols.org, a collaborative, evidence-based, digital platform for the development and dissemination of COVID-19 clinical guidelines that has been used by over 500,000 people from 196 countries. We use a Collaborative Writing Application (CWA) to facilitate an expedited expert review process and a web platform that deploys content directly from the CWA to minimize any delays. Over 200 contributors have volunteered to create open creative-commons content that spans over 30 specialties and medical disciplines. Multiple local and national governments, hospitals, and clinics have used the site as a key resource for their own clinical guideline development. COVIDprotocols.org represents a model for efficiently launching open-access clinical guidelines during crisis situations to share expertise and combat misinformation.

Baseline predictors of efavirenz-containing antiretroviral regimen adverse experiences.

PURPOSE: We aimed to identify modifiable, routinely available patient characteristics associated with adverse experiences potentially attributable to efavirenz-based regimens in patients in Botswana. METHODS: HIV-infected treatment naïve individuals starting a standard antiretroviral regimen including two nucleoside analog reverse transcriptase inhibitors and efavirenz in Botswana were enrolled in a prospective cohort. Adverse experiences were measured at 1 and 6 months using the efavirenz checklist, a 35-item instrument developed by the AIDS Clinical Trials Group. RESULTS: We enrolled 232 patients from 11 March 2010 to 17 March 2011. One hundred ninety-six were included in the month 1 analyses. Of the 196 included in the month 1 analyses, 157 (80%) completed the 6-month follow-up. Median efavirenz checklist score was 6 (interquartile range (IQR): 2-15) at month 1 and 1 (IQR: 0-5) at month 6. The median change in efavirenz checklist score from month 1-6 was -4 (IQR: -11 to -1), representing an improvement. Depressive symptoms, low CD4 count and less alcohol use were associated with improvement in adverse experiences over time. Low weight was associated with increased extent of adverse experiences at month 1 and 6. There was no confounding or effect modification. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians may want to consider more intensive and tailored adverse experience education and management in patients based on depressive symptoms, CD4 count, and weight. Further assessment of the mechanism of the effect of alcohol use on adverse experiences, including analysis of CYP2B6 genotype and plasma efavirenz concentrations, is warranted.