SAFER model: Strategic allocation of fundamental epidemic resources.

BACKGROUND: To describe the Strategic Allocation of Fundamental Epidemic Resources (SAFER) model as a method to inform equitable community distribution of critical resources and testing infrastructure. METHODS: The SAFER model incorporates a four-quadrant design to categorize a given community based on two scales: testing rate and positivity rate. Three models for stratifying testing rates and positivity rates were applied to census tracts in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin: using median values (MVs), cluster-based classification and goal-oriented values (GVs). RESULTS: Each of the three approaches had its strengths. MV stratification divided the categories most evenly across geography, aiding in assessing resource distribution in a fixed resource and testing capacity environment. The cluster-based stratification resulted in a less broad distribution but likely provides a truer distribution of communities. The GVs grouping displayed the least variation across communities, yet best highlighted our areas of need. CONCLUSIONS: The SAFER model allowed the distribution of census tracts into categories to aid in informing resource and testing allocation. The MV stratification was found to be of most utility in our community for near real time resource allocation based on even distribution of census tracts. The GVs approach was found to better demonstrate areas of need.

Cardiac surgery outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A case-series report.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the postoperative course of patients after cardiac surgery is unknown. We experienced a major severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak in our cardiac surgery unit, with several patients who tested positive early after surgery. Here we describe the characteristics, postoperative course, and laboratory findings of these patients, along with the fate of the health care workers. We also discuss how we reorganize and reallocate hospital resources to resume the surgical activity without further positive patients. METHODS: After diagnosis of the first symptomatic patient, surgery was suspended. Nasopharyngeal swabs were performed in all patients and health care workers. Patients who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 were isolated and monitored throughout the in-hospital stay and followed up after discharged until death or clinical recovery. RESULTS: Twenty patients were found to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 sometime after cardiac surgery (mean age 69 ± 10.4 years; median European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II score 3 [interquartile range, 5.1]); the median time from surgery to diagnosis was 15 days (interquartile range, 11). Among the patients, 18 had undergone cardiac surgery and 2 of them transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Overall mortality was 15%. Specific COVID-19-related symptoms were identified in 7 patients (35%). Among the 12 health care workers infected, 1 developed a bilateral mild-grade interstitial pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 infection after cardiac surgery, regardless the time of the onset, is a serious condition. The systemic inflammatory state that follows extracorporeal circulation may mask the typical COVID-19 laboratory findings, making the diagnosis more difficult. A strict reorganization of the hospital resources is necessary to safely resume the cardiac surgical activity.

Smartphone application alerts for early trauma team activation: Millennial technology in healthcare.

BACKGROUND: Data access through smartphone applications (apps) has reframed procedure and policy in healthcare, but its impact in trauma remains unclear. Citizen is a free app that provides real-time alerts curated from 911 dispatch data. Our primary objective was to determine whether app alerts occurred earlier than recorded times for trauma team activation and emergency department arrival. METHODS: Trauma registry entries were extracted from a level one urban trauma center from January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019 and compared with app metadata from the center catchment area. We matched entries to metadata according to description, date, time, and location then compared metadata timestamps to trauma team activation and emergency department arrival times. We computed percentage of time the app reported traumatic events earlier than trauma team activation or emergency department arrival along with exact binomial 95% confidence interval; median differences between times were presented along with interquartile ranges. RESULTS: Of 3,684 trauma registry entries, 209 (5.7%) matched app metadata. App alerts were earlier for 96.1% and 96.2% of trauma team activation and emergency department arrival times, respectively, with events reported median 36 (24-53, IQR) minutes earlier than trauma team activation and 32 (25-42, IQR) minutes earlier than emergency department arrival. Registry entries for younger males, motor vehicle-related injuries and penetrating traumas were more likely to match alerts (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Apps like Citizen may provide earlier notification of traumatic events and therefore earlier mobilization of trauma service resources. Earlier notification may translate into improved patient outcomes. Additional studies into the benefit of apps for trauma care are warranted.

Advocating for Greater Inclusion of Marginalized and Forgotten Populations in COVID19 Vaccine Rollouts.

Objectives: Many countries recently approved a number of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. There is therefore growing optimism around the world about their future availability and effectiveness. However, supplies are likely to be limited and restricted to certain categories of individuals, at least initially. Thus, governments have suggested prioritization schemes to allocate such limited supplies. The majority of such schemes are said to be developed to safeguard the weakest sections of society; that is, healthcare personnel and the elderly. Methods: In this work, we analyse three case studies (incarcerated people; homeless people, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants). We propose a bioethical argument that frames the discussion by describing the salient facts about each of the three populations and then argue that these characteristics entail inclusion and prioritization in the queue for vaccination in their country of residence. Results: Through an analysis informed by ethical considerations revolving around the concepts of fairness and equality, we try to raise awareness of these important issues among decision makers. Conclusion: Our goal is to advocate for the development of more inclusive policies and frameworks in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine allocation and, in general, in all scenarios in which there is a shortage of optimal care and treatments.

Treatment of moderate to severe respiratory COVID-19: a cost-utility analysis.

Despite COVID-19's significant morbidity and mortality, considering cost-effectiveness of pharmacologic treatment strategies for hospitalized patients remains critical to support healthcare resource decisions within budgetary constraints. As such, we calculated the cost-effectiveness of using remdesivir and dexamethasone for moderate to severe COVID-19 respiratory infections using the United States health care system as a representative model. A decision analytic model modelled a base case scenario of a 60-year-old patient admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Patients requiring oxygen were considered moderate severity, and patients with severe COVID-19 required intubation with intensive care. Strategies modelled included giving remdesivir to all patients, remdesivir in only moderate and only severe infections, dexamethasone to all patients, dexamethasone in severe infections, remdesivir in moderate/dexamethasone in severe infections, and best supportive care. Data for the model came from the published literature. The time horizon was 1 year; no discounting was performed due to the short duration. The perspective was of the payer in the United States health care system. Supportive care for moderate/severe COVID-19 cost $11,112.98 with 0.7155 quality adjusted life-year (QALY) obtained. Using dexamethasone for all patients was the most-cost effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $980.84/QALY; all remdesivir strategies were more costly and less effective. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed dexamethasone for all patients was most cost-effective in 98.3% of scenarios. Dexamethasone for moderate-severe COVID-19 infections was the most cost-effective strategy and would have minimal budget impact. Based on current data, remdesivir is unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment for COVID-19.

Relación entre la tasa de letalidad por COVID-19 y los recursos hospitalarios / Relation between COVID-19 fatality rate and hospital resources

Introducción: La tasa de letalidad por COVID-19 ha generado mucha preocupación entre los ciudadanos y los medios de comunicación con respecto a los números oficiales proporcionados por distintos gobiernos. La salud pública en la actualidad debe hacer frente a la pandemia más significativa del siglo xxi. Objetivo: Analizar la tasa de letalidad por COVID-19 y su relación con recursos hospitalarios críticos, en el contexto de la pandemia de la COVID-19. Métodos: Se analizó la tasa de letalidad sobre la base de datos oficiales. Se subestimó el número de casos para obtener una estimación más real del alcance de la infección, de los indicadores de recursos hospitalarios importantes (críticos) en transición pandémica que podrían elevar la tasa de letalidad posterior al estudio. Se emplearon curvas de tendencia exponencial doblemente suavizadas, distribución S y técnicas de regresión. Resultados: La curva que mejor explicó el comportamiento de fallecidos por COVID-19 en Chile fue una ecuación de regresión cúbica. La variable hospitalización básica se distribuyó como una curva S. Las variables hospitalización media, pacientes críticos, unidad tratamiento intensivo, unidad cuidado intensivo, ventiladores mecánicos totales y ventiladores mecánicos ocupados; se pudieron explicar mediante regresiones cúbicas. En todos los casos, los valores de R2 fueron superiores al 95 por ciento. Conclusiones: El número de fallecidos seguirá en aumento. Se sugiere fortificar las unidades de hospitalización básica para imposibilitar el colapso de la red sanitaria. Es necesario seguir creciendo en términos de hospitalización de media complejidad, unidad tratamiento intensivo, unidad cuidado intensivo y número total de ventiladores mecánicos para asegurar el soporte sanitario(AU)

Introduction: The fatality rate by COVID-19 has generated a lot of concern among citizens and the media regarding the official numbers provided by different governments. Public health today must cope with the most significant pandemic of the twenty-first century. Objective: Analyze the fatality rate due to COVID-19 and its relation with critical hospital resources, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The fatality rate was analyzed on the basis of official data. The number of cases was underestimated to obtain a more real estimate of the extent of the infection, of the indicators of important (critical) hospital resources in pandemic transition that could raise the post-study fatality rate. Double-smoothed exponential trend curves, S-distribution and regression techniques were used. Results: The curve that best explained the behavior of COVID-19 deaths in Chile was a cubic regression equation. The basic hospitalization variable was distributed as an S-curve. The variables called mean hospitalization, critical patients, intensive treatment unit, intensive care unit, total mechanical ventilators and busy mechanical ventilators could be explained by cubic regressions. In all cases, R2 values were greater than 95percent. Conclusions: The number of deaths will continue to rise. It is suggested to fortify the basic hospitalization units to prevent the collapse of the health network. It is necessary to continue growing in terms of medium complexity hospitalization, intensive treatment unit, intensive care unit and total number of mechanical ventilators to ensure health support(AU)

Association of COVID-19 Hospitalization Volume and Case Growth at US Hospitals with Patient Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Whether the volume of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations is associated with outcomes has important implications for the organization of hospital care both during this pandemic and future novel and rapidly evolving high-volume conditions. METHODS: We identified COVID-19 hospitalizations at US hospitals in the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry with ≥10 cases between January and August 2020. We evaluated the association of COVID-19 hospitalization volume and weekly case growth indexed to hospital bed capacity, with hospital risk-standardized in-hospital case-fatality rate (rsCFR). RESULTS: There were 85 hospitals with 15,329 COVID-19 hospitalizations, with a median hospital case volume was 118 (interquartile range, 57, 252) and median growth rate of 2 cases per 100 beds per week but varied widely (interquartile range: 0.9 to 4.5). There was no significant association between overall hospital COVID-19 case volume and rsCFR (rho, 0.18, P = .09). However, hospitals with more rapid COVID-19 case-growth had higher rsCFR (rho, 0.22, P = 0.047), increasing across case growth quartiles (P trend = .03). Although there were no differences in medical treatments or intensive care unit therapies (mechanical ventilation, vasopressors), the highest case growth quartile had 4-fold higher odds of above median rsCFR, compared with the lowest quartile (odds ratio, 4.00; 1.15 to 13.8, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: An accelerated case growth trajectory is a marker of hospitals at risk of poor COVID-19 outcomes, identifying sites that may be targets for influx of additional resources or triage strategies. Early identification of such hospital signatures is essential as our health system prepares for future health challenges.

Factors Associated with Emergency Department Length of Stay in Critically Ill Patients: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND Length of stay (LOS) in the emergency department (ED) should be measured and evaluated comprehensively as an important indicator of hospital emergency service. In this study, we aimed to analyze clinical characteristics of critically ill patients admitted to the ED and identify the factors associated with LOS. MATERIAL AND METHODS All patients with level 1 and level 2 of the Emergency Severity Index who were admitted to the ED from January 2018 to December 2019 were included in this retrospective study. The patients were divided into 2 groups: LOS ≥4 h and LOS <4 h. Variables were comprehensively analyzed and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS A total of 19 616 patients, including 7269 patients in the LOS ≥4 h group and 12 347 patients in the LOS <4 group, were included. Advanced age, admission in winter and during the night shift, and diseases excluding nervous system diseases, cardiovascular diseases, and trauma were associated with higher risk of LOS. Nervous system diseases, cardiovascular diseases, trauma, and procedures including tracheal intubation, surgery, percutaneous coronary intervention, and thrombolysis were associated with lower risk of LOS. CONCLUSIONS Prolonged LOS in the ED was associated with increased age and admission in winter and during the night shift, while shortened LOS was associated with nervous system diseases, cardiovascular diseases, and trauma, as well as with procedures including tracheal intubation, surgery, percutaneous coronary intervention, and thrombolysis. Our findings can serve as a guide for ED physicians to individually evaluate patient condition and allocate medical resources more effectively.

Optimal SARS-CoV-2 vaccine allocation using real-time attack-rate estimates in Rhode Island and Massachusetts.

BACKGROUND: When three SARS-CoV-2 vaccines came to market in Europe and North America in the winter of 2020-2021, distribution networks were in a race against a major epidemiological wave of SARS-CoV-2 that began in autumn 2020. Rapid and optimized vaccine allocation was critical during this time. With 95% efficacy reported for two of the vaccines, near-term public health needs likely require that distribution is prioritized to the elderly, health care workers, teachers, essential workers, and individuals with comorbidities putting them at risk of severe clinical progression. METHODS: We evaluate various age-based vaccine distributions using a validated mathematical model based on current epidemic trends in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. We allow for varying waning efficacy of vaccine-induced immunity, as this has not yet been measured. We account for the fact that known COVID-positive cases may not have been included in the first round of vaccination. And, we account for age-specific immune patterns in both states at the time of the start of the vaccination program. Our analysis assumes that health systems during winter 2020-2021 had equal staffing and capacity to previous phases of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic; we do not consider the effects of understaffed hospitals or unvaccinated medical staff. RESULTS: We find that allocating a substantial proportion (>75%) of vaccine supply to individuals over the age of 70 is optimal in terms of reducing total cumulative deaths through mid-2021. This result is robust to different profiles of waning vaccine efficacy and several different assumptions on age mixing during and after lockdown periods. As we do not explicitly model other high-mortality groups, our results on vaccine allocation apply to all groups at high risk of mortality if infected. A median of 327 to 340 deaths can be avoided in Rhode Island (3444 to 3647 in Massachusetts) by optimizing vaccine allocation and vaccinating the elderly first. The vaccination campaigns are expected to save a median of 639 to 664 lives in Rhode Island and 6278 to 6618 lives in Massachusetts in the first half of 2021 when compared to a scenario with no vaccine. A policy of vaccinating only seronegative individuals avoids redundancy in vaccine use on individuals that may already be immune, and would result in 0.5% to 1% reductions in cumulative hospitalizations and deaths by mid-2021. CONCLUSIONS: Assuming high vaccination coverage (>28%) and no major changes in distancing, masking, gathering size, hygiene guidelines, and virus transmissibility between 1 January 2021 and 1 July 2021 a combination of vaccination and population immunity may lead to low or near-zero transmission levels by the second quarter of 2021.

Use of behavioral health care in Medicaid managed care carve-out versus carve-in arrangements.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in access to behavioral health services for Medicaid enrollees covered by a Medicaid entity that integrated the financing of behavioral and physical health care ("carve-in group") versus a Medicaid entity that separated this financing ("carve-out group"). DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Medicaid claims data from two Medicaid entities in the Portland, Oregon tri-county area in 2016. STUDY DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, we compared differences across enrollees in the carve-in versus carve-out group, using a machine learning approach to incorporate a large set of covariates and minimize potential selection bias. Our primary outcomes included behavioral health visits for a variety of different provider types. Secondary outcomes included inpatient, emergency department, and primary care visits. DATA COLLECTION: We used Medicaid claims, including adults with at least 9 months of enrollment. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The study population included 45,786 adults with mental health conditions. Relative to the carve-out group, individuals in the carve-in group were more likely to access outpatient behavioral health (2.39 percentage points, p < 0.0001, with a baseline rate of approximately 73%). The carve-in group was also more likely to access primary care physicians, psychologists, and social workers and less likely to access psychiatrists and behavioral health specialists. Access to outpatient behavioral health visits was more likely in the carve-in arrangement among individuals with mild or moderate mental health conditions (compared to individuals with severe mental illness) and among black enrollees (compared to white enrollees). CONCLUSIONS: Financial integration of physical and behavioral health in Medicaid managed care was associated with greater access to behavioral health services, particularly for individuals with mild or moderate mental health conditions and for black enrollees. Recent changes to incentivize financial integration should be monitored to assess differential impacts by illness severity, race and ethnicity, provider types, and other factors.

An Auxiliary Medical Education: The Evolution of a Medical Student-Founded Organization in Response to the COVID-19 Era Personal Protective Equipment Shortage.

At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many medical students were removed from clinical duties and had their education put on hold. Some found novel ways to join efforts to respond to the pandemic. Georgetown University School of Medicine medical students created Medical Supply Drive (MSD or MedSupplyDrive), a 501(c)(3), on March 17, 2020, in response to the national shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE). This article reviews the formation of a national response to the pandemic, the methods employed to distribute PPE, and the results of MSD's work from March 17, 2020, through June 20, 2020. A focus was placed on equitable distribution, both within local regions and on the national scale, by distinguishing COVID-19 hotspots, including Native American reservations. As of June 20, 2020, over half a million items were donated, with 1,001 deliveries made to 423 hospitals, 182 clinics, 175 long-term care facilities, 25 homeless shelters, 32 public health departments, and 164 other facilities. From 46 states and the District of Columbia, 1,514 individuals volunteered, and 202 signed up as regional coordinators. MSD formed 2 international organizations, MedSupplyDrive UK and MedSupplyDrive Scotland, and established U.S.-based partnerships with 19 different PPE and aid organizations. MSD gained local, national, and international media attention with over 45 interviews conducted about the organization. While the pandemic temporarily disrupted formal medical education, MSD empowered medical students to actively learn about the needs of their communities and organize ways to address them while incorporating these values into their professional identities. The framework that this organization employed also provides a potential model for future disaster relief efforts in times of crisis. MSD hopes to motivate budding physicians to collaborate and play an active role in tackling public health inequities beyond hospitals and within the communities students will one day serve.

COVID-19 vaccine prioritization of incarcerated people relative to other vulnerable groups: An analysis of state plans.

BACKGROUND: Carceral facilities are epicenters of the COVID-19 pandemic, placing incarcerated people at an elevated risk of COVID-19 infection. Due to the initial limited availability of COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, all states have developed allocation plans that outline a phased distribution. This study uses document analysis to compare the relative prioritization of incarcerated people, correctional staff, and other groups at increased risk of COVID-19 infection and morbidity. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a document analysis of the vaccine dissemination plans of all 50 US states and the District of Columbia using a triple-coding method. Documents included state COVID-19 vaccination plans and supplemental materials on vaccine prioritization from state health department websites as of December 31, 2020. We found that 22% of states prioritized incarcerated people in Phase 1, 29% of states in Phase 2, and 2% in Phase 3, while 47% of states did not explicitly specify in which phase people who are incarcerated will be eligible for vaccination. Incarcerated people were consistently not prioritized in Phase 1, while other vulnerable groups who shared similar environmental risk received this early prioritization. States' plans prioritized in Phase 1: prison and jail workers (49%), law enforcement (63%), seniors (65+ years, 59%), and long-term care facility residents (100%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that states' COVID-19 vaccine allocation plans do not prioritize incarcerated people and provide little to no guidance on vaccination protocols if they fall under other high-risk categories that receive earlier priority. Deprioritizing incarcerated people for vaccination misses a crucial opportunity for COVID-19 mitigation. It also raises ethical and equity concerns. As states move forward with their vaccine distribution, further work must be done to prioritize ethical allocation and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines to incarcerated people.

Out of Africa: A Solidarity-Based Approach to Vaccine Allocation.

This article sets forth a solidaristic approach to global distribution of vaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Our approach draws inspiration from African ethics and from the characterization of the Covid-19 crisis as a syndemic, a convergence of biosocial forces that interact with one another to produce and exacerbate clinical disease and prognosis. The first section elaborates the twin ideas of syndemic and solidarity. The second section argues that these ideas lend support to global health alliances to distribute vaccines beyond national borders. The third section introduces ethical criteria to guide global distribution, emphasizing priority to low- and middle-income countries, which have the least ability to obtain vaccines on their own. It also justifies giving priority to people at high risk of infection and high risk of severe disease and death.