Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To evaluate how key aspects of New York State Ventilator Allocation Guidelines (NYSVAG)-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score criteria and ventilator time trials -might perform with respect to the frequency of ventilator reallocation and survival to hospital discharge in a simulated cohort of COVID-19 patients. METHODS:Single center retrospective observational and simulation cohort study of 884 critically-ill COVID-19 patients undergoing ventilator allocation per NYSVAG. RESULTS:742 patients (83.9%) would have had their ventilator reallocated during the 11-day observation period, 280 (37.7%) of whom would have otherwise survived to hospital discharge if provided a ventilator. Only 65 (18.1%) of the observed surviving patients would have survived by NYSVAG. Extending ventilator time trials from 2 to 5 days resulted in a 49.2% increase in simulated survival to discharge. CONCLUSIONS:In the setting of a protracted respiratory pandemic, implementation of NYSVAG or similar protocols could lead to a high degree of ventilator reallocation, including withdrawal from patients who might otherwise survive. Longer ventilator time trials might lead to improved survival for COVID-19 patients given their protracted respiratory failure. Further studies are needed to understand the survival of patients receiving reallocated ventilators to determine whether implementation of NYSVAG would improve overall survival.

The National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center (NETEC) was established in 2015 to improve the capabilities of healthcare facilities to provide safe and effective care to patients with Ebola and other special pathogens in the United States. Through NETEC, a collaborative network of 10 Regional Emerging Special Pathogen Treatment Centers (RESPTCs) undertook readiness activities that included potential respiratory pathogens. These preparations, which took place before the COVID-19 pandemic, established a foundation of readiness that enabled RESPTCs to play a pivotal role in the US COVID-19 pandemic response. As initial COVID-19 cases were detected in the United States, RESPTCs provided essential isolation capacity, supplies, and subject matter expertise that allowed for additional time for healthcare systems to prepare. Through the Special Pathogen Research Network, RESPTCs rapidly enrolled patients into early clinical trials. During periods of high community transmission, RESPTCs provided educational, clinical, and logistical support to a wide range of healthcare and nonhealthcare settings. In this article, we describe how NETEC and the RESPTC network leveraged this foundation of special pathogen readiness to strengthen the national healthcare system's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. NETEC and the RESPTC network have proven to be an effective model that can support the national response to future emerging special pathogens.

Infectious disease outbreaks and pandemics have repeatedly threatened public health and have severely strained healthcare delivery systems throughout the past century. Pathogens causing respiratory illness, such as influenza viruses and coronaviruses, as well as the highly communicable viral hemorrhagic fevers, pose a large threat to the healthcare delivery system in the United States and worldwide. Through the Hospital Preparedness Program, within the US Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, a nationwide Regional Ebola Treatment Network (RETN) was developed, building upon a state- and jurisdiction-based tiered hospital approach. This network, spearheaded by the National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center, developed a conceptual framework and plan for the evolution of the RETN into the National Special Pathogen System of Care (NSPS). Building the NSPS strategy involved reviewing the literature and the initial framework used in forming the RETN and conducting an extensive stakeholder engagement process to identify gaps and develop solutions. From this, the NSPS strategy and implementation plan were formed. The resulting NSPS strategy is an ambitious but critical effort that will have impacts on the mitigation efforts of special pathogen threats for years to come.

BACKGROUND:After the publication of a 2014 consensus statement regarding mass critical care during public health emergencies, much has been learned about surge responses and the care of overwhelming numbers of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Gaps in prior pandemic planning were identified and require modification in the midst of ongoing surges throughout the world. METHODS:The Task Force for Mass Critical Care (TFMCC) adopted a modified version of established rapid guideline methodologies from the World Health Organization and the Guidelines International Network-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist. With a consensus development process incorporating expert opinion to define important questions and extract evidence, the TFMCC developed relevant pandemic surge suggestions in a structured manner, incorporating peer-reviewed literature, "gray" evidence from lay media sources, and anecdotal experiential evidence. RESULTS:Ten suggestions were identified regarding staffing, load-balancing, communication, and technology. Staffing models are suggested with resilience strategies to support critical care staff. ICU surge strategies and strain indicators are suggested to enhance ICU prioritization tactics to maintain contingency level care and to avoid crisis triage, with early transfer strategies to further load-balance care. We suggest that intensivists and hospitalists be engaged with the incident command structure to ensure two-way communication, situational awareness, and the use of technology to support critical care delivery and families of patients in ICUs. CONCLUSIONS:A subcommittee from the TFMCC offers interim evidence-informed operational strategies to assist hospitals and communities to plan for and respond to surge capacity demands resulting from COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Hospitals experienced substantial stress during the COVID-19 pandemic-threats to standard operations- but it is not well known how this stress manifested at individual hospitals. We aimed to understand patterns of hospital stress over time, where stress was located within hospitals, and correlations between individual stress measures.
METHOD(S): We conducted a weekly hospital stress survey from November 2020 through May 2021 among site leaders from the SCCM Discovery Severe Acute Respiratory Infection - Preparedness (SARI-PREP) multicenter prospective cohort study. The survey assessed hospital stress ordinally and also assessed ED and ICU stress and deviations from standard operating procedures. Pairwise comparisons of strain measures were calculated by Pearson's correlation coefficients (r).
RESULT(S): Eight hospitals across three health systems in New York, California, and Washington contributed 190 hospital-weeks of data. Sites reported unavailability of some hospital resources resulting in potentially avoidable patient harm during 3.5% of hospital-weeks (with at least one such week at four hospitals); alterations in care processes and/or staffing which were fully compensated for during 57.9% of weeks; and no stress during 38.6% of weeks. During one December 2020 week, hospital stress, ICU stress, and care deviations were all present at 100% of reporting sites. The most common care deviations were increased hospital staffing (39.5%) and cancelling elective surgeries (18.6%). Hospital stress and care deviations were highly correlated (r = 0.81, p < 0.0001). Stress was more common in ICUs (72.4%) than EDs (14.3%), and ICU and ED stress were not correlated (r = 0.19, p = 0.05). While ED stress rose and abated earlier, ICU stress and care deviations persisted (range 2-13 weeks longer) as local case rates declined.
CONCLUSION(S): Hospital stress during the pandemic varied in degree and type both within and among hospitals over time. Care deviations were common but potentially avoidable patient harm was rare. Systematic national assessments of hospital stress, both during and between pandemics, could inform more rapid, proactive public health responses to novel threats. Areas for further study include impacts from persistent low-level stress and longer-term consequences for hospitals and their communities

OBJECTIVES: We designed a prospective cohort study to systematically study patients with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) and improve hospital preparedness (SARI-PREP). The goal of this project is to evaluate the natural history, prognostic biomarkers, and characteristics, including hospital stress, associated with SARI clinical outcomes and severity.
METHOD(S): In collaboration with the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Research Network and the National Emerging Special Pathogen Training and Education Center (NETEC), SARIPREP is an ongoing, prospective, observational, multi-center cohort study of hospitalized patients with respiratory viral infections. We collected patient demographics, signs, symptoms, and medications; microbiology, imaging, and other diagnostics; mechanical ventilation, hospital procedures, and other interventions; and clinical outcomes. Hospital leadership completed a weekly hospital stress survey. Respiratory, blood, and urine biospecimens were collected from patients on days 0, 3, 7-14 after study enrollment and at hospital discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: SARI-PREP enrollment began on April 4, 2020 and currently includes 674 patients. Here we report results from the first 400 patients: 216 are from the University of Washington Hospitals, Seattle WA, 142 from New York University, New York NY and 42 from University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA. Almost all tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=397), whereas 3 patients tested positive for an alternative viral pathogen. The mean (+/-SD) age of the patients was 57+/-16 years; 72% were men, 62% were White, 14% were Asian, 12% were Black, and 31% were Hispanic. Most of the patients were admitted to the intensive care unit (96%). The median (interquartile range) hospital length of stay was 22 (9-46) days. Rates of invasive mechanical ventilation (72%) and renal replacement therapy (19%) were common and the rate of hospital mortality was 35%.
CONCLUSION(S): Initial SARI-PREP analysis indicates enrollment of a diverse population of hospitalized patients primarily with SARSCoV-2 infection. The demographics and clinical outcomes of our cohort mirror other large critically ill cohorts of COVID-19 patients. Results of a concomitant, weekly, hospital stress assessment are reported separately