Formulating interprofessional anesthesiology and operating room clinical management pathway during COVID-19 pandemic using experiential learning theory in a university hospital in Saudi Arabia.

As the number of COVID-19 cases is rapidly increasing internationally, management, recommendations and guidelines of COVID-19 are rapidly evolving and changing. Formulating local clinical management policies among institutions adopting these recommendations is vital to staff as well as the patients' safety. Also, training multidisciplinary teams on these policies is an important, yet challenging, part of the process. The purpose of this paper is to present the process that has been followed to formulate COVID-19-specific response anesthesiology and operating room (OR) policies at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, by applying David A. Kolb's experiential learning theory during simulation-based training. This project had a total of six simulation-based sessions (four simulation scenarios and two clinical drills) designed to test the efficacy and efficiency of the then current practice in the hospital, facing the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative data analysis was completed using qualitative thematic data analysis. To apply experiential Kolb's theory, session's checklist (two raters per session), outcomes, and participants' feedback to develop and improve clinical management pathway in the department were used. The 12 reports and participants' feedback highlighted three main areas for improvement. These are Personal Protective Equipment implementation, team dynamics, and airway management. This process then guided in creating a new understanding of the multidisciplinary clinical management pathway, in addition to enhancing viability of the current practice and clinical management guidelines and protocols, which were already established and adapted at the hospital before the COVID-19 pandemic crisis. The alignment with Kolb's experiential theory helped formulate anesthesiology and OR effective clinical management pathway has been demonstrated. Applying experiential learning theory by a clinical institute using interprofessional, multidisciplinary simulations and clinical drills can guide the process of formulating clinical management pathways during pandemic outbreaks.

Prevalence of COVID-19 antibodies among operating room and critical care staff at a tertiary teaching hospital: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the prevalence of COVID-19 antibodies among operating room and critical care staff. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we recruited 319 Healthcare workers employed in the operation theater and intensive care unit of King Abdulaziz University Hospital (KAUH), a tertiary teaching hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia between August 9, 2020 and November 2, 2020. All participants completed a 20-item questionnaire on demographic data and COVID-19 risk factors and provided blood samples. Antibody testing was performed using an in-house enzyme immunoassay and microneutralization test. RESULTS: Of the 319 participants, 39 had detectable COVID-19 antibodies. Five of them had never experienced any symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, and only 19 were previously diagnosed with COVID-19. The odds of developing COVID-19 or having corresponding antibodies increased if participants experienced COVID-19 symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 3.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-7.5) or reported contact with an infected family member (OR, 5.3; 95% CI, 2.5-11.2). Disease acquisition was not associated with employment in the ICU and involvement in the intubation of or close contact with COVID-19 patients. Of the 19 previously diagnosed participants, 6 did not possess any detectable COVID-19 antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare workers may have undiagnosed COVID-19, and those previously infected may not have long-lasting immunity. Therefore, hospitals must continue to uphold strict infection control during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 Critical Care Simulations: An International Cross-Sectional Survey.

Objective: To describe the utility and patterns of COVID-19 simulation scenarios across different international healthcare centers. Methods: This is a cross-sectional, international survey for multiple simulation centers team members, including team-leaders and healthcare workers (HCWs), based on each center's debriefing reports from 30 countries in all WHO regions. The main outcome measures were the COVID-19 simulations characteristics, facilitators, obstacles, and challenges encountered during the simulation sessions. Results: Invitation was sent to 343 simulation team leaders and multidisciplinary HCWs who responded; 121 completed the survey. The frequency of simulation sessions was monthly (27.1%), weekly (24.8%), twice weekly (19.8%), or daily (21.5%). Regarding the themes of the simulation sessions, they were COVID-19 patient arrival to ER (69.4%), COVID-19 patient intubation due to respiratory failure (66.1%), COVID-19 patient requiring CPR (53.7%), COVID-19 transport inside the hospital (53.7%), COVID-19 elective intubation in OR (37.2%), or Delivery of COVID-19 mother and neonatal care (19%). Among participants, 55.6% reported the team's full engagement in the simulation sessions. The average session length was 30-60 min. The debriefing process was conducted by the ICU facilitator in (51%) of the sessions followed by simulation staff in 41% of the sessions. A total of 80% reported significant improvement in clinical preparedness after simulation sessions, and 70% were satisfied with the COVID-19 sessions. Most perceived issues reported were related to infection control measures, followed by team dynamics, logistics, and patient transport issues. Conclusion: Simulation centers team leaders and HCWs reported positive feedback on COVID-19 simulation sessions with multidisciplinary personnel involvement. These drills are a valuable tool for rehearsing safe dynamics on the frontline of COVID-19. More research on COVID-19 simulation outcomes is warranted; to explore variable factors for each country and healthcare system.

Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department at a Major Academic Centre's Adaptation to Face the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The new novel coronavirus is having a major impact on healthcare systems internationally. Hospitals are struggling to manage the sudden influx of critical patients. Anaesthesiologists and critical care physicians are front liners in the fight against COVID-19 and carry the highest risk of getting infected. Due to the rapid response of the Saudi government to the WHO's early warning, we were fortunate at our hospital to see a slower rise in COVID-19 cases allowing us some time to prepare. We had to make room for the expected rise in highly infectious and critical patients, while at the same time protecting non-COVID-19 patients, staff and trainees. Additionally, the team continued to provide essential and specialized care to all patients in the hospital and maintain its academic and non-clinical services within the university. This review presents the different protocols, challenges and lessons learned during the development of a COVID-19 anaesthesia and critical care department plan in a major teaching hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Our ultimate aim is to share our experience with other similar institutions.

Gaps identification in Saudi anesthesia residency training during early time of pandemic: Trainee view.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic was declared a worldwide crisis, as a response the community established new protocols and clinical pathways to prepare the health system in adapting to the expected surge of cases. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we aim to assess the effect of the pandemic on the anesthesia training program residents from their own view. Identification of gaps in training programs will help to overcome the challenge like pandemic in order to have competent anesthesia practitioners. METHODS: We deployed an online survey in early May 2020 targeting the anesthesia residents in Saudi Arabia. We used mixed methods, containing both quantitative and qualitative questions. Our survey had 3 main sections: demographics, pandemic effect on the training, and pandemic effect on the trainees. RESULTS: Our survey showed that in the first 2 months of the pandemic there was a vast decrease in educational activities and clinical activities. However, after that both the Saudi Commission for Health Speciality (SCFHS) and local hospitals employed alternative education methods like electronic learning and simulation to adopt these changes. We also found the average stress level among residents was 6.5 out of 10 with number one stressor is transmitting Covid-19 to family or self. Finally, Wellbeing resources were available to residents however were not used sufficiently by residents. CONCLUSION: During times of pandemic, assessment and gap identification in postgraduate training programs are necessary to help overcome challenges of training anesthesiologists. Other than the clinical competency residents' wellbeing needs to be monitored and make available resources easy to reach for the residents.