Humans not heroes: Canadian emergency physician experiences during the early COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The pandemic has upended much clinical care, irrevocably changing our health systems and thrusting emergency physicians into a time of great uncertainty and change. This study is a follow-up to a survey that examined the early pandemic experience among Canadian emergency physicians and aimed to qualitatively describe the experiences of these physicians during the global pandemic. The study was conducted at a time when Canadian COVID-19 case numbers were low. METHODS: The investigators engaged in an interview-based study that used an interpretive description analytic technique, sensitised by the principles of phenomenology. One-to-one interviews were conducted, transcribed and then analysed to establish a codebook, which was subsequently grouped into key themes. Results underwent source triangulation (with survey data from a similar period) and investigator-driven audit trail analysis. RESULTS: A total of 16 interviews (11 female, 5 male) were conducted between May and September 2020. The isolated themes on emergency physicians' experiences during the early pandemic included: (1) disruption and loss of emergency department shift work; (2) stress of COVID-19 uncertainty and information bombardment; (3) increased team bonding; (4) greater personal life stress; (5) concern for patients' isolation, miscommunication and disconnection from care; (6) emotional distress. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian emergency physicians experienced emotional and psychological distress during the early COVID-19 pandemic, at a time when COVID-19 prevalence was low. This study's findings could guide future interventions to protect emergency physicians against pandemic-related distress.

American Society of Hematology living guidelines on the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19: January 2022 update on the use of therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation in acutely ill patients.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19-related acute illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in making decisions about the use of anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included patient representatives and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process and performed systematic evidence reviews (through November 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. This is an update to guidelines published in February 2021 as part of the living phase of these guidelines. RESULTS: The panel made one additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation in favor of therapeutic-intensity over prophylactic-intensity anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related acute illness who do not have suspected or confirmed VTE. The panel emphasized the need for an individualized assessment of risk of thrombosis and bleeding. The panel also noted that heparin (unfractionated or low molecular weight) may be preferred because of a preponderance of evidence with this class of anticoagulants. CONCLUSION: This conditional recommendation was based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for additional, high-quality, randomized controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related acute illness.

Canadian emergency medicine physician burnout: a survey of Canadian emergency physicians during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: A previous survey of Canadian emergency medicine (EM) physicians during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic documented less than 20% experienced high levels of burnout. This study examined the experience of a similar group of physicians during the second pandemic wave. We reported the associations between burnout and physician age, gender, having children at home and training route. METHODS: This study utilized a national survey of Canadian emergency physicians. We collected data on demographics and measured burnout using the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). Multiple logistic regression models identified associations between the emotional exhaustion and depersonalization domains of the MBI and EM physician demographics (age, gender, children living at home, and training route). RESULTS: Between November 25, 2020, and February 4, 2021, 416 emergency physicians completed the survey, representing all Provinces or Territories in Canada (except Nunavut). The mean participant age was 44, 53% were male, 64% had children living at home and 41% were FRCPC and 41% CCFP-EM trained. Sixty percent reported high burnout (either high emotional exhaustion and/or high depersonalization). Increasing age was associated with lower emotional exhaustion and depersonalization; female or nonbinary gender was associated with an increase in emotional exhaustion; and having children living at home was associated with lower depersonalization. CONCLUSIONS: Most Canadian emergency physicians participating in our study during the COVID-19 pandemic reported high burnout levels. Younger physicians and female physicians were more likely than their coworkers to report high burnout levels. Hospitals should address emergency physician burnout during the pandemic because it is a threat to quality of patient care and retention of the workforce for the future.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Une enquête précédente sur les médecins d'urgence canadiens pendant la première vague de la pandémie de COVID-19 a montré que moins de 20 % d'entre eux souffraient de niveaux élevés d'épuisement professionnel. Cette étude a examiné l'expérience d'un groupe similaire de médecins au cours de la deuxième vague et a rapporté les associations entre l'épuisement professionnel et l'âge du médecin, son sexe, le fait d'avoir des enfants à la maison et le parcours de formation. MéTHODES: Cette étude s'est appuyée sur une enquête nationale auprès des médecins d'urgence canadiens. Nous avons recueilli des données démographiques et mesuré le burnout à l'aide du Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). De multiples modèles de régression logistique ont identifié des associations entre les domaines de l'épuisement émotionnel et de la dépersonnalisation du MBI et les données démographiques des médecins de la médecine d'urgence (âge, sexe, enfants vivant à la maison et parcours de formation). RéSULTATS: Entre le 25 novembre 2020 et le 4 février 2021, 416 médecins urgentistes ont répondu au sondage, représentant toutes les provinces ou territoires du Canada (sauf le Nunavut). L'âge moyen des participants était de 44 ans, 53% étaient des hommes, 64% avaient des enfants vivant à la maison et 41% étaient formés FRCPC et 41% CMFC-MU. Soixante pour cent ont signalé un épuisement professionnel élevé (soit un épuisement émotionnel élevé et/ou une dépersonnalisation élevée). L'augmentation de l'âge était associée à une diminution de l'épuisement émotionnel et de la dépersonnalisation ; le sexe féminin ou non binaire était associé à une augmentation de l'épuisement émotionnel ; et le fait d'avoir des enfants vivant à la maison était associé à une diminution de la dépersonnalisation. CONCLUSIONS: La plupart des médecins urgentistes canadiens ayant participé à notre étude pendant la pandémie de COVID-19 ont signalé des niveaux élevés d'épuisement professionnel. Les médecins plus jeunes et les femmes médecins étaient plus susceptibles que leurs collègues de déclarer des niveaux élevés d'épuisement professionnel. Les hôpitaux doivent s'attaquer au problème de l'épuisement professionnel des médecins urgentistes pendant la pandémie, car il constitue une menace pour la qualité des soins aux patients et la rétention de la main-d'œuvre pour l'avenir.

American Society of Hematology living guidelines on the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19: July 2021 update on postdischarge thromboprophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19-related acute illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel, including 3 patient representatives, and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to March 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 1 additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation against the use of outpatient anticoagulant prophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 who are discharged from the hospital and who do not have suspected or confirmed VTE or another indication for anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS: This recommendation was based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for high-quality randomized controlled trials assessing the role of postdischarge thromboprophylaxis. Other key research priorities include better evidence on assessing risk of thrombosis and bleeding outcomes in patients with COVID-19 after hospital discharge.

American Society of Hematology living guidelines on the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19: May 2021 update on the use of intermediate-intensity anticoagulation in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19-related critical illness is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in making decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included 3 patient representatives and applied strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Centre supported the guideline development process by performing systematic evidence reviews (up to 5 March 2021). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the GRADE approach to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. This is an update on guidelines published in February 2021. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 1 additional recommendation. The panel issued a conditional recommendation in favor of prophylactic-intensity over intermediate-intensity anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19-related critical illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. CONCLUSIONS: This recommendation was based on low certainty in the evidence, which underscores the need for additional high-quality, randomized, controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation in critically ill patients. Other key research priorities include better evidence regarding predictors of thrombosis and bleeding risk in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and the impact of nonanticoagulant therapies (eg, antiviral agents, corticosteroids) on thrombotic risk.

American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines on the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related critical illness and acute illness are associated with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). OBJECTIVE: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in decisions about the use of anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis for patients with COVID-19-related critical illness and acute illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. METHODS: ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel and applied strict management strategies to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The panel included 3 patient representatives. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline-development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to 19 August 2020). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 2 recommendations. The panel issued conditional recommendations in favor of prophylactic-intensity anticoagulation over intermediate-intensity or therapeutic-intensity anticoagulation for patients with COVID-19-related critical illness or acute illness who do not have confirmed or suspected VTE. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations were based on very low certainty in the evidence, underscoring the need for high-quality, randomized controlled trials comparing different intensities of anticoagulation. They will be updated using a living recommendation approach as new evidence becomes available.

Clinical trials in a COVID-19 pandemic: Shared infrastructure for continuous learning in a rapidly changing landscape.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials, conducted efficiently and with the utmost integrity, are a key component in identifying effective vaccines, therapies, and other interventions urgently needed to solve the COVID-19 crisis. Yet launching and implementing trials with the rigor necessary to produce convincing results is a complicated and time-consuming process. Balancing rigor and efficiency involves relying on designs that employ flexible features to respond to a fast-changing landscape, measuring valid endpoints that result in translational actions and disseminating findings in a timely manner. We describe the challenges involved in creating infrastructure with potential utility for shared learning. METHODS: We have established a shared infrastructure that borrows strength across multiple trials. The infrastructure includes an endpoint registry to aid in selecting appropriate endpoints, a registry to facilitate establishing a Data & Safety Monitoring Board, common data collection instruments, a COVID-19 dedicated design and analysis team, and a pragmatic platform protocol, among other elements. RESULTS: The authors have relied on the shared infrastructure for six clinical trials for which they serve as the Data Coordinating Center and have a design and analysis team comprising 15 members who are dedicated to COVID-19. The authors established a pragmatic platform to simultaneously investigate multiple treatments for the outpatient with adaptive features to add or drop treatment arms. CONCLUSION: The shared infrastructure provides appealing opportunities to evaluate disease in a more robust manner with fewer resources and is especially valued during a pandemic where efficiency in time and resources is crucial. The most important element of the shared infrastructure is the pragmatic platform. While it may be the most challenging of the elements to establish, it may provide the greatest benefit to both patients and researchers.