A hood shield reduces postdoffing contamination during simulated COVID-19 airway management: an exploratory, simulation-based randomized study.

PURPOSE: SARS-CoV-2 poses a significant occupational health threat to health care workers performing aerosol-generating medical procedures, with a threefold increased risk of a positive test and predicted infection compared with the general population. Nevertheless, the personal protective equipment (PPE) configuration that provides better protection with lower contamination rates is still unknown. METHODS: We enrolled 40 practitioners with airway management training (anesthesiologists, anesthesia assistants/nurses) in an exploratory, simulation-based randomized study. We evaluated the performance of a novel, locally designed hood (n = 20) in terms of protection from surrogate contamination using an ultraviolet (UV) marker during a standardized urgent intubation procedure and a simulated episode of coughing in a high-fidelity simulation setting compared with standard PPE (n = 20). The primary outcome was the presence of residual UV fluorescent contamination on any base clothing or exposed skin of the upper body after doffing PPE assessed by a blinded evaluator. RESULTS: The proportion of participants with residual contamination on any base clothing or exposed skin of the upper body after doffing was less than half in the hood PPE group compared with the standard PPE group (8/20 [40%] vs 18/20 [90%], respectively; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with standard PPE, enhanced PPE with a locally designed prototype hood was associated with reduced contamination of the upper torso and fewer body areas being exposed to droplets after a simulated aerosol-generating scenario without designed airflow. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04373096); registered 4 May 2020.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Le SRAS-CoV-2 représente une menace importante pour la santé au travail des travailleurs de la santé réalisant des interventions médicales générant des aérosols, avec un risque trois fois plus élevé de test positif au SRAS-CoV-2 et d'infection prédite au SRAS-CoV-2 par rapport à la population générale. Néanmoins, la configuration optimale des équipements de protection individuelle (EPI) offrant la meilleure protection avec des taux de contamination plus faibles est encore inconnue. MéTHODE: Nous avons recruté 40 praticiens ayant une formation en prise en charge des voies aériennes (anesthésiologistes, assistants en anesthésie/personnel infirmier) dans le cadre d'une étude exploratoire randomisée de simulation. Nous avons évalué la performance d'un nouveau capuchon conçu localement (n = 20) par rapport aux EPI standards (n = 20) en termes de protection contre la contamination de substitution à l'aide d'un marqueur ultraviolet (UV) au cours d'une procédure d'intubation urgente normalisée et d'un épisode simulé de toux dans un environnement de simulation haute fidélité. Le critère d'évaluation principal était la présence d'une contamination résiduelle par fluorescence UV sur les vêtements de base ou la peau exposée du haut du corps après le retrait des EPI telle qu'évaluée par un évaluateur en aveugle. RéSULTATS: La proportion de participants présentant une contamination résiduelle sur les vêtements de base ou la peau exposée du haut du corps après le retrait des équipements de protection était de moins de la moitié dans le groupe ayant porté le capuchon par rapport au groupe EPI standard (8/20 [40 %] vs 18/20 [90 %], respectivement; P = 0,002). CONCLUSION: Par rapport aux EPI standards, les EPI améliorés avec un prototype de capuchon conçu localement étaient associés à une contamination réduite du haut du torse et à moins de zones du corps exposées aux gouttelettes après une mise en situation simulée de génération d'aérosols sans flux d'air préconçu. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04373096); enregistrée le 4 mai 2020.

Experiences of healthcare providers with a novel emergency response intubation team during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: In the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were significant concerns about the infectious risks of intubation to healthcare providers. In response, a dedicated emergency response intubation team (ERIT) consisting of anesthesiologists and allied health providers was instituted for our emergency department (ED). Given the high-risk nature of intubations and the new interprofessional team dynamics, we sought to assess health-care provider experiences and potential areas of improvement. METHODS: Surveys were distributed to healthcare providers at the University Health Network, a quaternary healthcare centre in Toronto, Canada, which includes two urban EDs seeing over 128,000 patients per year. Participants included ED physicians and nurses, anesthesiologists, anesthesia assistants, and operating room nurses. The survey included free-text questions. Responses underwent thematic analysis using grounded theory and were independently coded by two authors to generate descriptive themes. Discrepancies were resolved with a third author. Descriptive themes were distilled through an inductive, iterative process until fewer main themes emerged. RESULTS: A total of 178 surveys were collected (68.2% response rate). Of these, 123 (69%) participated in one or more ERIT activations. Positive aspects included increased numbers of staff to assist, increased intubation expertise, improved safety, and good team dynamics within the ERIT team. Challenges included a loss of scope (primarily ED physicians and nurses) and unfamiliar workflows, perceived delays to ERIT team arrival or patient intubation, role confusion, handover concerns, and communication challenges between ED and ERIT teams. Perceived opportunities for improvement included interprofessional training, developing clear guidelines on activation, inter-team role clarification, and guidelines on handover processes post-intubation. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare providers perceived that a novel interprofessional collaboration for intubations of COVID-19 patients presented both benefits and challenges. Opportunities for improvement centred around interprofessional training, shared decision making between teams, and structured handoff processes.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Aux premiers stades de la pandémie de COVID-19, les risques infectieux de l'intubation pour les prestataires de soins de santé ont suscité de vives inquiétudes. En réponse, une équipe d'intervention d'urgence en intubation (emergency response intubation team ERIT), composée d'anesthésistes et de prestataires de services paramédicaux, a été mise en place dans notre service d'urgence. Compte tenu de la nature à haut risque des intubations et de la nouvelle dynamique d'équipe interprofessionnelle, nous avons cherché à évaluer les expériences des prestataires de soins et les domaines d'amélioration potentiels. MéTHODES: Les questionnaires ont été distribués aux prestataires de soins de santé du University Health Network, un centre de soins de santé quaternaire de Toronto, au Canada, qui comprend deux urgences urbaines accueillant plus de 128 000 patients par an. Les participants comprenaient des médecins et des infirmiers des urgences, des anesthésistes, des assistants en anesthésie et des infirmiers de salle d'opération. Les réponses ont fait l'objet d'une analyse thématique fondée sur la théorie de la base et ont été codées indépendamment par deux auteurs afin de générer des thèmes descriptifs. Les divergences ont été résolues avec un troisième auteur. Les thèmes descriptifs ont été distillés par un processus inductif et itératif jusqu'à ce qu'un nombre réduit de thèmes principaux émerge. RéSULTATS: Au total, 178 sondages ont été recueillis (taux de réponse de 68,2 %). Parmi ceux-ci, 123 (69 %) ont participé à une ou plusieurs activations d'ERIT. Les aspects positifs comprenaient un nombre accru de personnel pour aider, une expertise accrue en matière d'intubation, une sécurité améliorée et une bonne dynamique d'équipe au sein de l'équipe ERIT. Parmi les difficultés rencontrées, citons la perte du champ d'action (principalement les médecins et les infirmières des services d'urgence) et les flux de travail non familiers, les retards perçus dans l'arrivée de l'équipe d'ERIT ou l'intubation du patient, la confusion des rôles, les problèmes de transfert et les difficultés de communication entre les équipes des services d'urgence et d'ERIT. Les possibilités d'amélioration perçues comprennent la formation interprofessionnelle, l'élaboration de directives claires sur l'activation, la clarification des rôles entre les équipes et les directives sur les processus de transfert après l'intubation. CONCLUSIONS: Les prestataires de soins de santé ont perçu qu'une nouvelle collaboration interprofessionnelle pour les intubations des patients COVID-19 présentait à la fois des avantages et des défis.

A specialized airway management team for COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study of the experience of two Canadian hospitals in Toronto Une équipe spécialisée dans la prise en charge des voies aériennes pour les patients atteints de la COVID-19 : une étude rétrospective de l’expérience de deux hôpitaux canadiens à Toronto

Background In the COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented number of individuals required endotracheal intubation. To safely face these challenges, expert intubation teams were formed in some institutions. Here, we report on the experience of emergency rapid intubation teams (ERITs) in two Canadian hospitals. Methods We retrospectively collected data on all airway management procedures in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients performed by ERITs at two academic hospitals between 3 April and 17 June 2020. The co-primary outcomes were incidence of periprocedural adverse events (hypoxemia, hypotension, and cardiac arrest within 15 min of intubation) and first-attempt intubation success rate. Secondary outcomes included number of intubation attempts, device used to achieve successful airway management, and adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) protocols. Results During the study period, 123 patients were assessed for airway management, with 117 patients receiving airway interventions performed by the ERIT. The first-attempt success rate for intubation was 92%, and a videolaryngoscope was the final successful device in 93% of procedures. Hypoxemia (peripheral oxygen saturation [SpO2] < 90%) occurred in 28 patients (24%) and severe hypoxemia (SpO2 < 70%) occurred in ten patients (9%). Hypotension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] < 90 mm Hg) occurred in 37 patients (32%) and severe hypotension (SBP < 65 mm Hg) in 11 patients (9%). Adherence to recommended PPE use among providers was high. Conclusion In this cohort of critically ill patients with respiratory failure requiring time-sensitive airway management, specialized ERIT teams showed high rates of successful airway management with high adherence to PPE use. Hypoxemia and hemodynamic instability were common and should be anticipated within the first 15 min following intubation. Study registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04689724);registered 30 December 2020.

A specialized airway management team for COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study of the experience of two Canadian hospitals in Toronto.

BACKGROUND: In the COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented number of individuals required endotracheal intubation. To safely face these challenges, expert intubation teams were formed in some institutions. Here, we report on the experience of emergency rapid intubation teams (ERITs) in two Canadian hospitals. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data on all airway management procedures in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients performed by ERITs at two academic hospitals between 3 April and 17 June 2020. The co-primary outcomes were incidence of periprocedural adverse events (hypoxemia, hypotension, and cardiac arrest within 15 min of intubation) and first-attempt intubation success rate. Secondary outcomes included number of intubation attempts, device used to achieve successful airway management, and adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) protocols. RESULTS: During the study period, 123 patients were assessed for airway management, with 117 patients receiving airway interventions performed by the ERIT. The first-attempt success rate for intubation was 92%, and a videolaryngoscope was the final successful device in 93% of procedures. Hypoxemia (peripheral oxygen saturation [SpO2] < 90%) occurred in 28 patients (24%) and severe hypoxemia (SpO2 < 70%) occurred in ten patients (9%). Hypotension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] < 90 mm Hg) occurred in 37 patients (32%) and severe hypotension (SBP < 65 mm Hg) in 11 patients (9%). Adherence to recommended PPE use among providers was high. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of critically ill patients with respiratory failure requiring time-sensitive airway management, specialized ERIT teams showed high rates of successful airway management with high adherence to PPE use. Hypoxemia and hemodynamic instability were common and should be anticipated within the first 15 min following intubation. STUDY REGISTRATION: www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04689724); registered 30 December 2020.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: Pendant la pandémie de COVID-19, un nombre sans précédent de patients ont dû bénéficier d'une intubation endotrachéale. Pour faire face en toute sécurité à ces défis, des équipes d'experts en intubation ont été formées dans certains établissements. Nous rendons compte ici de l'expérience d'équipes d'intubation rapide d'urgence (ou ERIT, pour Emergency Rapid Intubation Team) dans deux hôpitaux canadiens. MéTHODE: Nous avons colligé rétrospectivement les données concernant toutes les interventions de prise en charge des voies aériennes chez les patients COVID-19 confirmés ou suspectés réalisées par les ERIT dans deux hôpitaux universitaires entre le 3 avril et le 17 juin 2020. Les deux critères d'évaluation principaux étaient l'incidence d'événements indésirables péri-procédure (hypoxémie, hypotension et arrêt cardiaque dans les 15 minutes suivant l'intubation) et le taux de réussite de l'intubation à la première tentative. Les critères d'évaluation secondaires comprenaient le nombre de tentatives d'intubation, le dispositif utilisé pour parvenir au succès de la prise en charge des voies aériennes et le respect des protocoles concernant les équipements de protection individuelle (EPI). RéSULTATS: Au cours de la période à l'étude, 123 patients ont été évalués pour une prise en charge des voies aériennes, et 117 patients ont bénéficié d'interventions au niveau des voies aériennes réalisées par l'ERIT. Le taux de réussite de la première tentative d'intubation était de 92 %, et un vidéolaryngoscope a été le dispositif menant à une intubation réussie dans 93 % des interventions. Des épisodes d'hypoxémie (saturation périphérique en oxygène [SpO2] < 90 %) sont survenus chez 28 patients (24 %) et dix patients (9 %) ont souffert d'hypoxémie sévère (SpO2 < 70 %). Des épisodes d'hypotension (tension artérielle systolique [TAS] < 90 mmHg) sont survenus chez 37 patients (32 %) et 11 patients (9 %) ont souffert d'hypotension sévère (TAS < 65 mmHg). Le respect de l'utilisation recommandée des EPI chez les soignants était élevé. CONCLUSION: Dans cette cohorte de patients gravement malades atteints d'insuffisance respiratoire et nécessitant une prise en charge des voies aériennes urgente, les équipes spécialisées de l'ERIT ont montré des taux élevés de succès de prise en charge des voies aériennes, avec une adhésion élevée aux protocoles d'utilisation des EPI. L'hypoxémie et l'instabilité hémodynamique étaient fréquentes et devaient être anticipées dans les 15 premières minutes suivant l'intubation. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: www.ClinicalTrials.gov  (NCT04689724); enregistrée le 30 décembre 2020.

Emergency Airway Management in Patients with COVID-19: A Prospective International Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Tracheal intubation for patients with COVID-19 is required for invasive mechanical ventilation. The authors sought to describe practice for emergency intubation, estimate success rates and complications, and determine variation in practice and outcomes between high-income and low- and middle-income countries. The authors hypothesized that successful emergency airway management in patients with COVID-19 is associated with geographical and procedural factors. METHODS: The authors performed a prospective observational cohort study between March 23, 2020, and October 24, 2020, which included 4,476 episodes of emergency tracheal intubation performed by 1,722 clinicians from 607 institutions across 32 countries in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation. The authors investigated associations between intubation and operator characteristics, and the primary outcome of first-attempt success. RESULTS: Successful first-attempt tracheal intubation was achieved in 4,017/4,476 (89.7%) episodes, while 23 of 4,476 (0.5%) episodes required four or more attempts. Ten emergency surgical airways were reported-an approximate incidence of 1 in 450 (10 of 4,476). Failed intubation (defined as emergency surgical airway, four or more attempts, or a supraglottic airway as the final device) occurred in approximately 1 of 120 episodes (36 of 4,476). Successful first attempt was more likely during rapid sequence induction versus non-rapid sequence induction (adjusted odds ratio, 1.89 [95% CI, 1.49 to 2.39]; P < 0.001), when operators used powered air-purifying respirators versus nonpowered respirators (adjusted odds ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.16 to 2.20]; P = 0.006), and when performed by operators with more COVID-19 intubations recorded (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03 for each additional previous intubation [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.06]; P = 0.015). Intubations performed in low- or middle-income countries were less likely to be successful at first attempt than in high-income countries (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.41 to 0.79]; P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The authors report rates of failed tracheal intubation and emergency surgical airway in patients with COVID-19 requiring emergency airway management, and identified factors associated with increased success. Risks of tracheal intubation failure and success should be considered when managing COVID-19.

Risk factors and protective measures for healthcare worker infection during highly infectious viral respiratory epidemics: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate risk factors for healthcare worker (HCW) infection in viral respiratory pandemics: severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), SARS CoV-1, influenza A H1N1, influenza H5N1. To improve understanding of HCW risk management amid the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases from conception until July 2020 for studies comparing infected HCWs (cases) and noninfected HCWs (controls) and risk factors for infection. Outcomes included HCW types, infection prevention practices, and medical procedures. Pooled effect estimates with pathogen-specific stratified meta-analysis and inverse variance meta-regression analysis were completed. We used the GRADE framework to rate certainty of evidence. (PROSPERO no. CRD42020176232, 6 April 2020.). RESULTS: In total, 54 comparative studies were included (n = 191,004 HCWs). Compared to nonfrontline HCWs, frontline HCWs were at increased infection risk (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.24-2.22), and the risk was greater for HCWs involved in endotracheal intubations (risk difference, 35.2%; 95% CI, 21.4-47.9). Use of gloves, gown, surgical mask, N95 respirator, face protection, and infection training were each strongly protective against infection. Meta-regression showed reduced infection risk in frontline HCWs working in facilities with infection designated wards (OR, -1.04; 95% CI, -1.53 to -0.33, P = .004) and performing aerosol-generating medical procedures in designated centers (OR, -1.30; 95% CI, -2.52 to -0.08; P = .037). CONCLUSIONS: During highly infectious respiratory pandemics, widely available protective measures such as use of gloves, gowns, and face masks are strongly protective against infection and should be instituted, preferably in dedicated settings, to protect frontline HCW during waves of respiratory virus pandemics.