"I don't know how we would have coped without it." Understanding the Importance of a Virtual Hospital Visiting Program During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

As the COVID-19 pandemic reached Canada in full strength, the concept of allowing visiting to patients became an impossibility in most healthcare organizations. In March 2020, hospitals across Canada made the decision to close to visitors. This was a complicated decision which left admitted patients with very little option for connecting with family and friends other than through the telephone. In response, North York General Hospital launched a virtual family visiting (VFV) program across all inpatient units. Here we report the findings of a qualitative study of the program informed by an interpretive descriptive approach. Interviews were conducted with families who participated in the VFV program at North York General Hospital in Toronto, Canada during the first wave of the COVID pandemic. A total of 24 family members were interviewed. As anticipated, the family members were all extremely pleased with the opportunity to connect virtually and very satisfied with the VFV program. What was less anticipated was the anxiety and distress that families experienced in being separated from their loved ones. Our data analysis revealed 4 key themes which we have labeled (a) the unforeseen consequences of separation trauma, (b) increased vulnerability of patients and family, (c) a lifeline of human connection, and (d) the role of the facilitator as a connector. This work contributes significantly to a system-level understanding of the impact of imposed separation, increased vulnerability, and the importance of providing an alternative way for families to be present with their loved ones in these unprecedented times.

Demographic characteristics, outcomes and experience of patients using virtual urgent care services from 14 emergency department led sites in Ontario.

INTRODUCTION: As part of the COVID-19 pandemic response, the Ontario Ministry of Health funded a virtual care pilot program intended to support emergency department (ED) diversion of patients with low acuity complaints and reduce the need for face-to-face contact. The objective was to describe the demographic characteristics, outcomes and experience of patients using the provincial pilot program. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of patients using virtual care services provided by 14 ED-led pilot sites from December 2020 to September 2021. Patients who completed a virtual visit were invited by email to complete a standardized, 25-item online survey, which included questions related to satisfaction and patient-reported outcome measures. RESULTS: There were 22,278 virtual visits. When patients were asked why they contacted virtual urgent care, of the 82.7% patients who had a primary care provider, 31.0% said they could not make a timely appointment with their family physician. Rash, fever, abdominal pain, and COVID-19 vaccine queries represented 30% of the presenting complaints. Of 19,613 patients with a known disposition, 12,910 (65.8%) were discharged home and 3,179 (16.2%) were referred to the ED. Of the 2,177 survey responses, 94% rated their overall experience as 8/10 or greater. More than 80% said they had answers to all the questions they had related to their health concern, believed they were able to manage the issue, had a plan they could follow, and knew what to do if the issue got worse or came back. CONCLUSIONS: Many presenting complaints were low acuity, and most patients had a primary care provider, but timely access was not available. Future work should focus on health equity to ensure virtual care is accessible to underserved populations. We question if virtual urgent care can be safely and more economically provided by non-emergency physicians.

RéSUMé: INTRODUCTION: Dans le cadre de la réponse à la pandémie de COVID-19, le ministère de la Santé de l'Ontario a financé un programme pilote de soins virtuels visant à soutenir la réorientation vers les services d'urgence des patients présentant des problèmes de faible acuité et à réduire le besoin de contact en personne. L'objectif était de décrire les caractéristiques démographiques, les résultats et l'expérience des patients utilisant le programme pilote provincial. MéTHODES: Il s'agissait d'une étude de cohorte prospective de patients utilisant des services de soins virtuels fournis par 14 sites pilotes dirigés par des services d'urgence, de décembre 2020 à septembre 2021. Les patients qui ont effectué une visite virtuelle ont été invités par courriel à répondre à une enquête en ligne standardisée de 25 questions, qui comprenait des questions relatives à la satisfaction et aux résultats rapportés par les patients. RéSULTATS: Il y a eu 22 278 visites virtuelles. Lorsqu'on a demandé aux patients pourquoi ils avaient contacté les soins urgents virtuels, sur les 82,7 % de patients qui avaient un prestataire de soins primaires, 31,0 % ont répondu qu'ils n'avaient pas pu obtenir un rendez-vous en temps voulu avec leur médecin de famille. Les éruptions cutanées, la fièvre, les douleurs abdominales et les interrogations sur le vaccin COVID-19 représentaient 30 % des plaintes présentées. Sur les 19 613 patients dont la disposition était connue, 12 910 (65,8 %) ont été renvoyés chez eux et 3 179 (16,2 %) ont été orientés vers les urgences. Sur les 2 177 réponses à l'enquête, 94 % ont attribué une note de 8/10 ou plus à leur expérience globale. Plus de 80 % d'entre eux ont déclaré avoir obtenu des réponses à toutes les questions qu'ils se posaient sur leur problème de santé, se croire capables de le gérer, avoir un plan qu'ils pouvaient suivre et savoir quoi faire si le problème s'aggravait ou revenait. CONCLUSIONS: De nombreuses plaintes présentées étaient de faible acuité, et la plupart des patients avaient un fournisseur de soins primaires, mais l'accès en temps opportun n'était pas disponible. Les travaux futurs devraient se concentrer sur l'équité en matière de santé pour s'assurer que les soins virtuels sont accessibles aux populations mal desservies et nous nous demandons si ces services peuvent être fournis en toute sécurité et de manière plus économique par des médecins non urgentistes.

Designs, facilitators, barriers, and lessons learned during the implementation of emergency department led virtual urgent care programs in Ontario, Canada.

Introduction: Virtual patient care has seen incredible growth since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. To provide greater access to safe and timely urgent care, in the fall of 2020, the Ministry of Health introduced a pilot program of 14 virtual urgent care (VUC) initiatives across the province of Ontario. The objective of this paper was to describe the overall design, facilitators, barriers, and lessons learned during the implementation of seven emergency department (ED) led VUC pilot programs in Ontario, Canada. Methods: We assembled an expert panel of 13 emergency medicine physicians and researchers with experience leading and implementing local VUC programs. Each VUC program lead was asked to describe their local pilot program, share common facilitators and barriers to adoption of VUC services, and summarize lessons learned for future VUC design and development. Results: Models of care interventions varied across VUC pilot programs related to triage, staffing, technology, and physician remuneration. Common facilitators included local champions to guide program delivery, provincial funding support, and multi-modal marketing and promotions. Common barriers included behaviour change strategies to support adoption of a new service, access to high-quality information technology to support new workflow models that consider privacy, risk, and legal perspectives, and standardized data collection which underpin overall objective impact assessments. Conclusions: These pilot programs were rapidly implemented to support safe access to care and ED diversion of patients with low acuity issues during the COVID-19 pandemic. The heterogeneity of program implementation respects local autonomy yet may present challenges for sustainability efforts and future funding considerations.

2021 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; First Aid Task Forces; and the COVID-19 Working Group.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the fifth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations; a more comprehensive review was done in 2020. This latest summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews in this summary include resuscitation topics of video-based dispatch systems; head-up cardiopulmonary resuscitation; early coronary angiography after return of spontaneous circulation; cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the prone patient; cord management at birth for preterm and term infants; devices for administering positive-pressure ventilation at birth; family presence during neonatal resuscitation; self-directed, digitally based basic life support education and training in adults and children; coronavirus disease 2019 infection risk to rescuers from patients in cardiac arrest; and first aid topics, including cooling with water for thermal burns, oral rehydration for exertional dehydration, pediatric tourniquet use, and methods of tick removal. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations or good practice statements. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

Bystanders are less willing to resuscitate out-of-hospital cardiac arrest victims during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic may influence the willingness of bystanders to engage in resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. We sought to determine if and how the pandemic has changed willingness to intervene, and the impact of personal protective equipment (PPE). METHODS: We distributed a 12-item survey to the general public through social media channels from June 4 to 23, 2020. We used 100-point scales to inquire about participants' willingness to perform interventions on "strangers or unfamiliar persons" and "family members or familiar persons", and compared mean willingness during time periods prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic using paired t-tests. RESULTS: Survey participants (n = 1360) were from 26 countries; the median age was 38 years (IQR 24-50) and 45% were female. Compared to prior to the pandemic, there were significant decreases in willingness to check for breathing or a pulse (mean difference -10.7% [95%CI -11.8, -9.6] for stranger/unfamiliar persons, -1.2% [95%CI -1.6, -0.8] for family/familiar persons), perform chest compressions (-14.3% [95%CI -15.6, -13.0], -1.6% [95%CI -2.1, -1.1]), provide rescue breaths (-19.5% [95%CI -20.9, -18.1], -5.5% [95%CI -6.4, -4.6]), and apply an automated external defibrillator (-4.8% [95%CI -5.7, -4.0], -0.9% [95%CI -1.3, -0.5]) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Willingness to intervene increased significantly if PPE was available (+8.3% [95%CI 7.2, 9.5] for stranger/unfamiliar, and +1.4% [95%CI 0.8, 1.9] for family/familiar persons). CONCLUSION: Willingness to perform bystander resuscitation during the pandemic decreased, however this was ameliorated if simple PPE were available.