The Maryland (USA) Critical Care Coordination Center (C4): From Pandemic to Permanence.

INTRODUCTION: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic created overwhelming demand for critical care services within Maryland's (USA) hospital systems. As intensive care units (ICUs) became full, critically ill patients were boarded in hospital emergency departments (EDs), a practice associated with increased mortality and costs. Allocation of critical care resources during the pandemic requires thoughtful and proactive management strategies. While various methodologies exist for addressing the issue of ED overcrowding, few systems have implemented a state-wide response using a public safety-based platform. The objective of this report is to describe the implementation of a state-wide Emergency Medical Services (EMS)-based coordination center designed to ensure timely and equitable access to critical care. METHODS: The state of Maryland designed and implemented a novel, state-wide Critical Care Coordination Center (C4) staffed with intensivist physicians and paramedics purposed to ensure appropriate critical care resource management and patient transfer assistance. A narrative description of the C4 is provided. A retrospective cohort study design was used to present requests to the C4 as a case series report to describe the results of implementation. RESULTS: Providing a centralized asset with regional situational awareness of hospital capability and bed status played an integral role for directing the triage process of critically ill patients to appropriate facilities during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 2,790 requests were received by the C4. The pairing of a paramedic with an intensivist physician resulted in the successful transfer of 67.4% of requests, while 27.8% were managed in place with medical direction. Overall, COVID-19 patients comprised 29.5% of the cohort. Data suggested increased C4 usage was predictive of state-wide ICU surges. The C4 usage volume resulted in the expansion to pediatric services to serve a broader age range. The C4 concept, which leverages the complimentary skills of EMS clinicians and intensivist physicians, is presented as a proposed public safety-based model for other regions to consider world-wide. CONCLUSION: The C4 has played an integral role in the State of Maryland's pledge to its citizens to deliver the right care to the right patient at the right time and can be considered as a model for adoption by other regions world-wide.

The Role of a Statewide Critical Care Coordination Center in the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic-and Beyond.

OBJECTIVE: Public health emergencies, like the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, can cause unprecedented demand for critical care services. We describe statewide implementation of a critical care coordination center designed to optimize ICU utilization. To describe a centralized critical care coordination center designed to ensure appropriate intensive care resource allocation. DESIGN: A descriptive case series of consecutive critically ill adult patients. SETTING: ICUs, emergency departments, freestanding medical facilities in the state of Maryland and adjacent states, serving a population of over 6,045,000 across a land area of 9,776 sq mi (25,314 km2). PATIENTS: Adults requiring intensive care. INTERVENTIONS: Consultation with a critical care physician and emergency medical services clinician. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Number of consults, number of patient movements to higher levels of critical care, and number of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation referrals for both patients with and without coronavirus disease 2019. Over a 6-month period, critical care coordination center provided 1,006 critical care consultations and directed 578 patient transfers for 58 hospitals in the state of Maryland and adjoining region. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation referrals were requested for 58 patients. Four-hundred twenty-eight patients (42.5%) were managed with consultation only and did not require transfer. CONCLUSIONS: Critical care coordination center, staffed 24/7 by a critical care physician and emergency medical service clinician, may improve critical care resource use and patient flow. This serves as a model for a tiered regionalized system to ensure that the demand for critical care services may be met during a pandemic and beyond.

A Statewide EMS Viral Syndrome Pandemic Triage Protocol: 24 Hour Outcomes.

Background: Early during the COVID-19 pandemic, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) systems encountered many challenges that prompted crisis-level strategies. Maryland's statewide EMS system implemented the Viral Syndrome Pandemic Triage Protocol which contained a decision tool to help identify patients potentially safe for self-care at home. Objectives: This study assessed the effects of the Maryland Viral Syndrome Pandemic Triage Protocol and the safety of referring patients for self-care at home. Methods: This is a retrospective statewide analysis of EMS patients from March 19 thru September 4, 2020, who were not transported and had documentation of the Viral Syndrome Pandemic Triage Protocol's decision support tool completed, as well as a random sample of 150 patients who were not transported and did not have documentation of the decision tool. Descriptive statistics were performed as well as a two-stage multivariable logistic regression model for the outcomes of ED presentation within 24 hours and subsequent hospitalization. Results: 301 EMS patients were documented as triaged to home using the protocol and outcomes data were available for 282 (94%). 41(14.5%) patients presented to an ED within 24 hours and 14 (5% of 282) required inpatient hospitalization. Nine (3.2%) patients were subsequently hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19 illness. Of those patients for whom the decision tool was not documented, 35 (23%) had an ED visit within 24 hours and 15 (10%) were hospitalized (p = 0.075). Multivariate logistic regression model results (N = 432) suggest that those with documentation of triage protocol use had some advantage over those patients without documentation. The 95% CIs of the estimated effect of Triage/No Triage protocol documented were wide and crossed the 1.0 limit but overall, all effects Odds Ratios and Adjust Odds Ratios were consistently over 1.0 with the lowest value of 1.3 and the highest value of 2.1. Conclusion: Most patients (95%) who were triaged to self-care at home with home documented decision support tool use did not require hospitalization within 24 hours following EMS encounter and this appears to be safe. Future opportunity exists to incorporate such tools into comprehensive pandemic preparedness strategies along with appropriate follow up and quality improvement mechanisms.

Correlation between Emergency Medical Services Suspected COVID-19 Patients and Daily Hospitalizations.

Objective: We sought to determine if Emergency Medical Services (EMS) identified Persons Under Investigation (PUI) for COVID-19 are associated with hospitalizations for COVID-19 disease for the purposes of serving as a potential early indicator of hospital surge. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Maryland statewide EMS electronic medical records and daily COVID-19 hospitalizations from March 13, 2020 through July 31, 2020. All unique EMS patients who were identified as COVID-19 PUIs during the study period were included. Descriptive analysis was performed. The Box-Jenkins approach was used to evaluate the relationship between EMS transports and daily new hospitalizations. Separate Auto Regressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) models were constructed to transform the data into a series of independent, identically distributed random variables. Fit was measured using the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). The Box-Ljung white noise test was utilized to ensure there was no autocorrelation in the residuals. Results: EMS units in Maryland identified a total of 26,855 COVID-19 PUIs during the 141-day study period. The median patient age was 62 years old, and 19,111 (71.3%) were 50 years and older. 6,886 (25.6%) patients had an abnormal initial pulse oximetry (<92%). A strong degree of correlation was observed between EMS PUI transports and new hospitalizations. The correlation was strongest and significant at a 9-day lag from time of EMS PUI transports to new COVID-19 hospitalizations, with a cross correlation coefficient of 0.26 (p < .01). Conclusions: A strong correlation between EMS PUIs and COVID-19 hospitalizations was noted in this state-wide analysis. These findings demonstrate the potential value of incorporating EMS clinical information into the development of a robust syndromic surveillance system for COVID-19. This correlation has important utility in the development of predictive tools and models that seek to provide indicators of an impending surge on the healthcare system at large.