A novel negative pressure isolation device reduces aerosol exposure: A randomized controlled trial

Background and aim The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a proliferation of intubation barriers designed to protect healthcare workers from infection. We developed the Suction-Assisted Local Aerosol Containment Chamber (SLACC) and tested it in the operating room. The primary objectives were to determine the ease and safety of airway management with SLACC, and to measure its efficacy of aerosol containment to determine if it significantly reduces exposure to health care workers. Methods In this randomized clinical trial, adult patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery with general endotracheal anesthesia were screened and informed consent obtained from those willing to participate. Patients were randomized to airway management either with or without the SLACC device. Patients inhaled nebulized saline before and during anesthesia induction to simulate the size and concentration of particles seen with severe symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results 79 patients were enrolled and randomized. Particle number concentration (PNC) at the patients' and healthcare workers' locations were measured and compared between the SLACC vs. control groups during airway management. Ease and success of tracheal intubation were recorded for each patient. All intubations were successful and time to intubation was similar between the two groups. Healthcare workers were exposed to significantly lower particle number concentrations (#/cm3) during airway management when SLACC was utilized vs. control. The particle count outside SLACC was reduced by 97% compared to that inside the device. Conclusions The SLACC device does not interfere with airway management and significantly reduces healthcare worker exposure to aerosolized particles during airway management.

Impact of solid organ transplant status on outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. However, it remains unclear whether the risk factor for SOT patients is the immunosuppression inherent to transplantation versus patient comorbidities. METHODS: We reviewed outcomes in a cohort of SOT (n = 129) and non-SOT (NSOT) patients (n = 708) admitted to the University of California, Los Angeles for COVID-19 infection. Data analyses utilized multivariate logistic regression to evaluate the impact of patient demographics, comorbidities, and transplant status on outcomes. SOT patients were analyzed by kidney SOT (KSOT) versus nonkidney SOT (NKSOT) groups. RESULTS: SOT and NSOT patients with COVID-19 infection differed in terms of patient age, ethnicity, and comorbidities. NKSOT patients were the most likely to experience death, with a mortality rate of 16.2% compared with 1.8% for KSOT and 8.3% for NSOT patients (p = .013). Multivariable analysis of hospitalized patients revealed that patient age (odds ratio [OR] 2.79, p = .001) and neurologic condition (OR 2.66, p < .001) were significantly associated with mortality. Analysis of ICU patients revealed a 2.98-fold increased odds of death in NKSOT compared with NSOT patients (p = .013). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the importance of transplant status in predicting adverse clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized or admitted to the ICU with COVID-19, especially for NKSOT patients. Transplant status and comorbidities, including age, could be used to risk stratify patients with COVID-19. This data suggests that immunosuppression contributes to COVID-19 disease severity and mortality and may have implications for managing immunosuppression, especially for critically ill patients admitted to the ICU.

Evaluation of Telemedicine Use for Anesthesiology Pain Division: Retrospective, Observational Case Series Study.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of patients require outpatient and interventional pain management. To help meet the rising demand for anesthesia pain subspecialty care in rural and metropolitan areas, health care providers have used telemedicine for pain management of both interventional patients and those with chronic pain. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to describe the implementation of a telemedicine program for pain management in an academic pain division in a large metropolitan area. We also aimed to estimate patient cost savings from telemedicine, before and after the California COVID-19 "Safer at Home" directive, and to estimate patient satisfaction with telemedicine for pain management care. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational case series study of telemedicine use in a pain division at an urban academic medical center. From August 2019 to June 2020, we evaluated 1398 patients and conducted 2948 video visits for remote pain management care. We used the publicly available Internal Revenue Service's Statistics of Income data to estimate hourly earnings by zip code in order to estimate patient cost savings. We estimated median travel time and travel distance with Google Maps' Distance Matrix application programming interface, direct cost of travel with median value for regular fuel cost in California, and time-based opportunity savings from estimated hourly earnings and round-trip time. We reported patient satisfaction scores derived from a postvisit satisfaction survey containing questions with responses on a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Patients who attended telemedicine visits avoided an estimated median round-trip driving distance of 26 miles and a median travel time of 69 minutes during afternoon traffic conditions. Within the sample, their median hourly earnings were US $28 (IQR US $21-$39) per hour. Patients saved a median of US $22 on gas and parking and a median total of US $52 (IQR US $36-$75) per telemedicine visit based on estimated hourly earnings and travel time. Patients who were evaluated serially with telemedicine for medication management saved a median of US $156 over a median of 3 visits. A total of 91.4% (286/313) of patients surveyed were satisfied with their telemedicine experience. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine use for pain management reduced travel distance, travel time, and travel and time-based opportunity costs for patients with pain. We achieved the successful implementation of telemedicine across a pain division in an urban academic medical center with high patient satisfaction and patient cost savings.

Remote enrollment into a telehealth-delivering patient portal: Barriers faced in an urban population during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Telehealth drastically reduces the time burden of appointments and increases access to care for homebound patients. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many outpatient practices closed, requiring an expansion of telemedicine capabilities. However, a significant number of patients remain unconnected to telehealth-capable patient portals. Currently, no literature exists on the success of and barriers to remote enrollment in telehealth patient portals. From March 26 to May 8, 2020, a total of 324 patients were discharged from Mount Sinai Beth Israel (MSBI), a teaching hospital in New York City. Study volunteers attempted to contact and enroll patients in the MyChart patient portal to allow the completion of a post-discharge video visit. If patients were unable to enroll, barriers were documented and coded for themes. Of the 324 patients discharged from MSBI during the study period, 277 (85%) were not yet enrolled in MyChart. Volunteers successfully contacted 136 patients (49% of those eligible), and 39 (14%) were successfully enrolled. Inability to contact patients was the most significant barrier. For those successfully contacted but not enrolled, the most frequent barrier was becoming lost to follow-up (29% of those contacted), followed by lack of interest in remote appointments (21%) and patient technological limitations (9%). Male patients, and those aged 40-59, were significantly less likely to successfully enroll compared to other patients. Telehealth is critical for healthcare delivery. Remote enrollment in a telemedicine-capable patient portal is feasible, yet underperforms compared to reported in-person enrollment rates. Health systems can improve telehealth infrastructure by incorporating patient portal enrollment into in-person workflows, educating on the importance of telehealth, and devising workarounds for technological barriers.

Implementing COVID-19 Simulation Training for Anesthesiology Residents

Introduction During the COVID-19 pandemic, anesthesiology residents faced increased risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 while performing aerosolizing procedures. We developed an airway simulation on the out-of-operating-room management of COVID-19 patients. Methods A 90-minute simulation focused on caring for a 45-year-old COVID-19 patient provided training in donning and doffing personal protective equipment, intubation, management of postinduction hypotension, management of ICU ventilators, treatment strategies for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), interpersonal communication, and resource management. Presimulation, postsimulation, and 3-months postsimulation questionnaires measured changes in confidence, knowledge, and clinical practice. Statistical analysis was completed using related-samples Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Results Twenty-four residents participated in the simulation. Questionnaire response rates were 100% presimulation and postsimulation and 88% 3-months postsimulation. Confidence scores (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely) improved with donning and doffing personal protective equipment (from 3.0 to 4.1, p < .001), ARDS management (from 3.1 to 4.0, p < .001), and COVID-19 airway management (from 2.8 to 4.0, p < .001). Correct answers on 10 knowledge questions increased significantly between presimulation and postsimulation (from 5.1 to 9.0, p < .001) but not between presimulation and 3-months postsimulation (from 5.1 to 5.8, p = .27). All participants who cared for COVID-19 patients at 3 months agreed or strongly agreed that their current management of COVID-19 patients was directly influenced by the simulation session (M = 4.4). Discussion This simulation is a safe, effective method of providing the experiential training necessary to care for actual COVID-19 patients during an active pandemic.

Remote enrollment into a telehealth-delivering patient portal: Barriers faced in an urban population during the COVID-19 pandemic

Telehealth drastically reduces the time burden of appointments and increases access to care for homebound patients. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many outpatient practices closed, requiring an expansion of telemedicine capabilities. However, a significant number of patients remain unconnected to telehealth-capable patient portals. Currently, no literature exists on the success of and barriers to remote enrollment in telehealth patient portals. From March 26 to May 8, 2020, a total of 324 patients were discharged from Mount Sinai Beth Israel (MSBI), a teaching hospital in New York City. Study volunteers attempted to contact and enroll patients in the MyChart patient portal to allow the completion of a post-discharge video visit. If patients were unable to enroll, barriers were documented and coded for themes. Of the 324 patients discharged from MSBI during the study period, 277 (85%) were not yet enrolled in MyChart. Volunteers successfully contacted 136 patients (49% of those eligible), and 39 (14%) were successfully enrolled. Inability to contact patients was the most significant barrier. For those successfully contacted but not enrolled, the most frequent barrier was becoming lost to follow-up (29% of those contacted), followed by lack of interest in remote appointments (21%) and patient technological limitations (9%). Male patients, and those aged 40–59, were significantly less likely to successfully enroll compared to other patients. Telehealth is critical for healthcare delivery. Remote enrollment in a telemedicine-capable patient portal is feasible, yet underperforms compared to reported in-person enrollment rates. Health systems can improve telehealth infrastructure by incorporating patient portal enrollment into in-person workflows, educating on the importance of telehealth, and devising workarounds for technological barriers.

Combined Percutaneous Tracheostomy and Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tubes in COVID-19: A Prospective Series of Patient Outcomes.

Background: A significant number of patients with severe respiratory failure related to COVID-19 require prolonged mechanical ventilation. Minimal data exists regarding the timing, safety, and efficacy of combined bedside percutaneous tracheostomy and endoscopy gastrostomy tube placement in these patients. The safety for healthcare providers is also in question. This study's objective was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of combined bedside tracheostomy and gastrostomy tube placement in COVID-19 patients. Design and Methods: This is a single arm, prospective cohort study in patients with COVID-19 and acute respiratory failure requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation who underwent bedside tracheostomy and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement. Detailed clinical and procedural data were collected. Descriptive statistics were employed and time to event curves were estimated and plotted using the Kaplan Meier method for clinically relevant prespecified endpoints. Results: Among 58 patients, the median total intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay was 29 days (24.7-33.3) with a median of 10 days (6.3-13.7) postprocedure. Nearly 88% of patients were weaned from mechanical ventilation postprocedure at a median of 9 days (6-12); 94% of these were decannulated. Sixty-day mortality was 10.3%. Almost 90% of patients were discharged alive from the hospital. All procedures were done at bedside with no patient transfer required out of the ICU. A median of 3.0 healthcare personnel total were present in the room per procedure. Conclusion: This study shows that survival of critically ill COVID-19 patients after tracheostomy and gastrostomy was nearly 90%. The time-to-event curves are encouraging regarding time to weaning, downsizing, decannulation, and discharge. A combined procedure minimizes the risk of virus transmission to healthcare providers in addition to decreasing the number of anesthetic episodes, transfusions, and transfers patients must undergo. This approach should be considered in critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation.

Implementation and Evaluation of a Neurology Telemedicine Initiative at a Major Academic Medical Center.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic forced rapid adoption of telemedicine for care of neurology patients. This study contributes to this literature by describing the structure and implementation of telemedicine-based outpatient neurology clinics at the UCLA Medical Center and estimates patient cost savings, before and after the California COVID-19 "Safer at Home" directive, and patient satisfaction. Methods: This was a retrospective, nonrandomized, case series study of telemedicine-based neurological management in an urban academic medical center from October 2018 to June 2020. We estimated roundtrip travel time, roundtrip travel distance, total savings, and surveyed patient and provider satisfaction with telemedicine care. We supported these findings through evaluation of 7,194 patients by telemedicine and conducted 9,189 video visits for neurological care. Results: The median telemedicine patient avoided a roundtrip driving distance of 33 miles and roundtrip travel time of 75 min. Within sample, median hourly earnings were $27/h. The median patient saved $18 on fuel and parking and $36 of time-based opportunity savings, for total savings of $54 per video visit. Eighty-six percent of patients surveyed were satisfied with their video visit experience. Conclusions: Telemedicine reduced travel time and also reduced costs for neurology patients. Patients and providers both reported high levels of satisfaction with telemedicine.