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.

Developing a simulation programme to train airway management during the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary-level hospital.

Tracheal intubation of a patient with COVID-19 is a high-risk procedure for not only the patient, but all healthcare workers involved, leading to an understandable degree of staff anxiety. We used simulation to help train airway managers to intubate patients with COVID-19. Based on action cards developed by our department, we designed a series of scenarios to simulate airway management during the COVID-19 pandemic. Teams were asked to perform a rapid sequence induction with tracheal intubation. We designed in situ scenarios with low-fidelity manikins that could be set up in operating theatres across multiple sites. Over a period of 4 weeks, 101 consultant anaesthetists, 58 anaesthetic trainees and 30 operating department practitioners received intubation training. These members made up the airway response team of our hospital. 30 emergency department doctors also received training in anticipation of further COVID-19 surges leading to the possibility of overwhelmed services. Simulation-based training was an invaluable tool for our hospital to rapidly upskill medical professionals during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We have used feedback and additional guidelines to improve our scenarios to retrain staff during subsequent waves.