Wellness and Coping of Physicians Who Worked in ICUs During the Pandemic: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional North American Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Few surveys have focused on physician moral distress, burnout, and professional fulfilment. We assessed physician wellness and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey using four validated instruments. SETTING: Sixty-two sites in Canada and the United States. SUBJECTS: Attending physicians (adult, pediatric; intensivist, nonintensivist) who worked in North American ICUs. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analysed 431 questionnaires (43.3% response rate) from 25 states and eight provinces. Respondents were predominantly male (229 [55.6%]) and in practice for 11.8 ± 9.8 years. Compared with prepandemic, respondents reported significant intrapandemic increases in days worked/mo, ICU bed occupancy, and self-reported moral distress (240 [56.9%]) and burnout (259 [63.8%]). Of the 10 top-ranked items that incited moral distress, most pertained to regulatory/organizational ( n = 6) or local/institutional ( n = 2) issues or both ( n = 2). Average moral distress (95.6 ± 66.9), professional fulfilment (6.5 ± 2.1), and burnout scores (3.6 ± 2.0) were moderate with 227 physicians (54.6%) meeting burnout criteria. A significant dose-response existed between COVID-19 patient volume and moral distress scores. Physicians who worked more days/mo and more scheduled in-house nightshifts, especially combined with more unscheduled in-house nightshifts, experienced significantly more moral distress. One in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We identified four coping profiles (active/social, avoidant, mixed/ambivalent, infrequent) that were associated with significant differences across all wellness measures. CONCLUSIONS: Despite moderate intrapandemic moral distress and burnout, physicians experienced moderate professional fulfilment. However, one in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We highlight potentially modifiable factors at individual, institutional, and regulatory levels to enhance physician wellness.

Well-Being Among Respiratory Therapists in an Academic Medical Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have revealed high rates of burnout among respiratory therapists (RTs), which has implications for patient care and outcomes as well as for the health care workforce. We sought to better understand RT well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to determine rates and identify determinants of well-being, including burnout and professional fulfillment, among RTs in ICUs. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study comprised of a survey administered quarterly from July 2020-May 2021 to critical-care health care professionals and semi-structured interviews from April-May 2021 with 10 ICU RTs within a single health center. We performed multivariable analyses to compare RT well-being to other professional groups and to evaluate changes in well-being over time. We analyzed qualitative interview data using thematic analysis, followed by mapping themes to the Maslow needs hierarchy. RESULTS: One hundred eight RTs responded to at least one quarterly survey. Eighty-two (75%) experienced burnout; 39 (36%) experienced professional fulfillment, and 62 (58%) reported symptoms of depression. Compared to clinicians of other professions in multivariable analyses, RTs were significantly more likely to experience burnout (odds ratio 2.32 [95% CI 1.41-3.81]) and depression (odds ratio 2.73 [95% CI 1.65-4.51]) and less likely to experience fulfillment (odds ratio 0.51 [95% CI 0.31-0.85]). We found that staffing challenges, safety concerns, workplace conflict, and lack of work-life balance led to burnout. Patient care, use of specialized skills, appreciation and a sense of community at work, and purpose fostered professional fulfillment. Themes identified were mapped to Maslow's hierarchy of needs; met needs led to professional fulfillment, and unmet needs led to burnout. CONCLUSIONS: ICU RTs experienced burnout during the pandemic at rates higher than other professions. To address RT needs, institutions should design and implement strategies to reduce burnout across all levels.

Adherence to Lung Protective Ventilation in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Prior studies have demonstrated suboptimal adherence to lung protective ventilation among patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. A common barrier to providing this evidence-based practice is diagnostic uncertainty. We sought to test the hypothesis that patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome due to coronavirus disease 2019, in whom acute respiratory distress syndrome is easily recognized, would be more likely to receive low tidal volume ventilation than concurrently admitted acute respiratory distress syndrome patients without coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Five hospitals of a single health system. PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 or noncoronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome as identified by an automated, electronic acute respiratory distress syndrome finder in clinical use at study hospitals. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 333 coronavirus disease 2019 patients and 234 noncoronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, the average initial tidal volume was 6.4 cc/kg predicted body weight and 6.8 cc/kg predicted body weight, respectively. Patients had tidal volumes less than or equal to 6.5 cc/kg predicted body weight for a mean of 70% of the first 72 hours of mechanical ventilation in the coronavirus disease 2019 cohort, compared with 52% in the noncoronavirus disease 2019 cohort (unadjusted p < 0.001). After adjusting for height, gender, admitting hospital, and whether or not the patient was admitted to a medical specialty ICU, coronavirus disease 2019 diagnosis was associated with a 21% higher percentage of time receiving tidal volumes less than or equal to 6.5 cc/kg predicted body weight within the first 72 hours of mechanical ventilation (95% CI, 14-28%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to low tidal volume ventilation during the first 72 hours of mechanical ventilation is higher in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 than with acute respiratory distress syndrome without coronavirus disease 2019. This population may present an opportunity to understand facilitators of implementation of this life-saving evidence-based practice.

Implementing nudges to promote utilization of low tidal volume ventilation (INPUT): a stepped-wedge, hybrid type III trial of strategies to improve evidence-based mechanical ventilation management.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral economic insights have yielded strategies to overcome implementation barriers. For example, default strategies and accountable justification strategies have improved adherence to best practices in clinical settings. Embedding such strategies in the electronic health record (EHR) holds promise for simple and scalable approaches to facilitating implementation. A proven-effective but under-utilized treatment for patients who undergo mechanical ventilation involves prescribing low tidal volumes, which protects the lungs from injury. We will evaluate EHR-based implementation strategies grounded in behavioral economic theory to improve evidence-based management of mechanical ventilation. METHODS: The Implementing Nudges to Promote Utilization of low Tidal volume ventilation (INPUT) study is a pragmatic, stepped-wedge, hybrid type III effectiveness implementation trial of three strategies to improve adherence to low tidal volume ventilation. The strategies target clinicians who enter electronic orders and respiratory therapists who manage the mechanical ventilator, two key stakeholder groups. INPUT has five study arms: usual care, a default strategy within the mechanical ventilation order, an accountable justification strategy within the mechanical ventilation order, and each of the order strategies combined with an accountable justification strategy within flowsheet documentation. We will create six matched pairs of twelve intensive care units (ICUs) in five hospitals in one large health system to balance patient volume and baseline adherence to low tidal volume ventilation. We will randomly assign ICUs within each matched pair to one of the order panels, and each pair to one of six wedges, which will determine date of adoption of the order panel strategy. All ICUs will adopt the flowsheet documentation strategy 6 months afterwards. The primary outcome will be fidelity to low tidal volume ventilation. The secondary effectiveness outcomes will include in-hospital mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital length of stay, and occurrence of potential adverse events. DISCUSSION: This stepped-wedge, hybrid type III trial will provide evidence regarding the role of EHR-based behavioral economic strategies to improve adherence to evidence-based practices among patients who undergo mechanical ventilation in ICUs, thereby advancing the field of implementation science, as well as testing the effectiveness of low tidal volume ventilation among broad patient populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04663802 . Registered 11 December 2020.

The impact of resource limitations on care delivery and outcomes: routine variation, the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and persistent shortage.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Resource limitation, or capacity strain, has been associated with changes in care delivery, and in some cases, poorer outcomes among critically ill patients. This may result from normal variation in strain on available resources, chronic strain in persistently under-resourced settings, and less commonly because of acute surges in demand, as seen during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies confirmed existing evidence that high ICU strain is associated with ICU triage decisions, and that ICU strain may be associated with ICU patient mortality. Studies also demonstrated earlier discharge of ICU patients during high strain, suggesting that strain may promote patient flow efficiency. Several studies of strain resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic provided support for the concept of adaptability - that the surge not only caused detrimental strain but also provided experience with a novel disease entity such that outcomes improved over time. Chronically resource-limited settings faced even more challenging circumstances because of acute-on-chronic strain during the pandemic. SUMMARY: The interaction between resource limitation and care delivery and outcomes is complex and incompletely understood. The COVID-19 pandemic provides a learning opportunity for strain response during both pandemic and nonpandemic times.

Deep learning to detect acute respiratory distress syndrome on chest radiographs: a retrospective study with external validation.

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common, but under-recognised, critical illness syndrome associated with high mortality. An important factor in its under-recognition is the variability in chest radiograph interpretation for ARDS. We sought to train a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) to detect ARDS findings on chest radiographs. METHODS: CNNs were pretrained on 595 506 radiographs from two centres to identify common chest findings (eg, opacity and effusion), and then trained on 8072 radiographs annotated for ARDS by multiple physicians using various transfer learning approaches. The best performing CNN was tested on chest radiographs in an internal and external cohort, including a subset reviewed by six physicians, including a chest radiologist and physicians trained in intensive care medicine. Chest radiograph data were acquired from four US hospitals. FINDINGS: In an internal test set of 1560 chest radiographs from 455 patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, a CNN could detect ARDS with an area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUROC) of 0·92 (95% CI 0·89-0·94). In the subgroup of 413 images reviewed by at least six physicians, its AUROC was 0·93 (95% CI 0·88-0·96), sensitivity 83·0% (95% CI 74·0-91·1), and specificity 88·3% (95% CI 83·1-92·8). Among images with zero of six ARDS annotations (n=155), the median CNN probability was 11%, with six (4%) assigned a probability above 50%. Among images with six of six ARDS annotations (n=27), the median CNN probability was 91%, with two (7%) assigned a probability below 50%. In an external cohort of 958 chest radiographs from 431 patients with sepsis, the AUROC was 0·88 (95% CI 0·85-0·91). When radiographs annotated as equivocal were excluded, the AUROC was 0·93 (0·92-0·95). INTERPRETATION: A CNN can be trained to achieve expert physician-level performance in ARDS detection on chest radiographs. Further research is needed to evaluate the use of these algorithms to support real-time identification of ARDS patients to ensure fidelity with evidence-based care or to support ongoing ARDS research. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health, Department of Defense, and Department of Veterans Affairs.

Actions Taken by US Hospitals to Prepare for Increased Demand for Intensive Care During the First Wave of COVID-19: A National Survey.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic placed considerable strain on critical care resources. How US hospitals responded to this crisis is unknown. RESEARCH QUESTION: What actions did US hospitals take to prepare for a potential surge in demand for critical care services in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: From September to November 2020, the chief nursing officers of a representative sample of US hospitals were surveyed regarding organizational actions taken to increase or maintain critical care capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Weighted proportions of hospitals for each potential action were calculated to create estimates across the entire population of US hospitals, accounting for both the sampling strategy and nonresponse. Also examined was whether the types of actions taken varied according to the cumulative regional incidence of COVID-19 cases. RESULTS: Responses were received from 169 of 540 surveyed US hospitals (response rate, 31.3%). Almost all hospitals canceled or postponed elective surgeries (96.7%) and nonsurgical procedures (94.8%). Few hospitals created new medical units in areas not typically dedicated to health care (12.9%), and almost none adopted triage protocols (5.6%) or protocols to connect multiple patients to a single ventilator (4.8%). Actions to increase or preserve ICU staff, including use of ICU telemedicine, were highly variable, without any single dominant strategy. Hospitals experiencing a higher incidence of COVID-19 did not consistently take different actions compared with hospitals facing lower incidence. INTERPRETATION: Responses of hospitals to the mass need for critical care services due to the COVID-19 pandemic were highly variable. Most hospitals canceled procedures to preserve ICU capacity and scaled up ICU capacity using existing clinical space and staffing. Future research linking hospital response to patient outcomes can inform planning for additional surges of this pandemic or other events in the future.

Improving Prone Positioning for Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome during the COVID-19 Pandemic. An Implementation-Mapping Approach.

Rationale: Prone positioning reduces mortality in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a feature of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite this, most patients with ARDS do not receive this lifesaving therapy.Objectives: To identify determinants of prone-positioning use, to develop specific implementation strategies, and to incorporate strategies into an overarching response to the COVID-19 crisis.Methods: We used an implementation-mapping approach guided by implementation-science frameworks. We conducted semistructured interviews with 30 intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians who staffed 12 ICUs within the Penn Medicine Health System and the University of Michigan Medical Center. We performed thematic analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We then conducted three focus groups with a task force of ICU leaders to develop an implementation menu, using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change framework. The implementation strategies were adapted as part of the Penn Medicine COVID-19 pandemic response.Results: We identified five broad themes of determinants of prone positioning, including knowledge, resources, alternative therapies, team culture, and patient factors, which collectively spanned all five Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains. The task force developed five specific implementation strategies, including educational outreach, learning collaborative, clinical protocol, prone-positioning team, and automated alerting, elements of which were rapidly implemented at Penn Medicine.Conclusions: We identified five broad themes of determinants of evidence-based use of prone positioning for severe ARDS and several specific strategies to address these themes. These strategies may be feasible for rapid implementation to increase use of prone positioning for severe ARDS with COVID-19.

Benchmarking Critical Care Well-Being: Before and After the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Examine well-being, measured as burnout and professional fulfillment, across critical care healthcare professionals, ICUs, and hospitals within a health system; examine the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. DESIGN: To complement a longitudinal survey administered to medical critical care physicians at the end of an ICU rotation, which began in May 2018, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among critical care professionals across four hospitals in December 2018 to January 2019. We report the results of the cross-sectional survey and, to examine the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the longitudinal survey results from July 2019 to May 2020. SETTING: Academic medical center. SUBJECTS: Four-hundred eighty-one critical care professionals, including 353 critical care nurses, 58 advanced practice providers, 57 physicians, and 13 pharmacists, participated in the cross-sectional survey; 15 medical critical care physicians participated in the longitudinal survey through the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Burnout was present in 50% of ICU clinicians, ranging from 42% for critical care physicians to 55% for advanced practice providers. Professional fulfillment was less common at 37%, with significant variability across provider (p = 0.04), with a low of 23% among critical care pharmacists and a high of 53% among physicians. Well-being varied significantly at the hospital and ICU level. Workload and job demand were identified as drivers of burnout and meaning in work, culture and values of work community, control and flexibility, and social support and community at work were each identified as drivers of well-being. Between July 2019 and March 2020, burnout and professional fulfillment were present in 35% (15/43) and 58% (25/43) of medical critical care physician responses, respectively. In comparison, during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, burnout and professional fulfillment were present in 57% (12/21) and 38% (8/21), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout was common across roles, yet differed across ICUs and hospitals. Professional fulfillment varied by provider role. We identified potentially modifiable factors related to clinician well-being that can inform organizational strategies at the ICU and hospital level. Longitudinal studies, designed to assess the long-term impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on the well-being of the critical care workforce, are urgently needed.