Association between First-pass Intubation Success and Enhanced PPE Use during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated first-pass endotracheal intubation (ETI) success within the critical care transport (CCT) environment using a natural experiment created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Our primary objective was to evaluate if the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) or the COVID-19 time period was associated with differences in first-pass success rates of ETI within a large CCT system with a high baseline ETI first-pass success rate. We hypothesized that pandemic-related challenges would be associated with decreased first-pass success rates. METHODS: We performed a retrospective before-after cohort study of airway management by CCT personnel relative to the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a mixed effects logistic regression to evaluate the association between enhanced PPE (N95 mask, eye protection) use and the pandemic time period on first-pass intubation success, while controlling for other factors potentially associated with intubation success. Variables in the final model included patient demographics (age, sex, and race), body mass index, medical category (trauma versus non-trauma), interfacility or scene response, blade size (Macintosh 3 versus 4), use of face mask, use of eye protection, and crew member length of service. RESULTS: We identified 1279 cases involving intubation attempts on adult patients during the study period. A total of 1133 cases were included in the final analysis, with an overall first-pass success rate of 95.7% (96.4% pre-COVID-19 and 94.8% during COVID-19). In our final mixed effects logistic regression model, enhanced PPE use and the COVID-19 time period were not associated with first-pass intubation success rate. CONCLUSION: In a large regional CCT system with a high ETI first-pass success rate, neither PPE use nor the COVID-19 time period were associated with differences in ETI first-pass success while controlling for relevant patient and operational factors. Other emergency medical services (EMS) systems may have encountered different effects of pandemic-related PPE use on intubation success rates. Further studies are needed to evaluate the influence of sustained use of enhanced PPE or changes in training or procedural experience on post-pandemic ETI first-pass success rates for non-CCT EMS clinicians.

Masking by health care and public safety workers in non-patient care areas to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review.

Objectives: Wearing a mask is an important method for reducing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission in health care and public safety settings. We assess the evidence regarding masking in the workplace during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic (PROSPERO CRD4202432097). Methods: We performed a systematic review of published literature from 4 databases and evaluated the quality of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. We searched for observational and experimental research involving public safety and health care workers. We included articles evaluating the use of masks, versus no mask, on the outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: Our search yielded 15,013 records, of which 9 studies were included. Most studies (n = 8; 88.9%) involved infections or outbreaks among health care workers. The majority (88.9%) used in-depth interviews of cases and non-cases to obtain self-reported use of masks during periods of exposure. One of 9 studies quantitatively assessed differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection based on use of masks in non-patient care settings. Use of observational study designs, small sample sizes, inadequate control for confounding, and inadequate measurement of exposure and non-exposure periods with infected coworkers contributed to the quality of evidence being judged as very low. Conclusions: The available evidence from the initial months of the pandemic suggests that the use of masks in congregate, non-patient care settings, such as breakrooms, helps to reduce risk of SARS-CoV-2 virus transmission. However, this evidence is limited and is of very low quality. Prospective studies incorporating active observation measures are warranted.

EMS responses and non-transports during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic may affect both use of 9-1-1 systems and prehospital treatment and transport practices. We evaluated EMS responses in an EMS region when it experienced low to moderate burden of COVID-19 disease to assess overall trends, response and management characteristics, and non-transport rates. Our goal is to inform current and future pandemic response in similar regions. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of prehospital EMS responses from 22 urban, suburban, and rural EMS agencies in Western Pennsylvania. To account for seasonal variation, we compared demographic, response, and management characteristics for the 2-month period of March 15 to May 15, 2020 with the corresponding 2-month periods in 2016-2019. We then tested for an association between study period (pandemic vs historical control) and incidence of non-transport in unadjusted and adjusted regression. Finally, we described the continuous trends in responses and non-transports that occurred during the year before and initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic from January 1, 2019 to May 31, 2020. RESULTS: Among 103,607 EMS responses in the 2-month comparative periods of March 15 to May 15, 2016-2020, we found a 26.5% [95% CI 26.9%, 27.1%] decrease in responses in 2020 compared to the same months from the four prior years. There was a small increase in respiratory cases (0.6% [95%CI 0.1%, 1.1%]) and greater frequency of abnormal vital signs suggesting a sicker patient cohort. There was a relative increase (46.6%) in non-transports between periods. The pandemic period was independently associated with an increase in non-transport (adjusted OR 1.68; 95%CI 1.59, 1.78). Among 177,194 EMS responses occurring in the year before and during the early period of the pandemic, between January 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020, we identified a 31% decrease in responses and a 48% relative increase in non-transports for April 2020 compared to the previous year's monthly averages. CONCLUSION: Despite a low to moderate burden of infection during the initial period of the COVID-19 pandemic, we found a decline in overall EMS response volumes and an increase in the rate of non-transports independent of patient demographics and other response characteristics.

Collateral damage - Impact of a pandemic on stroke emergency services.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic's impact on stroke care is two-fold direct impact of the infection and indirect impact on non-COVID-19 diseases. Anecdotal evidence and clinical observation suggest that there is a decrease in the number of patients presenting with stroke during the pandemic. We aim to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the utilization of stroke emergency services on a single comprehensive stroke center (CSC). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database and compared all emergency department (ED) encounters, acute stroke admissions (including TIA), and thrombectomy cases admitted in March 2017-2019 to patients admitted in March 2020 at a comprehensive stroke center. RESULTS: Number of total ED encounters (22%, p=0.005), acute ischemic strokes (40%, p=0.001), and TIAs (60%, p=0.163) decreased between March of 2017-2019 compared to March of 2020. The number of patients undergoing EVT in March 2020 was comparable to March 2017-2019 (p=0.430). CONCLUSION: A pandemic-related stay-at-home policy reduces the utilization of stroke emergency services at a CSC. This effect appears to be more prominent for ED encounters, all stroke admissions and TIAs, and less impactful for severe strokes. Given the relatively low prevalence of COVID-19 cases in our region, this decrement is likely related to healthcare seeking behavior rather than capacity saturation.