Tracheal intubation in the critically ill patient.

Tracheal intubation is among the most commonly performed and high-risk procedures in critical care. Indeed, 45% of patients undergoing intubation experience at least one major peri-intubation adverse event, with cardiovascular instability being the most common event reported in 43%, followed by severe hypoxemia in 9% and cardiac arrest in 3% of cases. These peri-intubation adverse events may expose patients to a higher risk of 28-day mortality, and they are more frequently observed with an increasing number of attempts to secure the airway. The higher risk of peri-intubation complications in critically ill patients, compared with the anaesthesia setting, is the consequence of their deranged physiology (e.g. underlying respiratory failure, shock and/or acidosis) and, in this regard, airway management in critical care has been defined as "physiologically difficult". In recent years, several randomised studies have investigated the most effective preoxy-genation strategies, and evidence for the use of positive pressure ventilation in moderate-to-severe hypoxemic patients is established. On the other hand, evidence on interventions to mitigate haemodynamic collapse after intubation has been elusive. Airway management in COVID-19 patients is even more challenging because of the additional risk of infection for healthcare workers, which has influenced clinical choices in this patient group. The aim of this review is to provide an update of the evidence for intubation in critically ill patients with a focus on understanding peri-intubation risks and evaluating interventions to prevent or mitigate adverse events.

Development of a repeated-measures predictive model and clinical risk score for mortality in ventilated COVID-19 patients.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused intensive care units (ICUs) to reach capacities requiring triage. A tool to predict mortality risk in ventilated patients with COVID-19 could inform decision-making and resource allocation, and allow population-level comparisons across institutions. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all mechanically ventilated adults with COVID-19 admitted to three tertiary care ICUs in Toronto, Ontario, between 1 March 2020 and 15 December 2020. Generalized estimating equations were used to identify variables predictive of mortality. The primary outcome was the probability of death at three-day intervals from the time of ICU admission (day 0), with risk re-calculation every three days to day 15; the final risk calculation estimated the probability of death at day 15 and beyond. A numerical algorithm was developed from the final model coefficients. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven patients were eligible for inclusion. Median ICU length of stay was 26.9 (interquartile range, 15.4-52.0) days. Overall mortality was 42%. From day 0 to 15, the variables age, temperature, lactate level, ventilation tidal volume, and vasopressor use significantly predicted mortality. Our final clinical risk score had an area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve of 0.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 0.9). For every ten-point increase in risk score, the relative increase in the odds of death was approximately 4, with an odds ratio of 4.1 (95% CI, 2.9 to 5.9). CONCLUSION: Our dynamic prediction tool for mortality in ventilated patients with COVID-19 has excellent diagnostic properties. Notwithstanding, external validation is required before widespread implementation.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: En raison de la pandémie de COVID-19, les unités de soins intensifs (USI) ont atteint des taux d'occupation nécessitant un triage. Un outil pour prédire le risque de mortalité chez les patients sous ventilation atteints de COVID-19 pourrait éclairer la prise de décision et l'attribution des ressources tout en permettant des comparaisons populationnelles entre les établissements. MéTHODE: Cette étude de cohorte rétrospective a inclus tous les adultes atteints de COVID-19 sous ventilation mécanique admis dans trois USI de centres de soins tertiaires à Toronto, en Ontario, entre le 1er mars 2020 et le 15 décembre 2020. Des équations d'estimation généralisées ont été utilisées pour identifier les variables prédictives de mortalité. Le critère d'évaluation principal était la probabilité de décès à des intervalles de trois jours à partir du moment de l'admission à l'USI (jour 0), avec un nouveau calcul du risque tous les trois jours jusqu'au jour 15; le calcul final du risque a estimé la probabilité de décès au jour 15 et au-delà. Un algorithme numérique a été mis au point à partir des coefficients du modèle final. RéSULTATS: Cent vingt-sept patients étaient éligibles à l'inclusion. La durée médiane de séjour à l'USI était de 26,9 jours (écart interquartile, 15,4 à 52,0). La mortalité globale était de 42 %. Du jour 0 au jour 15, les variables que sont l'âge, la température, les taux de lactate, le volume courant de ventilation et l'utilisation de vasopresseurs ont constitué des prédicteurs significatifs de mortalité. Notre score de risque clinique final avait une aire sous la courbe ROC de 0,9 (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 0,8 à 0,9). Pour chaque augmentation de dix points du score de risque, l'augmentation relative des risques de décès était d'environ 4, avec un rapport de cotes de 4,1 (IC 95 %, 2,9 à 5,9). CONCLUSION: Notre outil de prédiction dynamique de la mortalité pour les patients ventilés atteints de COVID-19 possède d'excellentes propriétés diagnostiques. Néanmoins, une validation externe est nécessaire avant sa mise en œuvre généralisée.

Experiences of healthcare providers with a novel emergency response intubation team during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: In the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were significant concerns about the infectious risks of intubation to healthcare providers. In response, a dedicated emergency response intubation team (ERIT) consisting of anesthesiologists and allied health providers was instituted for our emergency department (ED). Given the high-risk nature of intubations and the new interprofessional team dynamics, we sought to assess health-care provider experiences and potential areas of improvement. METHODS: Surveys were distributed to healthcare providers at the University Health Network, a quaternary healthcare centre in Toronto, Canada, which includes two urban EDs seeing over 128,000 patients per year. Participants included ED physicians and nurses, anesthesiologists, anesthesia assistants, and operating room nurses. The survey included free-text questions. Responses underwent thematic analysis using grounded theory and were independently coded by two authors to generate descriptive themes. Discrepancies were resolved with a third author. Descriptive themes were distilled through an inductive, iterative process until fewer main themes emerged. RESULTS: A total of 178 surveys were collected (68.2% response rate). Of these, 123 (69%) participated in one or more ERIT activations. Positive aspects included increased numbers of staff to assist, increased intubation expertise, improved safety, and good team dynamics within the ERIT team. Challenges included a loss of scope (primarily ED physicians and nurses) and unfamiliar workflows, perceived delays to ERIT team arrival or patient intubation, role confusion, handover concerns, and communication challenges between ED and ERIT teams. Perceived opportunities for improvement included interprofessional training, developing clear guidelines on activation, inter-team role clarification, and guidelines on handover processes post-intubation. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare providers perceived that a novel interprofessional collaboration for intubations of COVID-19 patients presented both benefits and challenges. Opportunities for improvement centred around interprofessional training, shared decision making between teams, and structured handoff processes.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Aux premiers stades de la pandémie de COVID-19, les risques infectieux de l'intubation pour les prestataires de soins de santé ont suscité de vives inquiétudes. En réponse, une équipe d'intervention d'urgence en intubation (emergency response intubation team ERIT), composée d'anesthésistes et de prestataires de services paramédicaux, a été mise en place dans notre service d'urgence. Compte tenu de la nature à haut risque des intubations et de la nouvelle dynamique d'équipe interprofessionnelle, nous avons cherché à évaluer les expériences des prestataires de soins et les domaines d'amélioration potentiels. MéTHODES: Les questionnaires ont été distribués aux prestataires de soins de santé du University Health Network, un centre de soins de santé quaternaire de Toronto, au Canada, qui comprend deux urgences urbaines accueillant plus de 128 000 patients par an. Les participants comprenaient des médecins et des infirmiers des urgences, des anesthésistes, des assistants en anesthésie et des infirmiers de salle d'opération. Les réponses ont fait l'objet d'une analyse thématique fondée sur la théorie de la base et ont été codées indépendamment par deux auteurs afin de générer des thèmes descriptifs. Les divergences ont été résolues avec un troisième auteur. Les thèmes descriptifs ont été distillés par un processus inductif et itératif jusqu'à ce qu'un nombre réduit de thèmes principaux émerge. RéSULTATS: Au total, 178 sondages ont été recueillis (taux de réponse de 68,2 %). Parmi ceux-ci, 123 (69 %) ont participé à une ou plusieurs activations d'ERIT. Les aspects positifs comprenaient un nombre accru de personnel pour aider, une expertise accrue en matière d'intubation, une sécurité améliorée et une bonne dynamique d'équipe au sein de l'équipe ERIT. Parmi les difficultés rencontrées, citons la perte du champ d'action (principalement les médecins et les infirmières des services d'urgence) et les flux de travail non familiers, les retards perçus dans l'arrivée de l'équipe d'ERIT ou l'intubation du patient, la confusion des rôles, les problèmes de transfert et les difficultés de communication entre les équipes des services d'urgence et d'ERIT. Les possibilités d'amélioration perçues comprennent la formation interprofessionnelle, l'élaboration de directives claires sur l'activation, la clarification des rôles entre les équipes et les directives sur les processus de transfert après l'intubation. CONCLUSIONS: Les prestataires de soins de santé ont perçu qu'une nouvelle collaboration interprofessionnelle pour les intubations des patients COVID-19 présentait à la fois des avantages et des défis.

A specialized airway management team for COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study of the experience of two Canadian hospitals in Toronto Une équipe spécialisée dans la prise en charge des voies aériennes pour les patients atteints de la COVID-19 : une étude rétrospective de l’expérience de deux hôpitaux canadiens à Toronto

Background In the COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented number of individuals required endotracheal intubation. To safely face these challenges, expert intubation teams were formed in some institutions. Here, we report on the experience of emergency rapid intubation teams (ERITs) in two Canadian hospitals. Methods We retrospectively collected data on all airway management procedures in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients performed by ERITs at two academic hospitals between 3 April and 17 June 2020. The co-primary outcomes were incidence of periprocedural adverse events (hypoxemia, hypotension, and cardiac arrest within 15 min of intubation) and first-attempt intubation success rate. Secondary outcomes included number of intubation attempts, device used to achieve successful airway management, and adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) protocols. Results During the study period, 123 patients were assessed for airway management, with 117 patients receiving airway interventions performed by the ERIT. The first-attempt success rate for intubation was 92%, and a videolaryngoscope was the final successful device in 93% of procedures. Hypoxemia (peripheral oxygen saturation [SpO2] < 90%) occurred in 28 patients (24%) and severe hypoxemia (SpO2 < 70%) occurred in ten patients (9%). Hypotension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] < 90 mm Hg) occurred in 37 patients (32%) and severe hypotension (SBP < 65 mm Hg) in 11 patients (9%). Adherence to recommended PPE use among providers was high. Conclusion In this cohort of critically ill patients with respiratory failure requiring time-sensitive airway management, specialized ERIT teams showed high rates of successful airway management with high adherence to PPE use. Hypoxemia and hemodynamic instability were common and should be anticipated within the first 15 min following intubation. Study registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04689724);registered 30 December 2020.

A specialized airway management team for COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study of the experience of two Canadian hospitals in Toronto.

BACKGROUND: In the COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented number of individuals required endotracheal intubation. To safely face these challenges, expert intubation teams were formed in some institutions. Here, we report on the experience of emergency rapid intubation teams (ERITs) in two Canadian hospitals. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data on all airway management procedures in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients performed by ERITs at two academic hospitals between 3 April and 17 June 2020. The co-primary outcomes were incidence of periprocedural adverse events (hypoxemia, hypotension, and cardiac arrest within 15 min of intubation) and first-attempt intubation success rate. Secondary outcomes included number of intubation attempts, device used to achieve successful airway management, and adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) protocols. RESULTS: During the study period, 123 patients were assessed for airway management, with 117 patients receiving airway interventions performed by the ERIT. The first-attempt success rate for intubation was 92%, and a videolaryngoscope was the final successful device in 93% of procedures. Hypoxemia (peripheral oxygen saturation [SpO2] < 90%) occurred in 28 patients (24%) and severe hypoxemia (SpO2 < 70%) occurred in ten patients (9%). Hypotension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] < 90 mm Hg) occurred in 37 patients (32%) and severe hypotension (SBP < 65 mm Hg) in 11 patients (9%). Adherence to recommended PPE use among providers was high. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of critically ill patients with respiratory failure requiring time-sensitive airway management, specialized ERIT teams showed high rates of successful airway management with high adherence to PPE use. Hypoxemia and hemodynamic instability were common and should be anticipated within the first 15 min following intubation. STUDY REGISTRATION: www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04689724); registered 30 December 2020.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: Pendant la pandémie de COVID-19, un nombre sans précédent de patients ont dû bénéficier d'une intubation endotrachéale. Pour faire face en toute sécurité à ces défis, des équipes d'experts en intubation ont été formées dans certains établissements. Nous rendons compte ici de l'expérience d'équipes d'intubation rapide d'urgence (ou ERIT, pour Emergency Rapid Intubation Team) dans deux hôpitaux canadiens. MéTHODE: Nous avons colligé rétrospectivement les données concernant toutes les interventions de prise en charge des voies aériennes chez les patients COVID-19 confirmés ou suspectés réalisées par les ERIT dans deux hôpitaux universitaires entre le 3 avril et le 17 juin 2020. Les deux critères d'évaluation principaux étaient l'incidence d'événements indésirables péri-procédure (hypoxémie, hypotension et arrêt cardiaque dans les 15 minutes suivant l'intubation) et le taux de réussite de l'intubation à la première tentative. Les critères d'évaluation secondaires comprenaient le nombre de tentatives d'intubation, le dispositif utilisé pour parvenir au succès de la prise en charge des voies aériennes et le respect des protocoles concernant les équipements de protection individuelle (EPI). RéSULTATS: Au cours de la période à l'étude, 123 patients ont été évalués pour une prise en charge des voies aériennes, et 117 patients ont bénéficié d'interventions au niveau des voies aériennes réalisées par l'ERIT. Le taux de réussite de la première tentative d'intubation était de 92 %, et un vidéolaryngoscope a été le dispositif menant à une intubation réussie dans 93 % des interventions. Des épisodes d'hypoxémie (saturation périphérique en oxygène [SpO2] < 90 %) sont survenus chez 28 patients (24 %) et dix patients (9 %) ont souffert d'hypoxémie sévère (SpO2 < 70 %). Des épisodes d'hypotension (tension artérielle systolique [TAS] < 90 mmHg) sont survenus chez 37 patients (32 %) et 11 patients (9 %) ont souffert d'hypotension sévère (TAS < 65 mmHg). Le respect de l'utilisation recommandée des EPI chez les soignants était élevé. CONCLUSION: Dans cette cohorte de patients gravement malades atteints d'insuffisance respiratoire et nécessitant une prise en charge des voies aériennes urgente, les équipes spécialisées de l'ERIT ont montré des taux élevés de succès de prise en charge des voies aériennes, avec une adhésion élevée aux protocoles d'utilisation des EPI. L'hypoxémie et l'instabilité hémodynamique étaient fréquentes et devaient être anticipées dans les 15 premières minutes suivant l'intubation. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: www.ClinicalTrials.gov  (NCT04689724); enregistrée le 30 décembre 2020.

Risk factors and protective measures for healthcare worker infection during highly infectious viral respiratory epidemics: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate risk factors for healthcare worker (HCW) infection in viral respiratory pandemics: severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), SARS CoV-1, influenza A H1N1, influenza H5N1. To improve understanding of HCW risk management amid the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases from conception until July 2020 for studies comparing infected HCWs (cases) and noninfected HCWs (controls) and risk factors for infection. Outcomes included HCW types, infection prevention practices, and medical procedures. Pooled effect estimates with pathogen-specific stratified meta-analysis and inverse variance meta-regression analysis were completed. We used the GRADE framework to rate certainty of evidence. (PROSPERO no. CRD42020176232, 6 April 2020.). RESULTS: In total, 54 comparative studies were included (n = 191,004 HCWs). Compared to nonfrontline HCWs, frontline HCWs were at increased infection risk (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.24-2.22), and the risk was greater for HCWs involved in endotracheal intubations (risk difference, 35.2%; 95% CI, 21.4-47.9). Use of gloves, gown, surgical mask, N95 respirator, face protection, and infection training were each strongly protective against infection. Meta-regression showed reduced infection risk in frontline HCWs working in facilities with infection designated wards (OR, -1.04; 95% CI, -1.53 to -0.33, P = .004) and performing aerosol-generating medical procedures in designated centers (OR, -1.30; 95% CI, -2.52 to -0.08; P = .037). CONCLUSIONS: During highly infectious respiratory pandemics, widely available protective measures such as use of gloves, gowns, and face masks are strongly protective against infection and should be instituted, preferably in dedicated settings, to protect frontline HCW during waves of respiratory virus pandemics.

Intubation outside of the operating room: new challenges and opportunities in COVID-19 era.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Airway management in patients outside the operating room is associated with increased difficulties and risks, and the setting of the COVID-19 global pandemic adds another layer of complexity. Therefore, endotracheal intubation (ETT) of a patient who is presumptive COVID-19 or COVID-19 positive presents an additional challenge to an anesthesiologist. The aim of this review is to summarize the important principles of airway management outside of the operating room during the COVID-19 pandemic. RECENT FINDINGS: Several professional societies have formulated guidelines on airway management COVID-19 suspect and proven patients. Additionally, anesthesiologists working in hospitals treating many infected patients have developed specialized teams responsible for airway management outside the operating room. These documents and protocols focus on the importance of wearing personal protective equipment and the skills of the providers responsible for securing the airway. Staff safety is always a priority when performing ETT outside operating room. SUMMARY: The COVID-19 pandemic redefined the management of patients requiring aerosol generating procedures (droplet and airborne precautions). ETT is one of them and anesthesiologists are experts in performing airway management. Although the operating room is a highly controlled environment, airway management outside of this setting is not always the easiest task.