Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Crit Care Med ; 49(10): 1739-1748, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1475872

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has overwhelmed healthcare resources even in wealthy nations, necessitating rationing of limited resources without previously established crisis standards of care protocols. In Massachusetts, triage guidelines were designed based on acute illness and chronic life-limiting conditions. In this study, we sought to retrospectively validate this protocol to cohorts of critically ill patients from our hospital. DESIGN: We applied our hospital-adopted guidelines, which defined severe and major chronic conditions as those associated with a greater than 50% likelihood of 1- and 5-year mortality, respectively, to a critically ill patient population. We investigated mortality for the same intervals. SETTING: An urban safety-net hospital ICU. PATIENTS: All adults hospitalized during April of 2015 and April 2019 identified through a clinical database search. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 365 admitted patients, 15.89% had one or more defined chronic life-limiting conditions. These patients had higher 1-year (46.55% vs 13.68%; p < 0.01) and 5-year (50.00% vs 17.22%; p < 0.01) mortality rates than those without underlying conditions. Irrespective of classification of disease severity, patients with metastatic cancer, congestive heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and neurodegenerative disease had greater than 50% 1-year mortality, whereas patients with chronic lung disease and cirrhosis had less than 50% 1-year mortality. Observed 1- and 5-year mortality for cirrhosis, heart failure, and metastatic cancer were more variable when subdivided into severe and major categories. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with major and severe chronic medical conditions overall had 46.55% and 50.00% mortality at 1 and 5 years, respectively. However, mortality varied between conditions. Our findings appear to support a crisis standards protocol which focuses on acute illness severity and only considers underlying conditions carrying a greater than 50% predicted likelihood of 1-year mortality. Modifications to the chronic lung disease, congestive heart failure, and cirrhosis criteria should be refined if they are to be included in future models.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Crisis Intervention/standards , Resource Allocation/methods , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Crisis Intervention/methods , Crisis Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Massachusetts , Middle Aged , Resource Allocation/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Safety-net Providers/organization & administration , Safety-net Providers/statistics & numerical data , Standard of Care/standards , Standard of Care/statistics & numerical data , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data
2.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 18(11): 1931-1932, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1261306
3.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 18(3): 408-416, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1154097

ABSTRACT

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has exposed critical supply shortages both in the United States and worldwide, including those in intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital bed supply, hospital staff, and mechanical ventilators. Many of those who are critically ill have required days to weeks of supportive invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) as part of their treatment. Previous estimates set the U.S. availability of mechanical ventilators at approximately 62,000 full-featured ventilators, with 98,000 non-full-featured devices (including noninvasive devices). Given the limited availability of this resource both in the United States and in low- and middle-income countries, we provide a framework to approach the shortage of IMV resources. Here we discuss evidence and possibilities to reduce overall IMV needs, discuss strategies to maximize the availability of IMV devices designed for invasive ventilation, discuss the underlying methods in the literature to create and fashion new sources of potential ventilation that are available to hospitals and front-line providers, and discuss the staffing needs necessary to support IMV efforts. The pandemic has already pushed cities like New York and Boston well beyond previous ICU capacity in its first wave. As hot spots continue to develop around the country and the globe, it is evident that issues may arise ahead regarding the efficient and equitable use of resources. This unique challenge may continue to stretch resources and require care beyond previously set capacities and boundaries. The approaches presented here provide a review of the known evidence and strategies for those at the front line who are facing this challenge.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Health Resources/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/supply & distribution , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Ventilators, Mechanical/supply & distribution , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Care , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL