Disinfection efficacy of ozone on ESKAPE bacteria biofilms: Potential use in difficult-to-access medical devices.

BACKGROUND: Medical devices can be reservoirs of multidrug-resistant bacteria that may be involved in the acquisition of infections since bacteria with the ability to form biofilms that are difficult to eradicate, mainly in mechanical ventilators. The aim of this work was to evaluate the efficacy of O3 against biofilms of bacteria ESKAPE group through disinfection studies. METHODS: The formation of biofilms of ESKAPE group bacteria was induced in vitro. O3 was injected at different exposure times at a constant dose of 600 mg/h. The recovery of surviving bacteria after O3 treatment was assessed by bacterial counts and biofilm disruption was analyzed. Finally, the viability and integrity of biofilms after O3 treatment was determined by confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). RESULTS: O3 showed bactericidal activity on biofilms from 12 min/7.68 ppm for A. baumannii and C. freundii. P. aeruginosa, K. pneumoniae and S. aureus were killed after 15 min/9.60 ppm. Correlation analyses showed inversely proportional relationships between the variables "disruption versus O3". CLSM revealed that death was time-dependent of biofilms upon O3 exposure. Orthogonal plane analysis showed that bacteria located in the outer region of the biofilms were the ones that initially suffered damage from O3 exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that this method could be an alternative for the disinfection in mechanical ventilators colonized by bacteria biofilm forming.

Outcomes of Early Versus Late Tracheostomy in Patients With COVID-19: A Multinational Cohort Study.

Timing of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 has attracted substantial attention. Initial guidelines recommended delaying or avoiding tracheostomy due to the potential for particle aerosolization and theoretical risk to providers. However, early tracheostomy could improve patient outcomes and alleviate resource shortages. This study compares outcomes in a diverse population of hospitalized COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheostomy either "early" (within 14 d of intubation) or "late" (more than 14 d after intubation). DESIGN: International multi-institute retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Thirteen hospitals in Bolivia, Brazil, Spain, and the United States. PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 undergoing early or late tracheostomy between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 549 patients from 13 hospitals in four countries were included in the final analysis. Multivariable regression analysis showed that early tracheostomy was associated with a 12-day decrease in time on mechanical ventilation (95% CI, -16 to -8; p < 0.001). Further, ICU and hospital lengths of stay in patients undergoing early tracheostomy were 15 days (95% CI, -23 to -9 d; p < 0.001) and 22 days (95% CI, -31 to -12 d) shorter, respectively. In contrast, early tracheostomy patients experienced lower risk-adjusted survival at 30-day post-admission (hazard ratio, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.8-5.2). Differences in 90-day post-admission survival were not identified. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy within 14 days of intubation have reduced ventilator dependence as well as reduced lengths of stay. However, early tracheostomy patients experienced lower 30-day survival. Future efforts should identify patients most likely to benefit from early tracheostomy while accounting for location-specific capacity.

Short Term Outcomes of Patients Who Underwent Lung Transplant for COVID-19 ARDS

Lung transplantation is a life saving treatment option for patients with COVID-19 ARDS. We aim to assess the short-term outcomes of patients who underwent lung transplantation for COVID ARDS. This is a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent lung transplantation for COVID 19 ARDS between 7/1/2020 and 06/30/2021. Study was IRB-approved. Baseline demographic data, pre transplant variables, peri operative data and post transplant variables were extracted. Post-transplant graft function variables were followed until 09/30/2021. Twenty patients underwent lung transplantation alone, and one patient underwent lung kidney transplantation. Nineteen patients (90%) were ECMO bridge to transplant and twenty patients (95%) were on mechanical ventilator until the transplant. These patients were followed for a median of 234 days [IQR (188-339)]. Three patients (14%) completed a one-year follow-up. Eighteen patients (86%) completed six months follow-up. None of the patients required dialysis. At the end of the follow up period, all patients have good graft function and none of the patients are on supplemental oxygen. With careful selection, lung transplants can be performed with reasonable post-transplant outcomes in COVID 19 ARDS patients. However, these patients tend to have a prolonged post transplant hospital stay, a median of 48 days with IQR (28.5 - 73.5). 50% of patients had at least one return to operating room post transplant for hemothorax. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Journal of Heart & Lung Transplantation is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Priorities Towards Fair Allocation of Ventilators During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in severe shortage in vital resources, including invasive mechanical ventilators. The current imbalance between demand and supply of mechanical ventilators has called for investigations on the fair allocation of mechanical ventilators. OBJECTIVE: To determine the priorities of the medical experts towards the fair allocation of ventilators during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study was conducted from May 28 to Aug 20, 2020. The questionnaire was sent to 50 medical specialists as the Delphi panel. Participants were asked to rate each prioritising factor: "-1" for low priority, "+1" for high priority, and "Zero" for equal priority. RESULTS: Among 38 experts who responded to the email, the responses of 35 were analysed. 31 (88.6%) participants recommended that pregnant women be considered high priority in allocating ventilators, 27 (77.1%) mothers of children <5 years, 26 (74.3%) patients under 80-years, and 23 (65.7%) front-line-healthcare-workers. In contrast, 28 (80.0) participants recommended that patients who are terminally ill should be considered as a low priority, 27 (77.1%) patients with active-malignancy, 25 (71.4%) neurodegenerative diseases, and 16 (45.7%) patients aged >80. The panel did not reach a consensus regarding the role of patients' laboratory profiles, underlying diseases, or drug abuse in the prioritisation of ventilators. CONCLUSIONS: The panel considered pregnant mothers, mothers of children under 5 years, age groups younger than 80, and front-line healthcare workers to have high priority in allocating mechanical ventilators.

Public Opinion on Priorities Toward Fair Allocation of Ventilators During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Nationwide Survey.

Background: The rapidly growing imbalance between supply and demand for ventilators during the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the principles for fair allocation of scarce resources. Failing to address public views and concerns on the subject could fuel distrust. The objective of this study was to determine the priorities of the Iranian public toward the fair allocation of ventilators during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This anonymous community-based national study was conducted from May 28 to Aug 20, 2020, in Iran. Data were collected via the Google Forms platform, using an online self-administrative questionnaire. The questionnaire assessed participants' assigned prioritization scores for ventilators based on medical and non-medical criteria. To quantify participants' responses on prioritizing ventilator allocation among sub-groups of patients with COVID-19 who need mechanical ventilation scores ranging from -2, very low priority, to +2, very high priority were assigned to each response. Results: Responses of 2,043 participants, 1,189 women, and 1,012 men, were analyzed. The mean (SD) age was 31.1 (9.5), being 32.1 (9.3) among women, and 29.9 (9.6) among men. Among all participants, 274 (13.4%) were healthcare workers. The median of assigned priority score was zero (equal) for gender, age 41-80, nationality, religion, socioeconomic, high-profile governmental position, high-profile occupation, being celebrities, employment status, smoking status, drug abuse, end-stage status, and obesity. The median assigned priority score was +2 (very high priority) for pregnancy, and having <2 years old children. The median assigned priority score was +1 (high priority) for physicians and nurses of patients with COVID-19, patients with nobel research position, those aged <40 years, those with underlying disease, immunocompromise status, and malignancy. Age>80 was the only factor participants assigned -1 (low priority) to. Conclusions: Participants stated that socioeconomic factors, except for age>80, should not be involved in prioritizing mechanical ventilators at the time of resources scarcity. Front-line physicians and nurses of COVID-19 patients, pregnant mothers, mothers who had children under 2 years old were given high priority.

Outcomes of acute respiratory distress syndrome in COVID-19 patients compared to the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) often leads to mortality. Outcomes of patients with COVID-19-related ARDS compared to ARDS unrelated to COVID-19 is not well characterized. AREAS COVERED: We performed a systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, and MedRxiv 11/1/2019 to 3/1/2021, including studies comparing outcomes in COVID-19-related ARDS (COVID-19 group) and ARDS unrelated to COVID-19 (ARDS group). Outcomes investigated were duration of mechanical ventilation-free days, intensive care unit (ICU) length-of-stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and mortality. Random effects models were fit for each outcome measure. Effect sizes were reported as pooled median differences of medians (MDMs), mean differences (MDs), or odds ratios (ORs). EXPERT OPINION: Ten studies with 2,281 patients met inclusion criteria (COVID-19: 861 [37.7%], ARDS: 1420 [62.3%]). There were no significant differences between the COVID-19 and ARDS groups for median number of mechanical ventilator-free days (MDM: -7.0 [95% CI: -14.8; 0.7], p = 0.075), ICU LOS (MD: 3.1 [95% CI: -5.9; 12.1], p = 0.501), hospital LOS (MD: 2.5 [95% CI: -5.6; 10.7], p = 0.542), or all-cause mortality (OR: 1.25 [95% CI: 0.78; 1.99], p = 0.361). Compared to the general ARDS population, results did not suggest worse outcomes in COVID-19-related ARDS.

Investigating the effect of materials and structures for negative pressure ventilators suitable for pandemic situation.

The onset of the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused shortages in mechanical ventilators (MVs) essential for the intensive care unit (ICU) in the hospitals. The increasing crisis prompted the investigation of ventilators which is low cost and offers lower health complications. Many researchers are revisiting the use of negative pressure ventilators (NPVs), due to the cost and complications of positive pressure ventilators (PPVs). This paper summarizes the evolution of the MVs, highlighting the limitations of popular positive and negative pressure ventilators and how NPV can be a cost-effective and lower health complication solution. This paper also provides a detailed investigation of the structure and material for the patient enclosure that can be used for a cost-effective NPV system using ANSYS simulations. The simulation results can confirm the selection and also help in developing a low cost while based on readily available materials. This can help the manufacturer to develop low-cost NPV and reduce the pressure on the healthcare system for any pandemic situation similar to COVID-19.

Cardiovascular Disease and Severe Hypoxemia Are Associated With Higher Rates of Noninvasive Respiratory Support Failure in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia.

Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is the major complication of coronavirus disease 2019, yet optimal respiratory support strategies are uncertain. We aimed to describe outcomes with high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in coronavirus disease 2019 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and identify individual factors associated with noninvasive respiratory support failure. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study to describe rates of high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and/or noninvasive positive pressure ventilation success (live discharge without endotracheal intubation). Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models were used to identify patient characteristics associated with high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and/or noninvasive positive pressure ventilation failure (endotracheal intubation and/or in-hospital mortality). SETTING: One large academic health system, including five hospitals (one quaternary referral center, a tertiary hospital, and three community hospitals), in New York City. PATIENTS: All hospitalized adults 18-100 years old with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted between March 1, 2020, and April 28, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 331 and 747 patients received high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation as the highest level of noninvasive respiratory support, respectively; 154 (46.5%) in the high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula cohort and 167 (22.4%) in the noninvasive positive pressure ventilation cohort were successfully discharged without requiring endotracheal intubation. In adjusted models, significantly increased risk of high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation failure was seen among patients with cardiovascular disease (subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.17-2.83 and subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.06-1.84, respectively). Conversely, a higher peripheral blood oxygen saturation to Fio2 ratio at high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation initiation was associated with reduced risk of failure (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.19-0.54, and subdistribution hazard ratio 0.34; 95% CI, 0.21-0.55, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients receiving noninvasive respiratory modalities for coronavirus disease 2019 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure achieved successful hospital discharge without requiring endotracheal intubation, with lower success rates among those with comorbid cardiovascular disease or more severe hypoxemia. The role of high-flow oxygen delivered through nasal cannula and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in coronavirus disease 2019-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure warrants further consideration.

Allocation of Mechanical Ventilators During a Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Study of Perceptions Among Japanese Health Care Workers and the General Public.

BACKGROUND: In Japan, public dialogue on allocation of life-saving medical resources remains taboo, and discussion largely has been avoided. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do Japanese health care workers and the general public agree with principles of ventilator allocation developed internationally? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A four-point Likert scale questionnaire was used to assess the extent of agreement or disagreement with internationally developed triage principles for rationing mechanical ventilators during pandemics. Questionnaires were distributed in person or online, and generalized linear models were used to analyze quantitative data. Free-text descriptions were analyzed qualitatively, both deductively and inductively, to compare respondent opinions with those described in previous US studies. RESULTS: Of 3,191 surveys distributed, 1,520 were returned. Allocation of resources to maximize survival from current illness ("save the most lives") was the most popular triage principle, with 95.8% of respondents in agreement. Allocation to ensure a minimum duration of benefit, as determined by predicted prognosis after illness ("ensure minimum duration of benefit"), and allocation to persons who have experienced fewer life stages ("life cycle") obtained agreement of 82.2% and 80.1%, respectively. Withdrawal and reallocation of mechanical ventilators to more appropriate patients was supported by 64.4% of respondents. Only 28.4% of respondents supported the principle of first-come, first-served access to ventilators. INTERPRETATION: Most respondents supported allocation principles developed internationally and disagreed with the idea of first-come, first-served allocation during resource shortages. The Japanese public seems largely to be prepared to discuss the ethical dilemmas and possible solutions regarding fair and transparent allocation of critical care resources as a necessary step in confronting present and future pandemics and disasters.

Evaluation of Respiratory Therapist Extender Comfort With Mechanical Ventilation During COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Staffing strategies used to meet the needs of respiratory care departments during the COVID-19 pandemic included the deployment of respiratory therapist extenders. The purpose of this study was to evaluate respiratory therapist extenders' comfort level with critical care ventilators while caring for patients with COVID-19. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the deployment of certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) in a critical care setting. METHODS: A qualitative survey method was used to assess CRNA experience with critical care ventilators. Prior to deployment in the ICU, CRNAs were trained by clinical lead respiratory therapists. Education included respiratory clinical practices and ventilator management. Sixty-minute sessions were held with demonstration stations set up in ICUs for hands-on experience. RESULTS: Fifty-six CRNAs responded to our survey (63%). A mean ± SD of 9.48 ± 12.27 h was spent training prior to deployment in the ICU. CRNAs were at the bedside a mean ± SD of 73.0 ± 40.6 h during the pandemic. While CRNA comfort level with critical care ventilators increased significantly (P < .001) from the beginning to the end of their work experience, no statistically significant differences were found between CRNA comfort based on years of experience. Differences in comfort level were not found after training (chi-squared test 23.82, P = .09) or after ICU experience was completed (chi-squared test = 15.99, P = .45). Similarly, mean comfort level did not increase based on the number of hours spent working in the ICU (chi-squared test = 13.67, P = .55). CONCLUSIONS: Comfort level with mechanical ventilation increased for CRNAs working alongside respiratory therapists during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Human factors/ergonomics to support the design and testing of rapidly manufactured ventilators in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: This paper describes a rapid response project from the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors (CIEHF) to support the design, development, usability testing and operation of new ventilators as part of the UK response during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: A five-step approach was taken to (1) assess the COVID-19 situation and decide to formulate a response; (2) mobilise and coordinate Human Factors/Ergonomics (HFE) specialists; (3) ideate, with HFE specialists collaborating to identify, analyse the issues and opportunities, and develop strategies, plans and processes; (4) generate outputs and solutions; and (5) respond to the COVID-19 situation via targeted support and guidance. RESULTS: The response for the rapidly manufactured ventilator systems (RMVS) has been used to influence both strategy and practice to address concerns about changing safety standards and the detailed design procedure with RMVS manufacturers. CONCLUSION: The documents are part of a wider collection of HFE advice which is available on the CIEHF COVID-19 website (https://covid19.ergonomics.org.uk/).

Clinical needs and technical requirements for ventilators for COVID-19 treatment critical patients: an evidence-based comparison for adult and pediatric age.

The spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, taking on pandemic proportions, is placing extraordinary and unprecedented demands on healthcare systems worldwide. The increasing number of critical patients who, experiencing respiratory failure from acute respiratory distress syndrome, need respiratory support, has been leading countries to race against time in arranging new Intensive Care Units (ICUs) and in finding affordable and practical solutions to manage patients in each stage of the disease. The simultaneous worldwide emergency caused serious problems for mechanical ventilators supply. This chaotic scenario generated, indeed, a frenetic race to buy life-saving ventilators. However, the variety of mechanical ventilators designs, together with the limitations in time and resources, make the decision-making processes on ventilators procurement crucial and not counterbalanced by the evaluation of devices quality. This paper aimed at offering an overview of how evidence-based approach for health technologies evaluation, might provide support during Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in ICUs management and critical equipment supply. We compared and combined all the publicly available indications on the essential requirements that ICU ventilators might meet to be considered acceptable for treating COVID-19 patients in severe to critical illnesses. We hope that the critical analysis of these data might help readers to understand how structured decision-making processes based on evidence, evaluating the safety and effectiveness of a given medical device and the effects of its introduction in a healthcare setting, are able to optimize time and resources allocation that should be considered essential, especially during pandemic period.

The Ventilator Management Team: Repurposing Anesthesia Workstations and Personnel to Combat COVID-19.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic resulted in unprecedented numbers of patients with respiratory failure requiring ventilatory support. The number of patients who required critical care quickly outpaced the availability of intensive care unit (ICU) beds. Consequently, health care systems had to creatively expand critical care services into alternative hospital locations with repurposed staff and equipment. Deploying anesthesia workstations to the ICU to serve as mechanical ventilators requires equipment preparation, multidisciplinary planning, and targeted education. We aim to contextualize this process, highlighting major differences between anesthesia workstations and ICU ventilators, and to share the insights gained from our experiences creating an anesthesia provider-based ventilator management team.