Performance of Aerosol Boxes for Endotracheal Intubation during the COVID-19 Pandemic with Systematic Review.

Introduction: In the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, endotracheal intubation using an aerosol box (AB) became the norm in the emergency department (ED) and the intensive care unit. We compared two models of AB with different dimensions to compare and identify a device that helps in reducing viral exposure without compromising successful airway management. Methods: We conducted this prospective observational study for 7 months (October 20-April 21) on 143 patients presenting with an acute airway compromise to the ED. All intubations were performed using one of the two models available. The primary outcome was time taken for intubation (TTI). Results: The overall median time taken to intubate using any AB was 63 (interquartile range [IQR]: 46.2-87.7) s with an 81.9% first-pass success (FPS) rate. TTI for AB I was 67 (IQR: 53-106) s with a 76.3% FPS rate, while TTI for AB II was 57 (IQR: 44-75) s with an 85.9% FPS rate. TTI was much shorter without the use of an AB (34: IQR: 24-53 s) with a 92% FPS rate. Intubations done by emergency physicians with more than 2 years of experience were faster in both with or without AB when compared to intubations done by physicians with <2 years of experience. Conclusion: The use of an AB is associated with a longer TTI when compared to intubations done without an AB. TTI was relatively shorter when more experienced emergency physicians performed intubation. FPS rates were low with intubations done using AB.

Rapid sequence intubation and the role of the emergency medicine pharmacist: Literature update.

DISCLAIMER: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. PURPOSE: The dosing, potential adverse effects, and clinical outcomes of the most commonly utilized pharmacologic agents for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) are reviewed for the practicing emergency medicine pharmacist (EMP). SUMMARY: RSI is the process of establishing a safe, functional respiratory system in patients unable to effectively breathe on their own. Various medications are chosen to sedate and even paralyze the patient to facilitate an efficient endotracheal intubation. The mechanism of action and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles of these agents were described in a 2011 review. Since then, the role of the EMP as well as the published evidence regarding RSI agents, including dosing, adverse effects, and clinical outcomes, has grown. It is necessary for the practicing EMP to update previous practice patterns in order to continue to provide optimal patient care. CONCLUSION: While the agents used in RSI have changed little, knowledge regarding optimal dosing, appropriate patient selection, and possible adverse effects continues to be gained. The EMP is a key member of the bedside care team and uniquely positioned to communicate this evolving data.

Risk of post-intubation cardiac arrest with the use of high-dose rocuronium in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Post-intubation cardiac arrest (PICA) is an uncommon complication of intubation, but numbers have risen to over 1.5 times the usual number since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Due to expert recommendations, high-dose rocuronium (HDR) has become a commonly used pre-intubation neuromuscular blocking agent. AIM: We conducted this retrospective case-control observational study with the hypothesis that high-dose rocuronium was not associated with higher incidence of PICA. METHODS: We included 93 patients who were intubated using the rapid sequence intubation (RSI) technique with rocuronium for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia, admitted from March 2020 to February 2021 to a tertiary care hospital in North Carolina, USA. The patients were grouped based on high (1.5 mg/kg of ideal body weight and above) versus low (<1.5 mg/kg of ideal body weight) dose rocuronium used for RSI. The differences of the various outcomes between the groups were analyzed. RESULTS: The baseline demographics were similar in both groups except for higher body mass index in high-dose group 39 versus 32 (kg/m2), p = 0.009. There was a total of six PICA events (6.45%). The HDR group had 8.0% of PICA versus 4.7% in the low-dose group. In-hospital mortality was 60.0% in the HDR group versus 72.1% in the low-dose group. CONCLUSION: The incidence of PICA in COVID-19 patients with ARDS who were intubated using the RSI technique was higher than in the pre-COVID-19 era. RELEVANCE FOR PATIENTS: The use of high-dose paralytics during invasive ventilation with RSI and their consequences should be explored with the help of large-scale studies. The rate of PICA is still very low, and perhaps, the use of HDR is safe, as suggested by the expert panel.

Evaluation of the Confidence and Competency of House Officers in Rapid Sequence Intubation (ECCHO-RSI) in Emergency Department of Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre during COVID-19 Pandemic

Rapid sequence intubation (RSI) is a procedural skill that house officers (HO) in Malaysia need to learn during their training in emergency department (ED) posting. This study aimed to evaluate the confidence and competency of HO in RSI after completed training in the ED of a university hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted among 44 HO. When they begin their posting in ED, a pre-test was done with a questionnaire to evaluate their knowledge and confidence level. A post-test was conducted three months later with a similar questionnaire. They underwent an objective structured clinical examination to evaluate their skill. A feedback survey form was filled in by the HO regarding their satisfaction in training in emergency rotation. The mean score for pre-test and post-test were 8.75 ± 3.005 and 14.86 ± 2.258, respectively (P = 0.000). There was an improvement in knowledge level and confidence level between pre-test and post-test (all P = 0.000). 43.2% were competent in knowledge, while 65.9% were competent in skill. 35 house officers filled in the feedback survey form. It showed that 42.9% (n = 15) were very satisfied and 28.6% (n = 10) were satisfied with the training in ED. There was an improvement in knowledge and confidence level in RSI among the HO after ED rotation. The clinical exposure in intubating real patients was limited among HO due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The training of HO for RSI in ED needs to be further improvised to optimize their learning process. © 2021 Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. All rights reserved.

Comparison of the Efficiency and Usability of Aerosol Box and Intubation Tent on Intubation of a Manikin Using Personal Protective Equipment: A Randomized Crossover Study.

BACKGROUND: The aerosol box and intubation tent are improvised barrier-enclosure devices developed during the novel coronavirus pandemic to protect health care workers from aerosol transmission. OBJECTIVE: Using time to intubation as a crude proxy, we aimed to compare the efficiency and usability of the aerosol box and intubation tent in a simulated manikin. METHODS: This was a single-center, randomized, crossover manikin study involving 28 participants (9 anesthetists, 16 emergency physicians, and 3 intensivists). Each participant performed rapid sequence intubations in a random sequence of three different scenarios: 1) no device use; 2) aerosol box; 3) intubation tent. We compared the time to intubation between different scenarios. RESULTS: The median total intubation time with no device use, aerosol box, and intubation tent were 23.7 s (interquartile range [IQR] 19.4-28.4 s), 30.9 s (IQR 24.1-52.5 s), and 26.0 s (IQR 22.1-30.8 s), respectively. Post hoc analysis showed a significantly longer intubation time using the aerosol box compared with no device use (p < 0.001) and compared with the intubation tent (p < 0.001). The difference between the intubation tent and no device use was not significant. The first-pass intubation success rate did not differ between the groups. Only aerosol box use had resulted in breaches of personal protective equipment. Participants considered intubation with the intubation tent more favorable than the aerosol box. CONCLUSIONS: The intubation tent seems to have a better barrier-enclosure design than the aerosol box, with a reasonable balance between efficiency and usability. Further evaluation of its efficacy in preventing aerosol dispersal and in human studies are warranted prior to recommendation of widespread adoption.

Unintended consequences: The impact of airway management modifications introduced in response to COVID-19 on intubations in a tertiary centre emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: In response to COVID-19, we introduced and examined the effect of a raft of modifications to standard practice on adverse events and first-attempt success (FAS) associated with ED intubation. METHODS: An analysis of prospectively collected registry data of all ED intubations over a 3-year period at an Australian Major Trauma Centre. During the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, we introduced modifications to standard practice to reduce the risk to staff including: aerosolisation reduction, comprehensive personal protective equipment for all intubations, regular low fidelity simulation with 'sign-off' for all medical and nursing staff, senior clinician laryngoscopist and the introduction of pre-drawn medications. RESULTS: There were 783 patients, 136 in the COVID-19 era and 647 in the pre-COVID-19 comparator group. The rate of hypoxia was higher during the COVID-19 era compared to pre-COVID-19 (18.4% vs 9.6%, P < 0.005). This occurred despite the FAS rate remaining very high (95.6% vs 93.8%, P = 0.42) and intubation being undertaken by more senior laryngoscopists (consultant 55.9% during COVID-19 vs 22.6% pre-COVID-19, P < 0.001). Other adverse events were similar before and during COVID-19 (hypotension 12.5% vs 7.9%, P = 0.082; bradycardia 1.5% vs 0.5%, P = 0.21). Video laryngoscopy was more likely to be used during COVID-19 (95.6% vs 82.5%, P < 0.001) and induction of anaesthesia more often used ketamine (66.9% vs 42.3%, P < 0.001) and rocuronium (86.8% vs 52.1%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This raft of modifications to ED intubation was associated with significant increase in hypoxia despite a very high FAS rate and more senior first laryngoscopist.