The 'haves' and 'have-nots' of personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic: the ethics of emerging inequalities amongst healthcare workers.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated inequalities, including among the healthcare workforce. Based on recent literature and drawing on our experiences of working in operating theatres and critical care in the UK's National Health Service during the pandemic, we review the role of personal protective equipment and consider the ethical implications of its design, availability and provision at a time of unprecedented demand. Several important inequalities have emerged, driven by factors such as individuals purchasing their own personal protective equipment (either out of choice or to address a lack of provision), inconsistencies between guidelines issued by different agencies and organisations, and the standardised design and procurement of equipment required to protect a diverse healthcare workforce. These, we suggest, have resulted largely because of a lack of appropriate pandemic planning and coordination, as well as insufficient appreciation of the significance of equipment design for the healthcare setting. As with many aspects of the pandemic, personal protective equipment has created and revealed inequalities driven by economics, gender, ethnicity and professional influence, creating a division between the 'haves' and 'have-nots' of personal protective equipment. As the healthcare workforce continues to cope with ongoing waves of COVID-19, and with the prospect of more pandemics in the future, it is vital that these inequalities are urgently addressed, both through academic analysis and practical action.

Obstetric services in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: A national survey.

BACKGROUND: The management of obstetric patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to human-to-human transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) requires unique considerations. Many aspects of labour and delivery practice required adaptation in response to the global pandemic and were supported by guidelines from the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecologists. The adoption and adherence to these guidelines is unknown. METHODS: Participating centres in "Quality of Recovery in Obstetric Anaesthesia study-a multicentre study" (ObsQoR) completed an electronic survey based on the provision of services and care related to COVID-19 in October 2021. The survey was designed against the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists COVID-19 guidelines. RESULTS: One hundred and five of the 107 participating centres completed the survey (98% response rate representing 54% of all UK obstetric units). The median [IQR] annual number of deliveries among the included sites was 4389 [3000-5325]. Ninety-nine of the 103 (94.3%) sites had guidelines for the management of peripartum women with COVID-19. Sixty-one of 105 (58.1%) sites had specific guidance for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Thirty-seven of 104 (35.6%) centres restricted parturient birthing plans if a positive diagnosis of COVID-19 was made. A COVID-19 vaccination referral pathway encouraging full vaccination for all pregnant women was present in 63/103 centres (61.2%). CONCLUSION: We found variability in care delivered and adherence to guidelines related to COVID-19. The clinical implications for this related to quality of peripartum care is unclear, however there remains scope to improve pathways for immunisation, birth plans and VTE prophylaxis.

Predicting Hospital Resource Use During COVID-19 Surges: A Simple but Flexible Discretely Integrated Condition Event Simulation of Individual Patient-Hospital Trajectories.

OBJECTIVES: To assist with planning hospital resources, including critical care (CC) beds, for managing patients with COVID-19. METHODS: An individual simulation was implemented in Microsoft Excel using a discretely integrated condition event simulation. Expected daily cases presented to the emergency department were modeled in terms of transitions to and from ward and CC and to discharge or death. The duration of stay in each location was selected from trajectory-specific distributions. Daily ward and CC bed occupancy and the number of discharges according to care needs were forecast for the period of interest. Face validity was ascertained by local experts and, for the case study, by comparing forecasts with actual data. RESULTS: To illustrate the use of the model, a case study was developed for Guy's and St Thomas' Trust. They provided inputs for January 2020 to early April 2020, and local observed case numbers were fit to provide estimates of emergency department arrivals. A peak demand of 467 ward and 135 CC beds was forecast, with diminishing numbers through July. The model tended to predict higher occupancy in Level 1 than what was eventually observed, but the timing of peaks was quite close, especially for CC, where the model predicted at least 120 beds would be occupied from April 9, 2020, to April 17, 2020, compared with April 7, 2020, to April 19, 2020, in reality. The care needs on discharge varied greatly from day to day. CONCLUSIONS: The DICE simulation of hospital trajectories of patients with COVID-19 provides forecasts of resources needed with only a few local inputs. This should help planners understand their expected resource needs.

Emergency Airway Management in Patients with COVID-19: A Prospective International Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Tracheal intubation for patients with COVID-19 is required for invasive mechanical ventilation. The authors sought to describe practice for emergency intubation, estimate success rates and complications, and determine variation in practice and outcomes between high-income and low- and middle-income countries. The authors hypothesized that successful emergency airway management in patients with COVID-19 is associated with geographical and procedural factors. METHODS: The authors performed a prospective observational cohort study between March 23, 2020, and October 24, 2020, which included 4,476 episodes of emergency tracheal intubation performed by 1,722 clinicians from 607 institutions across 32 countries in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation. The authors investigated associations between intubation and operator characteristics, and the primary outcome of first-attempt success. RESULTS: Successful first-attempt tracheal intubation was achieved in 4,017/4,476 (89.7%) episodes, while 23 of 4,476 (0.5%) episodes required four or more attempts. Ten emergency surgical airways were reported-an approximate incidence of 1 in 450 (10 of 4,476). Failed intubation (defined as emergency surgical airway, four or more attempts, or a supraglottic airway as the final device) occurred in approximately 1 of 120 episodes (36 of 4,476). Successful first attempt was more likely during rapid sequence induction versus non-rapid sequence induction (adjusted odds ratio, 1.89 [95% CI, 1.49 to 2.39]; P < 0.001), when operators used powered air-purifying respirators versus nonpowered respirators (adjusted odds ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.16 to 2.20]; P = 0.006), and when performed by operators with more COVID-19 intubations recorded (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03 for each additional previous intubation [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.06]; P = 0.015). Intubations performed in low- or middle-income countries were less likely to be successful at first attempt than in high-income countries (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.41 to 0.79]; P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The authors report rates of failed tracheal intubation and emergency surgical airway in patients with COVID-19 requiring emergency airway management, and identified factors associated with increased success. Risks of tracheal intubation failure and success should be considered when managing COVID-19.

Prospective observational study of gender and ethnicity biases in respiratory protective equipment for healthcare workers in the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To describe success rates of respiratory protective equipment (RPE) fit testing and factors associated with achieving suitable fit. DESIGN: Prospective observational study of RPE fit testing according to health and safety, and occupational health requirements. SETTING: A large tertiary referral UK healthcare facility. POPULATION: 1443 healthcare workers undergoing quantitative fit testing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quantitative fit test success (pass/fail) and the count of tests each participant required before successful fit. RESULTS: Healthcare workers were fit tested a median (IQR) 2 (1-3) times before successful fit was obtained. Males were tested a median 1 (1-2) times, while females were tested a median 2 (1-2) times before a successful fit was found. This difference was statistically significant (p<0.001). Modelling each fit test as its own independent trial (n=2359) using multivariable logistic regression, male healthcare workers were significantly more likely to find a well-fitting respirator and achieve a successful fit on first attempt in comparison to females, after adjusting for other factors (adjusted OR=2.07, 95% CI): 1.66 to 2.60, p<0.001). Staff who described their ethnicity as White were also more likely to achieve a successful fit compared with staff who described their ethnicity as Asian (OR=0.47, 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.58, p<0.001), Black (OR=0.54, 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.71, p<0.001), mixed (OR=0.50 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.80, p=0.004) or other (OR=0.53, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.99, p=0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Male and White ethnicity healthcare workers are more likely to achieve RPE fit test success. This has broad operational implications to healthcare services with a large female and Black, Asian and minority ethnic group population. Fit testing is imperative in ensuring RPE effectiveness in protecting healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Respiratory protection in dentistry.

Respiratory protection in the dental setting has become more important to protect healthcare professionals, their household members and their patients. As dental practices become increasingly independent in managing their respiratory protection requirements, the need for an in-depth understanding of the principles of respiratory protection is warranted. This article aims to enhance the awareness of dental professionals about the principles of respiratory protection and equipment, including designs, classification and levels of protection afforded to wearers. Determining the adequacy and suitability of respiratory protection, along with ensuring safe selection of appropriate equipment for protection of both wearer and patient, is described. Moreover, a detailed review of fit testing principles, procedures and governance are described. This comprehensive review should ensure that dental professionals are ideally placed to understand the implications of respiratory protection and safely apply it in their workplaces.

healthcareCOVID: a national cross-sectional observational study identifying risk factors for developing suspected or confirmed COVID-19 in UK healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the prevalence, risk factors and implications of suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection among healthcare workers in the United Kingdom (UK). DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: UK-based primary and secondary care. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare workers aged ≥18 years working between 1 February and 25 May 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A composite endpoint of laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, or self-isolation or hospitalisation due to suspected or confirmed COVID-19. RESULTS: Of 6,152 eligible responses, the composite endpoint was present in 1,806 (29.4%) healthcare workers, of whom 49 (0.8%) were hospitalised, 459 (7.5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 1,776 (28.9%) reported self-isolation. Overall, between 11,870 and 21,158 days of self-isolation were required by the cohort, equalling approximately 71 to 127 working days lost per 1,000 working days. The strongest risk factor associated with the presence of the primary composite endpoint was increasing frequency of contact with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases without adequate personal protective equipment (PPE): 'Never' (reference), 'Rarely' (adjusted odds ratio 1.06, (95% confidence interval: [0.87-1.29])), 'Sometimes' (1.7 [1.37-2.10]), 'Often' (1.84 [1.28-2.63]), 'Always' (2.93, [1.75-5.06]). Additionally, several comorbidities (cancer, respiratory disease, and obesity); working in a 'doctors' role; using public transportation for work; regular contact with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients; and lack of PPE were also associated with the presence of the primary endpoint. A total of 1,382 (22.5%) healthcare workers reported lacking access to PPE items while having clinical contact with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Suspected or confirmed COVID-19 was more common in healthcare workers than in the general population and is associated with significant workforce implications. Risk factors included inadequate PPE, which was reported by nearly a quarter of healthcare workers. Governments and policymakers must ensure adequate PPE is available as well as developing strategies to mitigate risk for high-risk healthcare workers during future COVID-19 waves.

A crossover study assessing the protective efficacy of improvised snorkel-based improvised respirators.

Introduction: This study was designed to determine whether improvised respirators based on modified full-face snorkel masks are able to pass a standard qualitative fit test. Methods: This is a prospective crossover study conducted in 16 staff. Fit-tests were conducted on masks mated to (1) an anaesthetic breathing circuit heat and moisture exchange filter and (2) a CE-marked P3 grade filter. P3 filters were mounted using both epoxy-coated and uncoated adaptors. Results: None of the tests using anaesthetic filters passed. Only one overall pass was observed using the P3-rated filter mated to the snorkel mask. Conclusions: These data suggest that improvised PPE designs cannot provide reliable protection against aerosols. Failures are likely due to poor fit, but the suitability of 3D printed materials is also uncertain as fused-filament manufacturing yields parts that are not reliably gas-tight. Improvised PPE cannot be recommended as a substitute for purpose designed systems.

The safety of anaesthetists and intensivists during the first COVID-19 surge supports extension of use of airborne protection PPE to ward staff.

A key controversy in the COVID-19 pandemic has been over staff safety in health and social care settings. Anaesthetists and intensivists were anticipated to be at the highest risk of work-related infection due to involvement in airway management and management of critical illness and therefore wear the highest levels of personal protective equipment (PPE) in the hospital. However, the data clearly show that those working in anaesthesia and critical care settings are at lower risk of infection, harm and death from COVID-19 than colleagues working on the wards. The observed safety of anaesthetists and intensivists and increased risk to those in other patient-facing roles has implications for transmission-based infection control precautions. The precautionary principle supports extending training in and use of airborne precaution PPE to all staff working in patient-facing roles who have close contact with coughing patients. This will both reduce their risk of contracting COVID-19, maintain services and reduce nosocomial transmission to vulnerable patients. The emergence of a new variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus with significantly higher transmissibility creates urgency to addressing this matter.

Timing of Tracheostomy for Prolonged Respiratory Wean in Critically Ill Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients: A Machine Learning Approach.

OBJECTIVES: To propose the optimal timing to consider tracheostomy insertion for weaning of mechanically ventilated patients recovering from coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia. We investigated the relationship between duration of mechanical ventilation prior to tracheostomy insertion and in-hospital mortality. In addition, we present a machine learning approach to facilitate decision-making. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Guy's & St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients admitted with acute respiratory failure secondary to coronavirus disease 2019 requiring mechanical ventilation between March 3, 2020, and May 5, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Baseline characteristics and temporal trends in markers of disease severity were prospectively recorded. Tracheostomy was performed for anticipated prolonged ventilatory wean when levels of respiratory support were favorable. Decision tree was constructed using C4.5 algorithm, and its classification performance has been evaluated by a leave-one-out cross-validation technique. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One-hundred seventy-six patients required mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure, of which 87 patients (49.4%) underwent tracheostomy. We identified that optimal timing for tracheostomy insertion is between day 13 and day 17. Presence of fibrosis on CT scan (odds ratio, 13.26; 95% CI [3.61-48.91]; p ≤ 0.0001) and Pao2:Fio2 ratio (odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI [0.95-0.99]; p = 0.008) were independently associated with tracheostomy insertion. Cox multiple regression analysis showed that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (hazard ratio, 6.56; 95% CI [1.04-41.59]; p = 0.046), ischemic heart disease (hazard ratio, 4.62; 95% CI [1.19-17.87]; p = 0.027), positive end-expiratory pressure (hazard ratio, 1.26; 95% CI [1.02-1.57]; p = 0.034), Pao2:Fio2 ratio (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI [0.97-0.99]; p = 0.003), and C-reactive protein (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI [1-1.01]; p = 0.005) were independent late predictors of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that the optimal window for consideration of tracheostomy for ventilatory weaning is between day 13 and 17. Late predictors of mortality may serve as adverse factors when considering tracheostomy, and our decision tree provides a degree of decision support for clinicians.

A prospective, observational, cohort study of airway management of patients with COVID-19 by specialist tracheal intubation teams.

PURPOSE: Because of the anticipated surge in cases requiring intensive care unit admission, the high aerosol-generating risk of tracheal intubation, and the specific requirements in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients, a dedicated Mobile Endotracheal Rapid Intubation Team (MERIT) was formed to ensure that a highly skilled team would be deployed to manage the airways of this cohort of patients. Here, we report our intubation team experience and activity as well as patient outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The MERIT members followed a protocolized early tracheal intubation model. Over a seven-week period during the peak of the pandemic, prospective data were collected on MERIT activity, COVID-19 symptoms or diagnosis in the team members, and demographic, procedural, and clinical outcomes of patients. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 150 primary tracheal intubation episodes, with 101 (67.3%) of those occurring in men, and with a mean (standard deviation) age of 55.7 (13.8) yr. Black, Asian, and minority ethnic groups accounted for 55.7% of patients. 91.3% of tracheal intubations were performed with videolaryngoscopy, and the first pass success rate was 88.0%. The 30-day survival was 69.2%, and the median [interquartile range] length of critical care stay was 11 [6-20] days and of hospital stay was 12 [7-22] days. Seven (11.1%) MERIT healthcare professionals self-isolated because of COVID-19 symptoms, with a total 41 days of clinical work lost. There was one reported incident of a breach of personal protective equipment and multiple anecdotal reports of doffing breaches. CONCLUSION: We have shown that a highly skilled designated intubation team, following a protocolized, early tracheal intubation model may be beneficial in improving patient and staff safety, and could be considered by other institutions in future pandemic surges.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: En raison de l'augmentation anticipée du nombre de cas nécessitant une admission à l'unité de soins intensifs, du risque élevé de génération d'aérosols de l'intubation trachéale et des exigences spécifiques aux patients atteints du coronavirus (COVID-19), nous avons créé une équipe mobile dédiée pour l'intubation trachéale rapide (MERIT - Mobile Endotracheal Rapid Intubation Team) afin de garantir qu'une équipe hautement qualifiée puisse être déployée pour prendre en charge les voies aériennes de cette cohorte de patients. Notre objectif était de rapporter l'expérience et l'activité de notre équipe d'intubation ainsi que les devenirs des patients pendant la pandémie de COVID-19. MéTHODE: Les membres de l'équipe MERIT ont suivi un modèle d'intubation trachéale précoce basé sur un protocole. Pendant sept semaines autour du pic de la pandémie, des données prospectives ont été colligées concernant l'activité de la MERIT, les symptômes et diagnostics de COVID-19 parmi les membres de l'équipe, ainsi que les données démographiques, procédurales et les devenirs cliniques des patients. RéSULTATS: Nous avons analysé les données de 150 épisodes d'intubations trachéales initiales, dont 101 (67,3 %) survenus chez des hommes, avec un âge moyen (écart type) de 55,7 (13,8) ans. Les personnes noires, asiatiques et de minorités ethniques représentaient 55,7 % des patients. Au total, 91,3 % des intubations trachéales ont été réalisées par vidéolaryngoscopie, et le taux de réussite au premier essai était de 88,0 %. Le taux de survie à 30 jours était de 69,2 %, et la durée médiane (écart interquartile) de séjour aux soins intensifs était de 11 (6-20) jours et de 12 (7-22) jours à l'hôpital. Sept (11,1 %) professionnels de la santé de l'équipe MERIT se sont mis en auto-isolement en raison de symptômes de la COVID-19, pour un total de 41 jours de travail clinique perdus. Un incident de bris de stérilité de l'équipement de protection individuelle a été rapporté, et de multiples bris lors du déshabillage ont également été rapportés de façon anecdotique. CONCLUSION: Nous avons démontré qu'une équipe d'intubation désignée et hautement qualifiée, respectant un modèle d'intubation trachéale précoce basé sur un protocole, pourrait contribuer à améliorer la sécurité des patients et du personnel. La création d'une telle équipe est envisageable dans d'autres établissements lors de futurs épisodes pandémiques.