Your browser doesn't support javascript.
A catalogue of tools and variables from crisis and routine care to support decision-making about allocation of intensive care beds and ventilator treatment during pandemics: Scoping review.
Cardona, Magnolia; Dobler, Claudia C; Koreshe, Eyza; Heyland, Daren K; Nguyen, Rebecca H; Sim, Joan P Y; Clark, Justin; Psirides, Alex.
  • Cardona M; Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia; Gold Coast University Hospital Evidence-Based Practice Professorial Unit, Southport, Queensland, Australia. Electronic address: mcardona@bond.edu.au.
  • Dobler CC; Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia; Evidence-Based Practice Center, Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, MN, USA; The University of New South Wales, South Western Sydney Clinical School, NS
  • Koreshe E; InsideOut Institute, Central Clinical School, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
  • Heyland DK; Department of Critical Care Medicine, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
  • Nguyen RH; The University of New South Wales, South Western Sydney Clinical School, NSW, Australia.
  • Sim JPY; The University of New South Wales, South Western Sydney Clinical School, NSW, Australia.
  • Clark J; Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
  • Psirides A; Intensive Care Unit, Wellington Regional Hospital, Wellington, New Zealand.
J Crit Care ; 66: 33-43, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1370571
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

This scoping review sought to identify objective factors to assist clinicians and policy-makers in making consistent, objective and ethically sound decisions about resource allocation when healthcare rationing is inevitable. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

Review of guidelines and tools used in ICUs, hospital wards and emergency departments on how to best allocate intensive care beds and ventilators either during routine care or developed during previous epidemics, and association with patient outcomes during and after hospitalisation.

RESULTS:

Eighty publications from 20 countries reporting accuracy or validity of prognostic tools/algorithms, or significant correlation between prognostic variables and clinical outcomes met our eligibility criteria twelve pandemic guidelines/triage protocols/consensus statements, twenty-two pandemic algorithms, and 46 prognostic tools/variables from non-crisis situations. Prognostic indicators presented here can be combined to create locally-relevant triage algorithms for clinicians and policy makers deciding about allocation of ICU beds and ventilators during a pandemic. No consensus was found on the ethical issues to incorporate in the decision to admit or triage out of intensive care.

CONCLUSIONS:

This review provides a unique reference intended as a discussion starter for clinicians and policy makers to consider formalising an objective a locally-relevant triage consensus document that enhances confidence in decision-making during healthcare rationing of critical care and ventilator resources.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pandemics / COVID-19 Type of study: Clinical Practice Guide / Prognostic study / Reviews Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: J Crit Care Journal subject: Critical Care Year: 2021 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pandemics / COVID-19 Type of study: Clinical Practice Guide / Prognostic study / Reviews Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: J Crit Care Journal subject: Critical Care Year: 2021 Document Type: Article