A Method to Determine Capabilities and Resources for Spacecraft Medical Systems.

INTRODUCTION: This paper describes the method for assigning medical diagnostic and treatment capabilities and resources to the database which assists with an updated probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) tool for exploration class medical system planning. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has used PRA since 2011 to inform mission medical system design, but existing tools are designed only for low Earth orbit. An updated PRA tool was needed to assist with exploration class missions.METHODS: A team of medical experts with a wide range of expertise and experience, including Space Medicine, was assembled to build capability and resource tables for the new PRA tool. This team met over 8 mo and used practice guidelines, literature, and experience to build capability and resource tables (CRTs) for each condition in the new PRA tool database.RESULTS: This process led to CRTs for each condition and a total of 617 distinct capabilities and 839 discrete resources.CONCLUSION: The CRT method is an effective way to translate medical practice guidelines into capabilities and resources usable by PRA tools for exploration class medical system planning. This same method may be used in commercial space ventures and in other applications in which medical predictive analytics are informative.Levin DR, Nelson AM, Zahner C, Stratton ER, Anderson A, Steller J. A method to determine capabilities and resources for spacecraft medical systems. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2024; 95(7):403-408.

COVID-19 Pandemic Effects on the Well-Being of Professional Pilots.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the well-being of professional pilots using a survey that included the World Health Organization (WHO)-5 Well-Being Index.METHODS: An electronic survey was sent to pilots between June 17-August 2, 2021. Pilots self-categorized as: airline transport pilot (ATP), commercial pilot, or both. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were used to evaluate differences between variables. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of impaired well-being.RESULTS: A total of 639 individuals returned the survey. The majority of respondents were ATPs and a majority identified as male. The average well-being score was 68.0 out of 100 possible, with 22% of respondents meeting the threshold definition of impaired well-being. The odds of having impaired well-being were not dependent on gender. In unadjusted analysis, the odds of impaired well-being were higher for those flying as commercial pilots as compared to airline transport pilots/both. Age was also strongly associated with impaired well-being, with younger pilots having greater odds of impaired well-being as compared to older pilots. Only a little over half of the surveyed pilots agreed or strongly agreed that pilot risk of occupational exposure to COVID-19 was appropriately controlled.CONCLUSION: This survey suggests an important connection between pilot age and impaired well-being scores during the COVID-19 pandemic. Future studies targeting the well-being of younger pilots will be of interest. Additionally, measures to reduce occupational risk of COVID-19 exposure may be helpful in view of the substantial fraction of pilots expressing concern regarding that risk.Stratton E, Haddon R, Murad MH, Petterson T, Nelson M, Cowl CT. COVID-19 pandemic effects on the well-being of professional pilots. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2022; 93(10):734-738.

Occupational exposure to severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and risk of infection among healthcare personnel.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the rate and factors associated with healthcare personnel (HCP) testing positive for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) after an occupational exposure. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Academic medical center with sites in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Florida. PARTICIPANTS: HCP with a high or medium risk occupational exposure to a patient or other HCP with SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We reviewed the records of HCP with significant occupational exposures from March 20, 2020, through December 31, 2020. We then performed regression analysis to assess the impact of demographic and occupational variables to assess their impact on the likelihood of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: In total, 2,253 confirmed occupational exposures occurred during the study period. Employees were the source for 57.1% of exposures. Overall, 101 HCP (4.5%) tested positive in the postexposure period. Of these, 80 had employee sources of exposure and 21 had patient sources of exposure. The postexposure infection rate was 6.2% when employees were the source, compared to 2.2% with patient sources. In a multivariate analysis, occupational exposure from an employee source had a higher risk of testing positive compared to a patient source (odds ratio [OR], 3.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.72-6.04). Sex, age, high-risk exposure, and HCP role were not associated with an increased risk of testing positive. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of acquiring coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) following a significant occupational exposure has remained relatively low, even in the prevaccination era. Exposure to an infectious coworker carries a higher risk than exposure to a patient. Continued vigilance and precautions remain necessary in healthcare settings.

Acute Cataract Development in a Pediatric Patient With Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is the most common form of diabetes mellitus in the pediatric population, with an estimated 500,000 children living with T1DM and an estimated 80,000 new cases each year in the United States. Ophthalmologic complications of diabetes are common in adult patients and those with longstanding disease, but can also be seen in patients with a recent diagnosis, even among the pediatric population. CASE REPORT: We present the case of a 13-year-old girl with recently diagnosed T1DM who presented to the pediatric emergency department with acute onset of bilateral blurry vision due to cataract formation. Prompt recognition of the condition and ophthalmologic consultation allowed for timely diagnosis and restorative surgery. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: We present this case to increase awareness among emergency physicians of the potential for cataract formation in pediatric patients with T1DM, as well as the fact that it may be the first presenting sign of the disease. Furthermore, emergency physicians should be aware that pediatric patients who present with severe T1DM, either with extremely high hemoglobin A1c or glycemic blood levels, are at increased risk for cataract formation and should be evaluated for subtle signs of cataract formation even in the absence of obvious cataracts. We also discuss the pathophysiologic theories of cataract formation in patients with T1DM.

A Cross-Sectional Pilot Survey of Rural Clinic Attitudes and Proficiency with Insulin Pumps and Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices.

Purpose: To examine the perceptions, proficiencies, and barriers of diabetes device use among rural clinic providers. Methods: A total of 210 surveys were sent through e-mail and/or U.S. Postal Service to rural clinics throughout Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, and Utah based on discussions with rural clinic network leadership in the states. Responses were included if the participant was 18 years of age and older, and worked at a rural clinic as a physician, physician assistant, nurse, nurse practitioner, allied health worker, or clinic manager. Results: Respondents included clinic management (13%), midlevel providers (physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and allied health workers (pharmacists, dietitians, and social workers, 30.8%), nurses (30.8%), and physicians (23.1%). We had a low response rate (20%; n = 41), but of those who said they work with patients who have diabetes, only 47.4% indicated that they use diabetes devices as part of their patients' treatment. The most common barrier reported among respondents suggested that additional medical team expertise is needed in their community or clinic to adopt insulin pumps and/or continuous glucose monitoring for qualified patients (75.9% and 80.8%, respectively). Conclusion: Lack of provider experience and having patients managed by out-of-area experts were the biggest reasons for providers not seeing or managing patients using these devices. Lack of provider access, patient satisfaction with current diabetes regimens, unsupportive health care team, patient literacy, and patient fear showed limited to negligible endorsements from survey respondents. A variety of potential solutions to this problem of limited provider experience and training are also offered.