RESUMO
Background@#The aerosol box was rapidly developed and disseminated to minimize viral exposure during aerosolizing procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet users may not understand how to use and clean the device. This could potentially lead to increased viral exposure to subsequent patients and practitioners. We evaluated intraoperative contamination and aerosol box decontamination and the impact of a preoperative educational visual aid. @*Methods@#Using a double-blinded randomized design, forty-four anesthesiology trainees and faculty completed a simulated anesthetic case using an aerosol box contaminated with a fluorescent marker; half of the subjects received a visual aid prior to the simulation. Intraoperative contamination was evaluated at 10 standardized locations using an ultraviolet (UV) light. Next, subjects were instructed to clean the aerosol box for use on the next patient. Following cleaning, the box was evaluated for decontamination using an UV light. @*Results@#Median total contamination score was significantly reduced in the experimental group (5.0 vs. 10.0, P < 0.001). The aerosol box was completely cleaned by 36.4% of subjects in the experimental group compared to 4.5% in the control group (P = 0.009). @*Conclusions@#The use of a visual aid significantly decreased intraoperative contamination and improved box cleaning. Despite these findings, a potentially clinically significant amount of viral exposure may exist. Thorough evaluation of the risks and benefits of the aerosol box should be completed prior to use. If an aerosol box is used, a visual aid should be considered to remind practitioners how to best use and clean the box.
RESUMO
Background@#The aerosol box was rapidly developed and disseminated to minimize viral exposure during aerosolizing procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet users may not understand how to use and clean the device. This could potentially lead to increased viral exposure to subsequent patients and practitioners. We evaluated intraoperative contamination and aerosol box decontamination and the impact of a preoperative educational visual aid. @*Methods@#Using a double-blinded randomized design, forty-four anesthesiology trainees and faculty completed a simulated anesthetic case using an aerosol box contaminated with a fluorescent marker; half of the subjects received a visual aid prior to the simulation. Intraoperative contamination was evaluated at 10 standardized locations using an ultraviolet (UV) light. Next, subjects were instructed to clean the aerosol box for use on the next patient. Following cleaning, the box was evaluated for decontamination using an UV light. @*Results@#Median total contamination score was significantly reduced in the experimental group (5.0 vs. 10.0, P < 0.001). The aerosol box was completely cleaned by 36.4% of subjects in the experimental group compared to 4.5% in the control group (P = 0.009). @*Conclusions@#The use of a visual aid significantly decreased intraoperative contamination and improved box cleaning. Despite these findings, a potentially clinically significant amount of viral exposure may exist. Thorough evaluation of the risks and benefits of the aerosol box should be completed prior to use. If an aerosol box is used, a visual aid should be considered to remind practitioners how to best use and clean the box.
RESUMO
BackgroundIt has been projected that there will be too few ventilators to meet demand during the COVID-19 (SARS CoV-2) pandemic. Ventilator sharing has been suggested as a crisis standard of care strategy to increase availability of mechanical ventilation. The safety and practicality of shared ventilation in patients is unknown. We designed and evaluated a system whereby one mechanical ventilator can be used to simultaneously ventilate two patients who have different lung compliances using a custom manufactured flow control valve to allow for individual adjustment of tidal volume and airway pressure for each patient. MethodsThe system was first evaluated in a simulation lab using two human patient simulators under expected clinical conditions. It was then tested in an observational study of four patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. Two separately ventilated COVID-19 patients were connected to a single ventilator for one hour. This intervention was repeated in a second pair of patients. Ventilatory parameters (tidal volume, peak airway pressures, compliance) were recorded at five minute intervals during both studys. Arterial blood gases were taken at zero, thirty, and sixty minutes. The primary outcome was maintenance of stable acid-base status and oxygenation during shared ventilation. ResultsTwo male and two female patients, age range 32-56 yrs, participated. Ideal body weight and driving pressure were markedly different among patients. All patients demonstrated stable physiology and ventilation for the duration of shared ventilation. In one patient tidal volume was increased after 30 minutes to correct a respiratory acidosis. ConclusionsDifferential ventilation using a single ventilator and a split breathing circuit with flow control valves is possible. A single ventilator could feasibly be used to safely ventilate two COVID-19 patients simultaneously as a bridge to full ventilatory support. Summary StatementNot applicable.
