COVID-19 Pandemic Planning: Simulation Models to Predict Biochemistry Test Capacity for Patient Surges

Towards reliable forecasting of healthcare capacity needs: A scoping review and evidence mapping

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the critical importance of robust healthcare capacity planning and preparedness for emerging crises. However, healthcare systems must also adapt to more gradual temporal changes in disease prevalence and demographic composition over time. To support proactive healthcare planning, statistical capacity forecasting models can provide valuable information to healthcare planners. This systematic literature review and evidence mapping aims to identify and describe studies that have used statistical forecasting models to estimate healthcare capacity needs within hospital settings.

METHOD

Studies were identified in the databases MEDLINE and Embase and screened for relevance before items were defined and extracted within the following categories: forecast methodology, measure of capacity, forecast horizon, healthcare setting, target diagnosis, validation methods, and implementation.

RESULTS

84 studies were selected, all focusing on various capacity outcomes, including number of hospital beds/ patients, staffing, and length of stay. The selected studies employed different analytical models grouped in six items; discrete event simulation (N = 13, 15 %), generalized linear models (N = 21, 25 %), rate multiplication (N = 15, 18 %), compartmental models (N = 14, 17 %), time series analysis (N = 22, 26 %), and machine learning not otherwise categorizable (N = 12, 14 %). The review further provides insights into disease areas with infectious diseases (N = 24, 29 %) and cancer (N = 12, 14 %) being predominant, though several studies forecasted healthcare capacity needs in general (N = 24, 29 %). Only about half of the models were validated using either temporal validation (N = 39, 46 %), cross-validation (N = 2, 2 %) or/and geographical validation (N = 4, 5 %).

CONCLUSION

The forecasting models' applicability can serve as a resource for healthcare stakeholders involved in designing future healthcare capacity estimation. The lack of routine performance validation of the used algorithms is concerning. There is very little information on implementation and follow-up validation of capacity planning models.

The response of total testing process in clinical laboratory medicine to COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction

Following a pandemic, laboratory medicine is vulnerable to laboratory errors due to the stressful and high workloads. We aimed to examine how laboratory errors may arise from factors, e.g., flexible working order, staff displacement, changes in the number of tests, and samples will reflect on the total test process (TTP) during the pandemic period.

Materials and methods

In 12 months, 6 months before and during the pandemic, laboratory errors were assessed via quality indicators (QIs) related to TTP phases. QIs were grouped as pre-, intra- and postanalytical. The results of QIs were expressed in defect percentages and sigma, evaluated with 3 levels of performance quality: 25^th, 50^th and 75^th percentile values.

Results

When the pre- and during pandemic periods were compared, the sigma value of the samples not received was significantly lower in pre-pandemic group than during pandemic group (4.7σ vs. 5.4σ, P = 0.003). The sigma values of samples transported inappropriately and haemolysed samples were significantly higher in pre-pandemic period than during pandemic (5.0σ vs. 4.9σ, 4.3σ vs. 4.1σ; P = 0.046 and P = 0.044, respectively). Sigma value of tests with inappropriate IQC performances was lower during pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period (3.3σ vs. 3.2σ, P = 0.081). Sigma value of the reports delivered outside the specified time was higher during pandemic than pre-pandemic period (3.0σ vs. 3.1σ, P = 0.030).

Conclusion

In all TTP phases, some quality indicators improved while others regressed during the pandemic period. It was observed that preanalytical phase was affected more by the pandemic.