The healthcare workers' clinical skill set requirements for a uniformed international response to the Ebola virus disease outbreak in West Africa: the Canadian perspective

Training and redeployment of healthcare workers to intensive care units (ICUs) during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The rapid influx of patients with COVID-19 to intensive care at a rate that exceeds pre-existing staff capacity has required the rapid development of innovative redeployment and training strategies, which considered patient care and infection control. The aim of this study was to provide a detailed understanding of redeployment and training during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic by capturing and considering the merit of the strategies enlisted and the experiences and needs of redeployed healthcare workers (HCWs).

DESIGN

The review involved a systematic search of key terms related to intensive care AND training AND redeployment AND healthcare workers within nine databases (Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO, MedRxiv, Web of Science, The Health Management Consortium database, Social Science Research Network, OpenGrey and TRIP), which took place on 16 July 2021. Analysis consisted of a synthesis of quantitative study outputs and framework-based thematic analysis of qualitative study outputs and grey literature. These results were then combined applying an interpretative synthesis. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, and the review protocol was available online.

RESULTS

Forty papers were analysed. These took place primarily in the UK (n=15, 37.5%) and USA (n=17, 42.5%). Themes presented in the results are redeployment: implementation strategies and learning; redeployed HCWs' experience and strategies to address their needs; redeployed HCWs' learning needs; training formats offered and training evaluations; and future redeployment and training delivery. Based on this, key principles for successful redeployment and training were proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic presents unique challenges to develop flexible redeployment strategies and deliver training promptly while following infection control recommendations. This review synthesises original approaches to tackle these challenges, which are relevant to inform the development of targeted and adaptative training and redeployment plans considering the needs of HCWs.

Harmonization of Biosafety and Biosecurity Standards for High-Containment Facilities in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: An Approach From the Perspective of Occupational Safety and Health

Following the global-level Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak during 2014–2016, international collaboration with multiorganizational participation has rapidly increased. Given the greater priorities for research and development (R&D) outcomes despite the quantitative and qualitative lack of high-containment laboratory facilities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where biological targets for investigation are located near their natural habitats, occupational readiness for health workers' safety has not been well-addressed, where limited global expert human resources are being deployed to high-containment laboratories including biosafety level 4 (BSL-4) facilities for case management and medical investigations. Pursuing scientific and managerial success to make laboratories efficient and productive, most laboratory safety policies have focused on the functionality of technical skills or performance, procedural methodologies, and supervision over the employees to collaborate in LMICs. The experts dispatched from advanced countries bring a long list of scientific tasks with high-tech devices, supplies, and training programs to introduce their collaboration with local partners in LMICs. However, the dispatched experts would subsequently realize their list becomes endless to establish their basic functions required in high-containment laboratories to ensure qualified scientific outcomes in LMICs. Under such circumstances where dual or multiple policies and standards accommodated pose dilemmas for operational procedures to ensure biosafety and biosecurity, all the frontline experts from both LMICs and advanced countries may be exposed to significant risks of life-threating infection of highly pathogenic agents like EVD, without any pragmatic measures or road maps to establish valued international collaboration, pursuing its sustainability. Given the fact mentioned above, we conducted a quick review of the key biosafety and biosecurity management documents, relevant policy analyses, and research to understand the current status and, if any, measures to dissolve critical dilemmas mentioned above. As a result, we found that occupational safety and health (OSH) aspects had not been sufficiently addressed, particularly in the context of international BSL-4 collaboration in LMICs. Moreover, consideration of OSH can be one of the key drivers to make such collaborative interventions more pragmatic, safer to reorient, harness disease-based vertical approaches, and harmonize policies of biosafety and biosecurity, particularly for collaborations organized in resource-limited settings.

Treatment-focused Ebola trials, supportive care and future of filovirus care

INTRODUCTION

During the 2014-2016 Ebolavirus (EBOV) outbreak, several candidate therapeutics were used in EBOV-infected patients in clinical trials and under expanded access for emergency use. This review will focus briefly on medications used during the outbreak. We will discuss current therapeutic candidates and their status and will then turn to a related and essential topic: supportive care and the standard of care for filovirus infected patients. Potential benefits and pitfalls of combination therapies for filoviruses will be discussed. Areas covered: Clinical trials of therapeutics targeting EBOV; clinical usage of therapeutics during recent EBOV outbreak; potential need for combination therapy; role of supportive care in treatment of Ebola virus disease (EVD). Expert commentary: In the absence of another large scale EBOV outbreak, the path to therapeutic product licensure in the United States of America (USA) would need to be via the FDA Animal Rule. However, human data may be needed to supplement animal data. The future of filovirus therapeutics may therefore benefit by establishing the ability to implement clinical trials in an outbreak setting in a timely fashion. Supportive care guidelines for filovirus infection should be defined and established as standard of care for treatment of EVD.