COVID-19 Intubation Safety: A Multidisciplinary, Rapid-Cycle Model of Improvement

Tools and methods for evaluating the change to health service delivery due to pandemics or other similar emergencies: A rapid evidence review

The novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 and its associated disease COVID-19, were declared a pandemic in March 2020. Countries developed rapid response activities within their health services to prevent spread of the virus and protect their populations. Evaluating health service delivery change is vital to assess how adapted practices worked, particularly during times of crisis. This review examined tools and methods that are used to evaluate health service delivery change during pandemics and similar emergencies. Five databases were searched, including PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. The SPIDER tool informed the inclusion criteria for the articles. Articles in English and published from 2002 to 2020 were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). A narrative synthesis approach was used to analyse the studies. Eleven articles met the inclusion criteria. Many evaluation tools, methods, and frameworks were identified in the literature. Only one established tool was specific to a particular disease outbreak. Others, including rapid-cycle improvement and PDSA cycles were implemented across various disease outbreaks. Novel evaluation strategies were common across the literature and included checklists, QI frameworks, questionnaires, and surveys. Adherence practices, experience with telehealth, patient/healthcare staff safety, and clinical competencies were some areas evaluated by the tools and methods. Several domains, including patient/practitioner safety and patient/practitioner experience with telemedicine were also identified in the studies.

Human Factors and Airway Management in COVID-19 Patients: The Perfect Storm?

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic heavily impacted healthcare workers, increasing their physical and psychological workload. Specifically, COVID-19 patients’ airway management is definitely a challenging task regarding both severe and acute respiratory failure and the risk of contagion while performing aerosol-generating procedures. The category of anesthesiologists and intensivists, the main actors of airway management, showed a poor psychological well-being and a high stress and burnout risk. Identifying and better defining the specific main SARS-CoV-2-related stressors can help them deal with and effectively plan a strategy to manage these patients in a more confident and safer way. In this review, we therefore try to analyze the relevance of human factors and non-technical skills when approaching COVID-19 patients. Lessons from the past, such as National Audit Project 4 recommendations, have taught us that safe airway management should be based on preoperative assessment, the planning of an adequate strategy, the optimization of setting and resources and the rigorous evaluation of the scenario. Despite, or thanks to, the critical issues and difficulties, the “take home lesson” that we can translate from SARS-CoV-2 to every airway management is that there can be no more room for improvisation and that creating teamwork must become a priority.

Impact of COVID-19 specific simulation training in improving intubators' level of comfort during intubations of COVID-19 patients - Results from a USA national survey

Background

Tracheal intubation is a hazardous aerosolizing procedure with a potential risk of spreading SAR-CoV-2 between patients and physicians.

Aim

The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of COVID-19 specific simulation training in improving provider level of comfort during the intubation of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

In this cross-sectional national study, an electronic survey was disseminated using a snowball sample approach to intubators from 55 hospitals across the United States. The survey assessed providers' comfort of intubating and fear of contracting the virus during COVID-19 intubations.

Results

A total of 329 surveys from 55 hospitals were analyzed. Of 329 providers, 111 providers (33.7%) reported participating in simulation training. Of those, 86 (77.5%) reported that the simulation training helped reduce their fear of intubating COVID-19 patients. Providers in the simulation training group also reported a higher level of comfort level with intubating both general patients (median [range] no-simulation training group 9 [3-10], simulation training group 9 [6-10]; p = 0.015) and COVID-19 patients (no-ST 8 [1-10], ST group 9 [4-10]; p < 0.0005) than providers in the no-simulation training group.

Conclusions

Our study suggests that COVID-19 specific intubation simulation training promotes provider comfort. Simulation training may be implemented as part of airway management training during the current and novel pandemic situations.

Interprofessional work in health in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

to map the scientific production on interprofessional relationships in health in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHOD

this is a scoping review performed in PubMed, Scopus, LILACS, CINAHL, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Science Direct databases, covering the period of publication in 2020, using the acronym PCC (Population = health professionals; Concept = interprofessional relationships; Context = health services) and respective search strategies.

RESULTS

fourteen scientific articles were selected and the content discussed in the manuscripts was standardized, analyzed and organized into categories of affinities and similarities of their results: 1 - Interprofessional collaboration; 2 - Collaborative practice; 3 - Interprofessional work; 4 - Interactive and interprofessional learning.

CONCLUSION

the pandemic demanded quick and effective responses that were only possible through collaboration and interprofessionalism dimensions. Interprofessional work in health during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic confirms the importance of interprofessional work and its dimensions for the provision of more comprehensive, resolute and safer health services.