Cargando…

Preparing for the Worst-Case Scenario in a Pandemic: Intensivists Simulate Prioritization and Triage of Scarce ICU Resources*

Simulation and evaluation of a prioritization protocol at a German university hospital using a convergent parallel mixed methods design. DESIGN: Prospective single-center cohort study with a quantitative analysis of ICU patients and qualitative content analysis of two focus groups with intensivists....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Knochel, Kathrin, Adaktylos-Surber, Katharina, Schmolke, Eva-Maria, Meier, Lukas J., Kuehlmeyer, Katja, Ulm, Kurt, Buyx, Alena, Schneider, Gerhard, Heim, Markus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668365/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36222541
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000005684
_version_ 1784831897990332416
author Knochel, Kathrin
Adaktylos-Surber, Katharina
Schmolke, Eva-Maria
Meier, Lukas J.
Kuehlmeyer, Katja
Ulm, Kurt
Buyx, Alena
Schneider, Gerhard
Heim, Markus
author_facet Knochel, Kathrin
Adaktylos-Surber, Katharina
Schmolke, Eva-Maria
Meier, Lukas J.
Kuehlmeyer, Katja
Ulm, Kurt
Buyx, Alena
Schneider, Gerhard
Heim, Markus
author_sort Knochel, Kathrin
collection PubMed
description Simulation and evaluation of a prioritization protocol at a German university hospital using a convergent parallel mixed methods design. DESIGN: Prospective single-center cohort study with a quantitative analysis of ICU patients and qualitative content analysis of two focus groups with intensivists. SETTING: Five ICUs of internal medicine and anesthesiology at a German university hospital. PATIENTS: Adult critically ill ICU patients (n = 53). INTERVENTIONS: After training the attending senior ICU physicians (n = 13) in rationing, an impending ICU congestion was simulated. All ICU patients were rated according to their likelihood to survive their acute illness (good-moderate-unfavorable). From each ICU, the two patients with the most unfavorable prognosis (n = 10) were evaluated by five prioritization teams for triage. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients nominated for prioritization visit (n = 10) had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores and already a longer stay at the hospital and on the ICU compared with the other patients. The order within this worst prognosis group was not congruent between the five teams. However, an in-hospital mortality of 80% confirmed the reasonable match with the lowest predicted probability of survival. Qualitative data highlighted the tremendous burden of triage and the need for a team-based consensus-oriented decision-making approach to ensure best possible care and to support professionals. Transparent communication within the teams, the hospital, and to the public was seen as essential for prioritization implementation. CONCLUSIONS: To mitigate potential bias and to reduce the emotional burden of triage, a consensus-oriented, interdisciplinary, and collaborative approach should be implemented. Prognostic comparative assessment by intensivists is feasible. The combination of long-term ICU stay and consistently high Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores resulted in a greater risk for triage in patients. It remains challenging to reliably differentiate between patients with very low chances to survive and requires further conceptual and empirical research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9668365
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96683652022-11-17 Preparing for the Worst-Case Scenario in a Pandemic: Intensivists Simulate Prioritization and Triage of Scarce ICU Resources* Knochel, Kathrin Adaktylos-Surber, Katharina Schmolke, Eva-Maria Meier, Lukas J. Kuehlmeyer, Katja Ulm, Kurt Buyx, Alena Schneider, Gerhard Heim, Markus Crit Care Med Feature Articles Simulation and evaluation of a prioritization protocol at a German university hospital using a convergent parallel mixed methods design. DESIGN: Prospective single-center cohort study with a quantitative analysis of ICU patients and qualitative content analysis of two focus groups with intensivists. SETTING: Five ICUs of internal medicine and anesthesiology at a German university hospital. PATIENTS: Adult critically ill ICU patients (n = 53). INTERVENTIONS: After training the attending senior ICU physicians (n = 13) in rationing, an impending ICU congestion was simulated. All ICU patients were rated according to their likelihood to survive their acute illness (good-moderate-unfavorable). From each ICU, the two patients with the most unfavorable prognosis (n = 10) were evaluated by five prioritization teams for triage. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients nominated for prioritization visit (n = 10) had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores and already a longer stay at the hospital and on the ICU compared with the other patients. The order within this worst prognosis group was not congruent between the five teams. However, an in-hospital mortality of 80% confirmed the reasonable match with the lowest predicted probability of survival. Qualitative data highlighted the tremendous burden of triage and the need for a team-based consensus-oriented decision-making approach to ensure best possible care and to support professionals. Transparent communication within the teams, the hospital, and to the public was seen as essential for prioritization implementation. CONCLUSIONS: To mitigate potential bias and to reduce the emotional burden of triage, a consensus-oriented, interdisciplinary, and collaborative approach should be implemented. Prognostic comparative assessment by intensivists is feasible. The combination of long-term ICU stay and consistently high Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores resulted in a greater risk for triage in patients. It remains challenging to reliably differentiate between patients with very low chances to survive and requires further conceptual and empirical research. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-10-12 2022-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9668365/ /pubmed/36222541 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000005684 Text en Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Feature Articles
Knochel, Kathrin
Adaktylos-Surber, Katharina
Schmolke, Eva-Maria
Meier, Lukas J.
Kuehlmeyer, Katja
Ulm, Kurt
Buyx, Alena
Schneider, Gerhard
Heim, Markus
Preparing for the Worst-Case Scenario in a Pandemic: Intensivists Simulate Prioritization and Triage of Scarce ICU Resources*
title Preparing for the Worst-Case Scenario in a Pandemic: Intensivists Simulate Prioritization and Triage of Scarce ICU Resources*
title_full Preparing for the Worst-Case Scenario in a Pandemic: Intensivists Simulate Prioritization and Triage of Scarce ICU Resources*
title_fullStr Preparing for the Worst-Case Scenario in a Pandemic: Intensivists Simulate Prioritization and Triage of Scarce ICU Resources*
title_full_unstemmed Preparing for the Worst-Case Scenario in a Pandemic: Intensivists Simulate Prioritization and Triage of Scarce ICU Resources*
title_short Preparing for the Worst-Case Scenario in a Pandemic: Intensivists Simulate Prioritization and Triage of Scarce ICU Resources*
title_sort preparing for the worst-case scenario in a pandemic: intensivists simulate prioritization and triage of scarce icu resources*
topic Feature Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9668365/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36222541
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000005684
work_keys_str_mv AT knochelkathrin preparingfortheworstcasescenarioinapandemicintensivistssimulateprioritizationandtriageofscarceicuresources
AT adaktylossurberkatharina preparingfortheworstcasescenarioinapandemicintensivistssimulateprioritizationandtriageofscarceicuresources
AT schmolkeevamaria preparingfortheworstcasescenarioinapandemicintensivistssimulateprioritizationandtriageofscarceicuresources
AT meierlukasj preparingfortheworstcasescenarioinapandemicintensivistssimulateprioritizationandtriageofscarceicuresources
AT kuehlmeyerkatja preparingfortheworstcasescenarioinapandemicintensivistssimulateprioritizationandtriageofscarceicuresources
AT ulmkurt preparingfortheworstcasescenarioinapandemicintensivistssimulateprioritizationandtriageofscarceicuresources
AT buyxalena preparingfortheworstcasescenarioinapandemicintensivistssimulateprioritizationandtriageofscarceicuresources
AT schneidergerhard preparingfortheworstcasescenarioinapandemicintensivistssimulateprioritizationandtriageofscarceicuresources
AT heimmarkus preparingfortheworstcasescenarioinapandemicintensivistssimulateprioritizationandtriageofscarceicuresources