White Paper on Early Critical Care Services in Low Resource Settings.
This White Paper has been formally accepted for support by the International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM) and by the World Federation of Intensive and Critical Care (WFICC), put forth by a multi-specialty group of intensivists and emergency medicine providers from low- and low-middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HiCs) with the aim of 1) defining the current state of caring for the critically ill in low-resource settings (LRS) within LMICs and 2) highlighting policy options and recommendations for improving the system-level delivery of early critical care services in LRS. LMICs have a high burden of critical illness and worse patient outcomes than HICs, hence, the focus of this White Paper is on the care of critically ill patients in the early stages of presentation in LMIC settings. In such settings, the provision of early critical care is challenged by a fragmented health system, costs, a health care workforce with limited training, and competing healthcare priorities. Early critical care services are defined as the early interventions that support vital organ function during the initial care provided to the critically ill patient-these interventions can be performed at any point of patient contact and can be delivered across diverse settings in the healthcare system and do not necessitate specialty personnel. Currently, a single "best" care delivery model likely does not exist in LMICs given the heterogeneity in local context; therefore, objective comparisons of quality, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness between varying models are difficult to establish. While limited, there is data to suggest that caring for the critically ill may be cost effective in LMICs, contrary to a widely held belief. Drawing from locally available resources and context, strengthening early critical care services in LRS will require a multi-faceted approach, including three core pillars: education, research, and policy. Education initiatives for physicians, nurses, and allied health staff that focus on protocolized emergency response training can bridge the workforce gap in the short-term; however, each country's current human resources must be evaluated to decide on the duration of training, who should be trained, and using what curriculum. Understanding the burden of critical Illness, best practices for resuscitation, and appropriate quality metrics for different early critical care services implementation models in LMICs are reliant upon strengthening the regional research capacity, therefore, standard documentation systems should be implemented to allow for registry use and quality improvement. Policy efforts at a local, national and international level to strengthen early critical care services should focus on funding the building blocks of early critical care services systems and promoting the right to access early critical care regardless of the patient's geographic or financial barriers. Additionally, national and local policies describing ethical dilemmas involving the withdrawal of life-sustaining care should be developed with broad stakeholder representation based on local cultural beliefs as well as the optimization of limited resources.
Losonczy LI
，Papali A
，Kivlehan S
，Calvello Hynes EJ
，Calderon G
，Laytin A
，Moll V
，Al Hazmi A
，Alsabri M
，Aryal D
，Atua V
，Becker T
，Benzoni N
，Dippenaar E
，Duneant E
，Girma B
，George N
，Gupta P
，Jaung M
，Hollong B
，Kabongo D
，Kruisselbrink RJ
，Lee D
，Maldonado A
，May J
，Osei-Ampofo M
，Osman YO
，Owoo C
，Rouhani SA
，Sawe H
，Schnorr D
，Shrestha GS
，Sohoni A
，Sultan M
，Tenner AG
，Yusuf H
，Adhikari NK
，Murthy S
，Kissoon N
，Marshall J
，Khoury A
，Bellou A
，Wallis L
，Reynolds T
... -
《Annals of Global Health》
Surgical intensive care - current and future challenges?
Bjorn Ibsen, an anesthetist who pioneered positive pressure ventilation as a treatment option during the Copenhagen polio epidemic of 1952, set up the first Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in Europe in 1953. He managed polio patients on positive pressure ventilation together with physicians and physiologists in a dedicated ward, where one nurse was assigned to each patient. In that sense Ibsen is more or less the father of intensive care medicine as a specialty and also an advocate of the one-to-one nursing ratio for critically ill patients. Nowadays, the Surgical Intensive Care Unit (SICU) offers critical care treatment to unstable, severely, or potentially severely ill patients in the perioperative setting, who have life-threatening conditions and require comprehensive care, constant monitoring, and possible emergency interventions. Hence there is one very specific challenge in the surgical setting: the intensivist has to manage the patient flow starting from admission to the hospital through to the operating theater, in the SICU, and postoperatively for the discharge to the ward. In other words, the planning of the resources (most frequently availability of beds) has to be optimized to prevent cancellations of elective surgical procedures but also to facilitate other emergency admissions. SICU intensivists take the role of arbitrators between surgical demand and patient's interests. This means they supervise the safety, efficacy, and workability of the process with respect to all stakeholders. This notion was reported in 2007 when Stawicki and co-workers performed a small prospective study concluding that it appears safe if the dedicated intensivist takes over the role of the last arbitrator supported by a multidisciplinary team.1 However, demographic changes in many countries during the last few decades have given rise to populations which are more elderly and sicker than before. This impacts on the healthcare system in general but on the intensivist and the ICU team too. In addition, in a society with an increased life expectancy, the balance between treatable disease, outcome, and utilization of resources must be maintained. This fact gains even more importance as patients and their families claim "high end" treatment. Such a demand is reflected looking at the developments that have taken place over the last 25 years. Mainly, the focus of intensive care medicine was on technical support or even replacement of failing organ systems such as the lungs, the heart, or the kidneys by veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO), veno-arterial ECMO (VA-ECMO), and continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) respectively. This means "technical care" became a core capability and expectation of critical care medicine. In parallel, medical treatment became more standardized. For example, lung protective ventilation strategies, early enteral feeding, and daily sedation vacation are part of modern protocols. As a consequence, ventilator time has been reduced and patients therefore develop delirium less frequently. These measures, beside others, are implemented in care bundles to improve the quality of care of patients by the whole ICU team. The importance of specialty trained teams was already pointed out 35 years ago when Li et al.,2 demonstrated in a study performed in a community hospital that the mortality was decreased if an ICU was managed 24/7 by an on-site physician. The association of improved outcomes and presence of a critical care trained physician (intensivist) has been shown in several studies since that time.3,4,5,6 A modern multidisciplinary critical care team consists at least of an intensivist, ICU nurse, pharmacist, respiratory therapist, physiotherapist, and the primary team physician. Based on clinical needs, the team can be supplemented by oncologists, cardiologists, or other specialties. Again, this approach is supported by research: a recent retrospective cohort study from the California Hospital Assessment and Reporting Taskforce (CHART) on 60,330 patients confirmed the association between improved patient outcome and such a multidisciplinary team.7 If such an intensive care team makes a difference, why do not all patients at risk receive advanced ICU-care? It was already demonstrated by Esteban et al., in a prospective study that patients with severe sepsis had a mortality rate of 26% when not admitted to an ICU in comparison to 11% when they were admitted to an ICU.8 Meanwhile, we know that early referral is particularly important, because for ischemic diseases the timing appears to make a difference in terms of full recovery. So, the following questions arise: Should intensive care be rolled out to each ward and physical admission to an ICU or be restricted to special cases only? For this purpose, the so-called "Rapid Response Teams" (RRT) or "Medical Emergency Team" (MET), which essentially are a form of an ICU outreach team, were implemented. The name, composition, or exact role of such team varies from institution to institution and country to country. Alternatively, should all ward staff be educated to recognize sick patients earlier for a timely transfer to a dedicated area? This would mean that ICU-care would be introduced in the ward. A first attempt to answer this question, whether to deploy critical care resources to deteriorating patients outside the ICU 24/7, was given by Churpek et al.9 The success of the rapid response teams could be related to decreased rates of cardiac arrest outside the ICU setting and in-hospital mortality. Interestingly, an analysis of the registry database of the RRT calls in this study showed that the lowest frequency of calls occurred between 1:00 AM to 6:59 AM time period. In contrast, the mortality was highest around 7 AM and lowest during noon hour. This indicates that not simply the availability of such a team makes a difference but also the alertness of the ward-teams is of high importance to identify deteriorating patients in a timely manner. Essentially, this would necessitate ward staff being trained to provide a higher level of care enabling them to better recognize when patients become sicker to avoid a delayed call to the ICU. Alternatively, a system in which the intensivist plays a major role in daily ward rounds could be beneficial. So, the ward doctor should become an intensivist. However, the latter means the ICU is rolled out across the whole hospital which would consume a huge amount of resources. Another option would be 24/7 remote monitoring of patients at risk that notifies the intensivist or RRT in case of need. The infrastructure, technology, and manpower to put this in place also has associated costs. As the demand for ICU care will rise further in the future, intensivists will play an even more important role in the healthcare system that itself is under enormous economic pressure to ensure the best quality of care for critically ill patients. Besides excellent knowledge and hard skills, intensivists need to be team players, communicators, facilitators, and arbitrators to achieve the best results in collaboration with all involved in patient treatment.
Rohrig SAH
，Lance MD
，Faisal Malmstrom M
《-》
Anaesthesiologist-intensivist phycisians at the core of the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients in Africa: persistent challenges, some resolved dilemma and future perspective.
Unlike developed countries which have purely intensivists also called critical care physicians or intensive care physicians to manage critically ill patients like those with severe forms of COVID-19, the practice of critical care medicine in Africa is coined to anaesthesiology. Hence, anaesthesiologist-intensivist physicians are the medical specialists taking care of critically ill COVID-19 patients in Africa. Likewise, unlike intensive care units (ICUs) in high income countries, those in most African countries face the challenge of a lack of emergency drugs and resuscitation equipment, limited health infrastructure and understaffed and underfunded health care systems. The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented one faced by intensivists in high-income countries and anaesthesiologist-intensivist phycisians in Africa. Infected patients with severe forms of the disease like those having grave COVID-19 complications like massive pulmonary embolism, severe cardiac arrhythmias, cardiogenic shock, septic shock, acute kidney injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome require ICU admission for better management. Both intensivists or anaesthesiologist-intensivist physicians have the peculiarity of securing the airways of critically COVID-19 patients and providing respiratory support with mechanical ventilation after laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation when needed. In so doing, they can easily be infected from respiratory droplets or aerosols expired by the COVID-19 patients. Hence, in Africa, anaesthesiologist-intensivist phycisians have a higher risk of contracting COVID-19 compared to other health professionals. It's worth to mention that the COVID-19 pandemic struck African anaesthesiologist-intensivist phycisians and ICUs when there were neither prepared skillfully or lacked the required ICU capacity to meet the demands of thousands of severe COVID-19 African patients. These further weakened the already strained health systems in Africa. It required a lot of creativity, engineering skills and courage for these ill prepared African anaesthesiologist-intensivist physicians to provide care to these critically ill patients and improve their outcomes as the pandemic progressed. However, despites the numerous efforts made in African anaesthesiologist-Intensivist phycisians to care for critically ill COVID-19 patients, the pandemic is spreading at a rapid rate across Africa. There is an urgent need for African health authorities to anticipate on how to scale up the future high ICU capacity needs and limited ICU workforce, infrastructure and equipment to manage severe forms of COVID-19 in future. It cannot be overemphasized that these severe forms of COVID-19 are potentially fatal and are a major contributor to the death toll of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Metogo JAM
，Tochie JN
，Etoundi PO
，Bengono RSB
，Ndikontar R
，Minkande JZ
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
