Management of potentially life-threatening emergencies at 74 primary level hospitals in Mongolia: results of a prospective, observational multicenter study

Abstract Background While the capacities to care for and epidemiology of emergency and critically ill patients have been reported for secondary and tertiary level hospitals in Mongolia, no data exist for Mongolian primary level hospitals. Methods In this prospective, observational multicenter study, 74 primary level hospitals of Mongolia were included. We determined the capacities of these hospitals to manage medical emergencies. Furthermore, characteristics of patients presenting with potentially life-threatening emergencies to these hospitals were evaluated during a 6 month period. Results An emergency/resuscitation room was available in 62.2% of hospitals. One third of the study hospitals had an operation theatre (32.4%). No hospital ran an intensive care unit or had trained emergency/critical care physicians or nurses available. Diagnostic resources were inconsistently available (sonography, 59.5%; echocardiography, 0%). Basic emergency procedures (wound care, 97.3%; foreign body removal, 86.5%; oxygen application, 85.2%) were commonly but advanced procedures (advanced cardiac life support, 10.8%; airway management, 13.5%; mechanical ventilation, 0%; renal replacement therapy, 0%) rarely available. During 6 months, 14,545 patients were hospitalized in the 74 study hospitals, of which 8.7% [n = 1267; median age, 34 (IQR 18–53) years; male gender, 54.4%] were included in the study. Trauma (excl. brain trauma) (20.4%), acute abdomen (16.9%) and heart failure (9.6%) were the most common conditions. Five-hundred-thirty patients (41.8%) were transferred to a secondary level hospital. The hospital mortality of patients not transferred was 3.2%. Conclusions Capacities of Mongolian primary level hospitals to manage life-threatening emergencies are highly limited. Trauma, surgical and medical conditions make up the most common emergencies. In view of the fact that almost half of the patients with a potentially life-threatening emergency were transferred to secondary level hospitals and the mortality of those hospitalized in primary level hospitals was 3.2%, room for improvement is clearly evident. Based on our findings, improvements could be obtained by strengthening inter-hospital transfer systems, training staff in emergency/critical care skills and by making mechanical ventilation and advanced life support techniques available at the emergency rooms of primary level hospitals

Intensive care medicine in Mongolia's 3 largest cities: outlining the needs

PURPOSE: To evaluate intensive care resources, support, and personnel available in Mongolia's 3 largest cities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was performed as a questionnaire-based survey evaluating intensive care units (ICUs) in Mongolia's 3 main cities. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 31 ICUs participated in the survey. The median number of beds per ICU was 7 (interquartile ranges, 6-10) with 0.7 (0.6-0.9) physicians and 1.5 (0.6-1.8) nurses per bed. A 24-hour physician service was available in 61.9% of the participating ICUs. A median number of 359 patients (250-500) with an average age of 39 (30-49) years were treated annually. Oxygen was available in all ICUs, but only for 60% (17-75) of beds. Pressurized air was available in 33% of the ICUs for 24% (0-15) of beds. Of the ICUs, 52.4% had a lung ventilator serving 20% (0-23) of beds. The most common admission diagnoses were sepsis, stroke, cardiac disease, postoperative or postpartum hemorrhage, and intoxication. Availability of medical equipment, disposables, and drugs was inadequate in all ICUs. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive care medicine in Mongolia's 3 largest cities is an under-resourced and underdeveloped medical specialty. The main problems encountered are insufficient training of staff as well as lack of medical equipment, disposables, and drugs

Using a checklist to identify barriers to compliance with evidence-based guidelines for central line management: A mixed methods study in Mongolia

Objectives: This study aimed to determine the extent to which a checklist has potential for identifying barriers to compliance with central line management guidelines, to evaluate the potential utility of checklists to improve the management of central lines in Mongolia, and to define the gap between current and best practices. Methods: A 22-item checklist was developed based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, USA) guidelines and existing central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) checklists. The checklist was used to observe 375 central line procedures performed in the intensive care units of four tertiary hospitals of Mongolia between July and December 2010. In parallel, 36 face-to-face interviews were conducted in six other tertiary hospitals to explain practice variations and identify barriers. Results: The baseline compliance level across all components of the checklist was 68.5%. The main factors explaining low levels of compliance were outdated local standards, a lack of updated guidelines, poor control over compliance with existing clinical guidelines, poor supply of medical consumables, and insufficient knowledge of contemporary infection control measures among health care providers. Conclusions: The health authorities of Mongolia need to adequately address the prevention and control of CLABSIs in their hospitals. Updating local standards and guidelines and implementing adequate multifaceted interventions with behavioral, educational, and logistical components are required. Use of a checklist as a baseline evaluation tool was feasible. It described current practice, showed areas that need urgent attention, and provided important information needed for future planning of CLABSI interventions

A Nationwide Census of ICU Capacity and Admissions in Mongolia

<div><p>In Mongolia, a Central Asian lower-middle income country, intensive care medicine is an under-resourced and–developed medical specialty. The burden of critical illness and capacity of intensive care unit (ICU) services in the country is unknown. In this nationwide census, we collected data on adult and pediatric/neonatal ICU capacities and the number of ICU admissions in 2014. All hospitals registered to run an ICU service in Mongolia were surveyed. Data on the availability of an adult and/or pediatric/neonatal ICU service, the number of available ICU beds, the number of available functional mechanical ventilators, the number of patients admitted to the ICU, and the number of patients admitted to the study hospital were collected. In total, 70 ICUs with 349 ICU beds were counted in Mongolia (11.7 ICU beds/100,000 inhabitants; 1.7 ICU beds/100 hospital beds). Of these, 241 (69%) were adult and 108 (31%) pediatric/neonatal ICU beds. Functional mechanical ventilators were available for approximately half of the ICU beds (5.1 mechanical ventilators/100,000 inhabitants). While all provincial hospitals ran a pediatric/neonatal ICU, only dedicated pediatric hospitals in Ulaanbaatar did so. The number of adult and pediatric/neonatal ICU admissions varied between provinces. The number of adult ICU beds and adult ICU admissions per 100,000 inhabitants correlated (<i>r</i> = 0.5; <i>p</i> = 0.02), while the number of pediatric/neonatal ICU beds and pediatric/neonatal ICU admissions per 100,000 inhabitants did not (<i>r</i> = 0.25; <i>p</i> = 0.26). In conclusion, with 11.7 ICU beds per 100,000 inhabitants the ICU capacity in Mongolia is higher than in other low- and lower-middle-income countries. Substantial heterogeneities in the standardized ICU capacity and ICU admissions exist between Mongolian provinces. Functional mechanical ventilators are available for only half of the ICU beds. Pediatric/neonatal ICU beds make up one third of the national ICU capacity and appear to meet or even exceed the demand of pediatric/neonatal critical care.</p></div

Additional file 1: of Management of potentially life-threatening emergencies at 74 primary level hospitals in Mongolia: results of a prospective, observational multicenter study

Study Site’s Capacity to Manage Medical Emergencies. (DOCX 16 kb

Number of intensive care unit admissions per 100,000 inhabitants and intensive care unit beds per 100,000 inhabitants in Ulaanbaatar and the provinces.

<p>(A) adult data. (B) pediatric/neonatal data. ICU, intensive care unit.</p

Adult and pediatric/neonatal intensive care unit admissions in Mongolia in 2014.

<p>Adult and pediatric/neonatal intensive care unit admissions in Mongolia in 2014.</p

Availability of intensive care unit beds and functional mechanical ventilators per 100.000 inhabitants for each Mongolian province.

<p>Availability of intensive care unit beds and functional mechanical ventilators per 100.000 inhabitants for each Mongolian province.</p

Differences in critical care practice between an industrialized and a developing country

BACKGROUND: Few data are available on intensive care unit (ICU) patient populations and critical care medicine practices in developing countries. METHODS: This prospective study evaluated differences in patient characteristics, ICU practice, and outcome between the ICUs of a Mongolian 400-bed tertiary university hospital (MonICU) and an Austrian 429-bed secondary hospital (AutICU). Demographics, chronic health status, clinical parameters, disease and therapeutic severity scores, and outcome were documented for all patients admitted to the two ICUs during a period of four and a half months. Standard tests and multiple regression analysis were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 203 critically ill patients were admitted to MonICU and 257 to AutICU. MonICU patients had fewer chronic diseases than AutICU patients (0.9 +/- 0.8 vs. 2.7 +/- 1.5, P < 0.001) but more frequently suffered from tuberculosis (2.5% vs. 0%, P = 0.01) and more frequently had never been medically examined before ICU admission (10.8% vs. 0%, P < 0.001). Admission diagnoses differed both in type and relative proportions in the two ICUs (P < 0.001). Admission of MonICU patients was more frequently unplanned (69% vs. 50.2%, P < 0.001), and although disease was more severe in these patients they received fewer therapeutic interventions than the AutICU patients. Overall mortality was higher in the MonICU patients (19.7 vs. 6.2%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patient characteristics and ICU practices varied significantly between the two ICUs. Mortality was substantially greater at MonICU, particularly among patients suffering from multiple-organ dysfunction. Strategies to improve the care of critically ill patients at MonICU should address both system- and staff-related problems, improve acceptance of the ICU service among physicians of other disciplines and upgrade the training of ICU staff

Pragmatic recommendations for the management of anticoagulation and venous thrombotic disease for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in low- And middle-income countries

New studies of COVID–19 are constantly updating best practices in clinical care. Often, it is impractical to apply recommendations based on high-income country investigations to resource limited settings in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We present a set of pragmatic recommendations for the management of anticoagulation and thrombotic disease for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in LMICs. In the absence of contraindications, we recommend prophylactic anticoagulation with either low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH) for all hospitalized COVID-19 patients in LMICs. If available, we recommend LMWH over UFH for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis to minimize risk to healthcare workers. We recommend against the use of aspirin for VTE prophylaxis in hospitalized COVID-19 and non–COVID-19 patients in LMICs. Because of limited evidence, we suggest against the use of “enhanced” or “intermediate” prophylaxis in COVID-19 patients in LMICs. Based on current available evidence, we recommend against the initiation of empiric therapeutic anticoagulation without clinical suspicion for VTE. If contraindications exist to chemical prophylaxis, we recommend mechanical prophylaxis with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices or graduated compression stockings (GCS) for hospitalized COVID-19 patients in LMICs. In LMICs, we recommend initiating therapeutic anticoagulation for hospitalized COVID-19 patients, in accordance with local clinical practice guidelines, if there is high clinical suspicion for VTE, even in the absence of testing. If available, we recommend LMWH over UFH or Direct oral anticoagulants for treatment of VTE in LMICs to minimize risk to healthcare workers. In LMIC settings where continuous intravenous UFH or LMWH are unavailable or not feasible to use, we recommend fixed dose heparin, adjusted to body weight, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with high clinical suspicion of VTE. We suggest D-dimer measurement, if available and affordable, at the time of admission for risk stratification, or when clinical suspicion for VTE is high. For hospitalized COVID-19 patients in LMICs, based on current available evidence, we make no recommendation on the use of serial D-dimer monitoring for the initiation of therapeutic anticoagulation. For hospitalized COVID-19 patients in LMICs receiving intravenous therapeutic UFH, we recommend serial monitoring of partial thromboplastin time or anti-factor Xa level, based on local laboratory capabilities. For hospitalized COVID-19 patients in LMICs receiving LMWH, we suggest against serial monitoring of anti-factor Xa level. We suggest serial monitoring of platelet counts in patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation for VTE, to assess risk of bleeding or development of heparin induced thrombocytopenia