Application of systems dynamics and group model building to identify barriers and facilitators to acute care delivery in a resource limited setting

BACKGROUND: Group model building (GMB) is a method to facilitate shared understanding of structures and relationships that determine system behaviors. This project aimed to determine the feasibility of GMB in a resource-limited setting and to use GMB to describe key barriers and facilitators to effective acute care delivery at a tertiary care hospital in Malawi. METHODS: Over 1 week, trained facilitators led three GMB sessions with two groups of healthcare providers to facilitate shared understanding of structures and relationships that determine system behaviors. One group aimed to identify factors that impact patient flow in the paediatric special care ward. The other aimed to identify factors impacting delivery of high-quality care in the paediatric accident and emergency room. Synthesized causal maps of factors influencing patient care were generated, revised, and qualitatively analyzed. RESULTS: Causal maps identified patient condition as the central modifier of acute care delivery. Severe illness and high volume of patients were identified as creating system strain in several domains: (1) physical space, (2) resource needs and utilization, (3) staff capabilities and (4) quality improvement. Stress in these domains results in worsening patient condition and perpetuating negative reinforcing feedback loops. Balancing factors inherent to the current system included (1) parental engagement, (2) provider resilience, (3) ease of communication and (4) patient death. Perceived strengths of the GMB process were representation of diverse stakeholder viewpoints and complex system synthesis in a visual causal pathway, the process inclusivity, development of shared understanding, new idea generation and momentum building. Challenges identified included time required for completion and potential for participant selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: GMB facilitated creation of a shared mental model, as a first step in optimizing acute care delivery in a paediatric facility in this resource-limited setting

Cost-effectiveness analysis of implementing an integrated neonatal care kit to reduce neonatal infection in rural Pakistan

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of distribution of the integrated neonatal care kit (iNCK) by community health workers from the healthcare payer perspective in Rahimyar Khan, Pakistan.Setting: Rahimyar Khan, Pakistan.Participants: N/A.Intervention: Cost-utility analysis using a Markov model based on cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT: NCT02130856) data and a literature review. We compared distribution of the iNCK to pregnant mothers to local standard of care and followed infants over a lifetime horizon.Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome was incremental net monetary benefit (INMB, at a cost-effectiveness threshold of US$15.50), discounted at 3$15.50, distribution of the iNCK resulted in lower expected DALYs (28.7 vs 29.6 years) at lower expected cost (US$52.50 vs 55.20), translating to an INMB of US$10.22 per iNCK distributed. These results were sensitive to the baseline risk of infection, cost of the iNCK and the estimated effect of the iNCK on the relative risk of infection. At relative risks of infection below 0.79 and iNCK costs below US$25.90, the iNCK remained cost-effective compared with current local standard of care.Conclusion: The distribution of the iNCK dominated the current local standard of care (ie, the iNCK is less costly and more effective than current care standards). Most of the cost-effectiveness of the iNCK was attributable to a reduction in neonatal infection

Risk of dispersion or aerosol generation and infection transmission with nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for detection of COVID-19: a systematic review

Objectives SARS-CoV-2-related disease, referred to as COVID-19, has emerged as a global pandemic since December 2019. While there is growing recognition regarding possible airborne transmission, particularly in the setting of aerosol-generating procedures and treatments, whether nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 generate aerosols remains unclear.Design Systematic review.Data sources We searched Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE up to 3 November 2020. We also searched the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Medical Journal Network, medRxiv and ClinicalTrials.gov up to 29 March 2020.Eligibility criteria All comparative and non-comparative studies that evaluated dispersion or aerosolisation of viable airborne organisms, or transmission of infection associated with nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab testing.Results Of 7702 citations, only one study was deemed eligible. Using a dedicated sampling room with negative pressure isolation room, personal protective equipment including N95 or higher masks, strict sterilisation protocols, structured training with standardised collection methods and a structured collection and delivery system, a tertiary care hospital proved a 0% healthcare worker infection rate among eight nurses conducting over 11 000 nasopharyngeal swabs. No studies examining transmissibility with other safety protocols, nor any studies quantifying the risk of aerosol generation with nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs for detection of SARS-CoV-2, were identified.Conclusions There is limited to no published data regarding aerosol generation and risk of transmission with nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Field experiments to quantify this risk are warranted. Vigilance in adhering to current standards for infection control is suggested

Challenges of implementing the Paediatric Surviving Sepsis Campaign International Guidelines 2020 in resource-limited settings: A real-world view beyond the academia.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign International Guidelines for the Management of Septic Shock and Sepsis-associated Organ Dysfunction in Children was released in 2020 and is intended for use in all global settings that care for children with sepsis. However, practitioners managing children with sep sis in resource-limited settings (RLS) face several challenges and disease patterns not experienced by those in resource-rich settings. Based upon our collective experience from RLS, we aimed to reflect on the difficulties of implementing the international guidelines. We believe there is an urgent need for more evidence from RLS on feasible, efficacious approaches to the management of sepsis and septic shock that could be included in future context-specific guidelines

Risk of dispersion or aerosol generation and infection transmission with nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for detection of COVID-19 : a systematic review

Objectives SARS-CoV-2-related disease, referred to as COVID-19, has emerged as a global pandemic since December 2019. While there is growing recognition regarding possible airborne transmission, particularly in the setting of aerosol-generating procedures and treatments, whether nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 generate aerosols remains unclear. Design Systematic review. Data sources We searched Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE up to 3 November 2020. We also searched the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Medical Journal Network, medRxiv and ClinicalTrials.gov up to 29 March 2020. Eligibility criteria All comparative and non-comparative studies that evaluated dispersion or aerosolisation of viable airborne organisms, or transmission of infection associated with nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab testing. Results Of 7702 citations, only one study was deemed eligible. Using a dedicated sampling room with negative pressure isolation room, personal protective equipment including N95 or higher masks, strict sterilisation protocols, structured training with standardised collection methods and a structured collection and delivery system, a tertiary care hospital proved a 0% healthcare worker infection rate among eight nurses conducting over 11 000 nasopharyngeal swabs. No studies examining transmissibility with other safety protocols, nor any studies quantifying the risk of aerosol generation with nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs for detection of SARS-CoV-2, were identified. Conclusions There is limited to no published data regarding aerosol generation and risk of transmission with nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Field experiments to quantify this risk are warranted. Vigilance in adhering to current standards for infection control is suggested.Medicine, Faculty ofNon UBCPediatrics, Department ofReviewedFacultyResearcherGraduateUndergraduat

Global PARITY: Study Design for a Multi-Centered, International Point Prevalence Study to Estimate the Burden of Pediatric Acute Critical Illness in Resource-Limited Settings

BackgroundThe burden of pediatric critical illness and resource utilization by children with critical illness in resource limited settings (RLS) are largely unknown. Without specific data that captures key aspects of critical illness, disease presentation, and resource utilization for pediatric populations in RLS, development of a contextual framework for appropriate, evidence-based interventions to guide allocation of limited but available resources is challenging. We present this methods paper which describes our efforts to determine the prevalence, etiology, hospital outcomes, and resource utilization associated with pediatric acute, critical illness in RLS globally.MethodsWe will conduct a prospective, observational, multicenter, multinational point prevalence study in sixty-one participating RLS hospitals from North, Central and South America, Africa, Middle East and South Asia with four sampling time points over a 12-month period. Children aged 29 days to 14 years evaluated for acute illness or injury in an emergency department) or directly admitted to an inpatient unit will be enrolled and followed for hospital outcomes and resource utilization for the first seven days of hospitalization. The primary outcome will be prevalence of acute critical illness, which Global PARITY has defined as death within 48 hours of presentation to the hospital, including ED mortality; or admission/transfer to an HDU or ICU; or transfer to another institution for a higher level-of-care; or receiving critical care-level interventions (vasopressor infusion, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive mechanical ventilation) regardless of location in the hospital, among children presenting to the hospital. Secondary outcomes include etiology of critical illness, in-hospital mortality, cause of death, resource utilization, length of hospital stay, and change in neurocognitive status. Data will be managed via REDCap, aggregated, and analyzed across sites.DiscussionThis study is expected to address the current gap in understanding of the burden, etiology, resource utilization and outcomes associated with pediatric acute and critical illness in RLS. These data are crucial to inform future research and clinical management decisions and to improve global pediatric hospital outcomes

Essential Emergency and Critical Care: a consensus among global clinical experts

BackgroundGlobally, critical illness results in millions of deaths every year. Although many of these deaths are potentially preventable, the basic, life-saving care of critically ill patients are often overlooked in health systems. Essential Emergency and Critical Care (EECC) has been devised as the care that should be provided to all critically ill patients in all hospitals in the world. EECC includes the effective care of low cost and low complexity for the identification and treatment of critically ill patients across all medical specialties. This study aimed to specify the content of EECC and additionally, given the surge of critical illness in the ongoing pandemic, the essential diagnosis-specific care for critically ill patients with COVID-19.MethodsIn a Delphi process, consensus (>90% agreement) was sought from a diverse panel of global clinical experts. The panel iteratively rated proposed treatments and actions based on previous guidelines and the WHO/ICRC's Basic Emergency Care. The output from the Delphi was adapted iteratively with specialist reviewers into a coherent and feasible package of clinical processes plus a list of hospital readiness requirements.ResultsThe 269 experts in the Delphi panel had clinical experience in different acute medical specialties from 59 countries and from all resource settings. The agreed EECC package contains 40 clinical processes and 67 requirements, plus additions specific for COVID-19.ConclusionThe study has specified the content of care that should be provided to all critically ill patients. Implementing EECC could be an effective strategy for policy makers to reduce preventable deaths worldwide