Global Critical Care: Moving Forward in Resource-Limited Settings

Caring for critically ill patients is challenging in resource-limited settings, where the burden of disease and mortality from potentially treatable illnesses is higher than in resource-rich areas. Barriers to delivering quality critical care in these settings include lack of epidemiologic data and context-specific evidence for medical decision-making, deficiencies in health systems organization and resources, and institutional obstacles to implementation of life-saving interventions. Potential solutions include the development of common definitions for intensive care unit (ICU), intensivist, and intensive care to create a universal ICU organization framework; development of educational programs for capacity building of health care professionals working in resource-limited settings; global prioritization of epidemiologic and clinical research in resource-limited settings to conduct timely and ethical studies in response to emerging threats; adaptation of international guidelines to promote implementation of evidence-based care; and strengthening of health systems that integrates these interventions. This manuscript reviews the field of global critical care, barriers to safe high-quality care, and potential solutions to existing challenges. We also suggest a roadmap for improving the treatment of critically ill patients in resource-limited settings

Academic careers in global pulmonary and critical care medicine

The burden of respiratory and critical illness is high worldwide, yet specialist care is underrepresented in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) [1]. For many areas of medicine, the past decade has witnessed tremendous growth in global health opportunities for trainees; however, these opportunities tend to be restricted to individual institutions and geographic regions and academic global pulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM) remains a relatively novel concept [2]. Consequently, PCCM fellows and junior faculty at institutions with limited global health mentorship have little guidance in building successful global health careers

Promises and challenges of personalized medicine to guide ARDS therapy

Identifying new effective treatments for the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), including COVID-19 ARDS, remains a challenge. The field of ARDS investigation is moving increasingly toward innovative approaches such as the personalization of therapy to biological and clinical sub-phenotypes. Additionally, there is growing recognition of the importance of the global context to identify effective ARDS treatments. This review highlights emerging opportunities and continued challenges for personalizing therapy for ARDS, from identifying treatable traits to innovative clinical trial design and recognition of patient-level factors as the field of critical care investigation moves forward into the twenty-first century

Academic careers in global pulmonary and critical care medicine: perspectives from experts in the field

Academic global pulmonary/critical care medicine (PCCM) remains a relatively novel concept not fully embraced by all training programs, so PCCM early-career professionals may have little guidance in building successful careers in this field. To highlight various approaches used by current PCCM faculty to incorporate global health into their academic careers, speakers from a global health careers mini symposia held at the 2017 and 2018 American Thoracic Society International Conferences were invited to submit perspectives reflecting on academic PCCM and global health. The collection of essays was collated into a single manuscript. Eight current global PCCM faculty from diverse geographic and professional backgrounds provide experiential guidance for early-career professionals interested in global academic PCCM. Trainees and junior faculty interested in academic global PCCM will find innumerable obstacles to developing this non-traditional career pathway, but there exist diverse pathways to success

Sepsis in two hospitals in Rwanda: A retrospective cohort study of presentation, management, outcomes, and predictors of mortality.

PURPOSE: Few studies have assessed the presentation, management, and outcomes of sepsis in low-income countries (LICs). We sought to characterize these aspects of sepsis and to assess mortality predictors in sepsis in two referral hospitals in Rwanda. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study in two public academic referral hospitals in Rwanda. Data was abstracted from paper medical records of adult patients who met our criteria for sepsis. RESULTS: Of the 181 subjects who met eligibility criteria, 111 (61.3%) met our criteria for sepsis without shock and 70 (38.7%) met our criteria for septic shock. Thirty-five subjects (19.3%) were known to be HIV positive. The vast majority of septic patients (92.7%) received intravenous fluid therapy (median = 1.0 L within 8 hours), and 94.0% received antimicrobials. Vasopressors were administered to 32.0% of the cohort and 46.4% received mechanical ventilation. In-hospital mortality for all patients with sepsis was 51.4%, and it was 82.9% for those with septic shock. Baseline characteristic mortality predictors were respiratory rate, Glasgow Coma Scale score, and known HIV seropositivity. CONCLUSIONS: Septic patients in two public tertiary referral hospitals in Rwanda are young (median age = 40, IQR = 29, 59) and experience high rates of mortality. Predictors of mortality included baseline clinical characteristics and HIV seropositivity status. The majority of subjects were treated with intravenous fluids and antimicrobials. Further work is needed to understand clinical and management factors that may help improve mortality in septic patients in LICs

Critical care outcomes in resource-limited settings

Purpose of review The burden of critical illness in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) is substantial. A better understanding of critical care outcomes is essential for improving critical care delivery in resource-limited settings. In this review, we provide an overview of recent literature reporting on critical care outcomes in LMICs. We discuss several barriers and potential solutions for a better understanding of critical care outcomes in LMICs. Recent findings Epidemiologic studies show higher in-hospital mortality rates for critically ill patients in LMICs as compared with patients in high-income countries (HICs). Recent findings suggest that critical care interventions that are effective in HICs may not be effective and may even be harmful in LMICs. Little data on long-term and morbidity outcomes exist. Better outcomes measurement is beginning to emerge in LMICs through decision support tools that report process outcome measures, studies employing mobile health technologies with community health workers and the development of context-specific severity of illness scores. Summary Outcomes from HICs cannot be reliably extrapolated to LMICs, so it is important to study outcomes for critically ill patients in LMICs. Specific challenges to achieving meaningful outcomes studies in LMICs include defining the critically ill population when few ICU beds exist, the resource-intensiveness of long-term follow-up, and the need for reliable severity of illness scores to interpret outcomes. Although much work remains to be done, examples of studies overcoming these challenges are beginning to emerge