For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
3
views
17
references
 Top references
cited by
8
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      145
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Rapid implementation of COVID-19 tracheostomy simulation training to increase surgeon safety and confidence

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To determine if rapid implementation of simulation training for anticipated COVID-19 tracheostomy procedures can increase physician confidence regarding procedure competency and use of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE).

          Methods

          A brief simulation training exercise was designed in conjunction with the development of a COVID-19 Tracheostomy Protocol. The simulation training focused primarily on provider safety, pre and post-surgical steps and the proper use of enhanced PPE. Simulation training was performed in the simulation lab at the institution over 2 days. Pre and post self-evaluations were measured using standardized clinical competency questionnaires on a 5-point Likert Scale ranging from “No knowledge, unable to perform” up to “Highly knowledgeable and confident, independent.”

          Results

          Physicians self-reported a significant increase in knowledge and competency immediately after completing the training exercise. Resident physicians increased from a mean score of 3.00 to 4.67, p-value 0.0041, mean increase 1.67 (CI 95% 0.81 to 2.52). Attending physicians increased from a mean score of 2.89 to 4.67, p-value 0.0002, mean increase 1.78 (CI 95% 1.14 to 2.42). Overall, all participants increased from a mean score of 3.06 to 4.71, p-value 0.0001, mean increase 1.65 (CI 95% 1.24 to 2.05).

          Discussion

          Implementation of this simulation training at our institution resulted in a significant increase in physician confidence regarding the safe performance of tracheostomy surgery in COVID-19 patients.

          Implications for practice

          Adoption of standardized COVID-19 tracheostomy simulation training at centers treating COVID-19 patients may result in improved physician safety and enhanced confidence in anticipation of performing these procedures in real-life scenarios.

          Highlights

          • •

            Rapid implementation of a COVID-19 mobile tracheostomy team is feasible in hospitals as the COVID-19 pandemic progresses.

          • •

            Continuing training of a groups of core providers promotes vigilance in pandemic situations.

          • •

            Simulation prior to pandemic peak is critical to ensure successful rollout.

          • •

            Training should focus on proper PPE donning and doffing, given the high risk of virus aerosolization during tracheostomy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1

          Neeltje van Doremalen, Trenton Bushmaker, Dylan H Morris … (2021)
          To the Editor: A novel human coronavirus that is now named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (formerly called HCoV-19) emerged in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and is now causing a pandemic. 1 We analyzed the aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 and compared it with SARS-CoV-1, the most closely related human coronavirus. 2 We evaluated the stability of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1 in aerosols and on various surfaces and estimated their decay rates using a Bayesian regression model (see the Methods section in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org). SARS-CoV-2 nCoV-WA1-2020 (MN985325.1) and SARS-CoV-1 Tor2 (AY274119.3) were the strains used. Aerosols (<5 μm) containing SARS-CoV-2 (105.25 50% tissue-culture infectious dose [TCID50] per milliliter) or SARS-CoV-1 (106.75-7.00 TCID50 per milliliter) were generated with the use of a three-jet Collison nebulizer and fed into a Goldberg drum to create an aerosolized environment. The inoculum resulted in cycle-threshold values between 20 and 22, similar to those observed in samples obtained from the upper and lower respiratory tract in humans. Our data consisted of 10 experimental conditions involving two viruses (SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1) in five environmental conditions (aerosols, plastic, stainless steel, copper, and cardboard). All experimental measurements are reported as means across three replicates. SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in aerosols throughout the duration of our experiment (3 hours), with a reduction in infectious titer from 103.5 to 102.7 TCID50 per liter of air. This reduction was similar to that observed with SARS-CoV-1, from 104.3 to 103.5 TCID50 per milliliter (Figure 1A). SARS-CoV-2 was more stable on plastic and stainless steel than on copper and cardboard, and viable virus was detected up to 72 hours after application to these surfaces (Figure 1A), although the virus titer was greatly reduced (from 103.7 to 100.6 TCID50 per milliliter of medium after 72 hours on plastic and from 103.7 to 100.6 TCID50 per milliliter after 48 hours on stainless steel). The stability kinetics of SARS-CoV-1 were similar (from 103.4 to 100.7 TCID50 per milliliter after 72 hours on plastic and from 103.6 to 100.6 TCID50 per milliliter after 48 hours on stainless steel). On copper, no viable SARS-CoV-2 was measured after 4 hours and no viable SARS-CoV-1 was measured after 8 hours. On cardboard, no viable SARS-CoV-2 was measured after 24 hours and no viable SARS-CoV-1 was measured after 8 hours (Figure 1A). Both viruses had an exponential decay in virus titer across all experimental conditions, as indicated by a linear decrease in the log10TCID50 per liter of air or milliliter of medium over time (Figure 1B). The half-lives of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1 were similar in aerosols, with median estimates of approximately 1.1 to 1.2 hours and 95% credible intervals of 0.64 to 2.64 for SARS-CoV-2 and 0.78 to 2.43 for SARS-CoV-1 (Figure 1C, and Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix). The half-lives of the two viruses were also similar on copper. On cardboard, the half-life of SARS-CoV-2 was longer than that of SARS-CoV-1. The longest viability of both viruses was on stainless steel and plastic; the estimated median half-life of SARS-CoV-2 was approximately 5.6 hours on stainless steel and 6.8 hours on plastic (Figure 1C). Estimated differences in the half-lives of the two viruses were small except for those on cardboard (Figure 1C). Individual replicate data were noticeably “noisier” (i.e., there was more variation in the experiment, resulting in a larger standard error) for cardboard than for other surfaces (Fig. S1 through S5), so we advise caution in interpreting this result. We found that the stability of SARS-CoV-2 was similar to that of SARS-CoV-1 under the experimental circumstances tested. This indicates that differences in the epidemiologic characteristics of these viruses probably arise from other factors, including high viral loads in the upper respiratory tract and the potential for persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 to shed and transmit the virus while asymptomatic. 3,4 Our results indicate that aerosol and fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is plausible, since the virus can remain viable and infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces up to days (depending on the inoculum shed). These findings echo those with SARS-CoV-1, in which these forms of transmission were associated with nosocomial spread and super-spreading events, 5 and they provide information for pandemic mitigation efforts.
          Article 0 comments Cited 4077 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Aerosol Generating Procedures and Risk of Transmission of Acute Respiratory Infections to Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review

            Khai Tran, Karen Cimon, Melissa Severn … (2012)
            Aerosol generating procedures (AGPs) may expose health care workers (HCWs) to pathogens causing acute respiratory infections (ARIs), but the risk of transmission of ARIs from AGPs is not fully known. We sought to determine the clinical evidence for the risk of transmission of ARIs to HCWs caring for patients undergoing AGPs compared with the risk of transmission to HCWs caring for patients not undergoing AGPs. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, University of York CRD databases, EuroScan, LILACS, Indian Medlars, Index Medicus for SE Asia, international health technology agencies and the Internet in all languages for articles from 01/01/1990 to 22/10/2010. Independent reviewers screened abstracts using pre-defined criteria, obtained full-text articles, selected relevant studies, and abstracted data. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. The outcome of interest was risk of ARI transmission. The quality of evidence was rated using the GRADE system. We identified 5 case-control and 5 retrospective cohort studies which evaluated transmission of SARS to HCWs. Procedures reported to present an increased risk of transmission included [n; pooled OR(95%CI)] tracheal intubation [n = 4 cohort; 6.6 (2.3, 18.9), and n = 4 case-control; 6.6 (4.1, 10.6)], non-invasive ventilation [n = 2 cohort; OR 3.1(1.4, 6.8)], tracheotomy [n = 1 case-control; 4.2 (1.5, 11.5)] and manual ventilation before intubation [n = 1 cohort; OR 2.8 (1.3, 6.4)]. Other intubation associated procedures, endotracheal aspiration, suction of body fluids, bronchoscopy, nebulizer treatment, administration of O2, high flow O2, manipulation of O2 mask or BiPAP mask, defibrillation, chest compressions, insertion of nasogastric tube, and collection of sputum were not significant. Our findings suggest that some procedures potentially capable of generating aerosols have been associated with increased risk of SARS transmission to HCWs or were a risk factor for transmission, with the most consistent association across multiple studies identified with tracheal intubation.
            Article 0 comments Cited 567 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Practical recommendations for critical care and anesthesiology teams caring for novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) patients

              Randy Wax, Michael D Christian (2020)
              A global health emergency has been declared by the World Health Organization as the 2019-nCoV outbreak spreads across the world, with confirmed patients in Canada. Patients infected with 2019-nCoV are at risk for developing respiratory failure and requiring admission to critical care units. While providing optimal treatment for these patients, careful execution of infection control measures is necessary to prevent nosocomial transmission to other patients and to healthcare workers providing care. Although the exact mechanisms of transmission are currently unclear, human-to-human transmission can occur, and the risk of airborne spread during aerosol-generating medical procedures remains a concern in specific circumstances. This paper summarizes important considerations regarding patient screening, environmental controls, personal protective equipment, resuscitation measures (including intubation), and critical care unit operations planning as we prepare for the possibility of new imported cases or local outbreaks of 2019-nCoV. Although understanding of the 2019-nCoV virus is evolving, lessons learned from prior infectious disease challenges such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome will hopefully improve our state of readiness regardless of the number of cases we eventually manage in Canada.
              Article 0 comments Cited 470 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Am J Otolaryngol
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Am J Otolaryngol
                Title: American Journal of Otolaryngology
                Publisher: Elsevier Inc.
                ISSN (Print): 0196-0709
                ISSN (Electronic): 1532-818X
                Publication date PMC-release: 1 June 2020
                Publication date (Print): September-October 2020
                Publication date (Electronic): 1 June 2020
                Volume: 41
                Issue: 5
                Page: 102574
                Affiliations
                Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, United States of America
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author at: Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, 1611 W. Harrison St., Suite 550 Orthopedic Building, Chicago, IL 60612, United States of America.
                Article
                Publisher Item ID: S0196-0709(20)30268-4 Publisher ID: 102574
                DOI: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102574
                PMC ID: 7837027
                PubMed ID: 32505992
                SO-VID: efdb31ba-f224-4057-b40f-36343ee53f84
                Copyright © © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                License:

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Date received : 14 May 2020
                Categories
                Subject: Article

                Keywords: tracheostomy,airway,safety,simulation,ppe,covid-19,psqi
                Data availability:
                Keywords: tracheostomy, airway, safety, simulation, ppe, covid-19, psqi

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content145

                See all similar

                Cited by8

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors336

                See all reference authors