Dataset Information

The Mount Sinai Hospital Institute for critical care medicine response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in a surge of critically ill patients. This was especially true in New York City. We present a roadmap for hospitals and healthcare systems to prepare for a Pandemic.

Methods

This was a retrospective review of how Mount Sinai Hospital (MSH) was able to rapidly prepare to handle the pandemic. MSH, the largest academic hospital within the Mount Sinai Health System, rapidly expanded the intensive care unit (ICU) bed capacity, including creating new ICU beds, expanded the workforce, and created guidelines.

Results

MSH a 1,139-bed quaternary care academic referral hospital with 104 ICU beds expanded to 1,453 beds (27.5% increase) with 235 ICU beds (126% increase) during the pandemic peak in the first week of April 2020. From March to June 2020, with follow-up through October 2020, MSH admitted 2,591 COVID-19-positive patients, 614 to ICUs. Most admitted patients received noninvasive support including a non-rebreather mask, high flow nasal cannula, and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. Among ICU patients, 68.4% (n=420) received mechanical ventilation; among the admitted ICU patients, 42.8% (n=263) died, and 47.8% (n=294) were discharged alive.

Conclusions

Flexible bed management initiatives; teamwork across multiple disciplines; and development and implementation of guidelines were critical accommodating the surge of critically ill patients. Non-ICU services and staff were deployed to augment the critical care work force and open new critical care units. This approach to rapidly expand bed availability and staffing across the system helped provide the best care for the patients and saved lives.

SUBMITTER: Wang J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8435441 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic directly affects the psychological well-being of critical care nurses. Several studies had investigated the psychological impact of the pandemic on nurses caring for patients with COVID-19, but few were conducted to identify the predictors of this impact.Aims and objectivesThe objective of this study is to identify the predictors of critical care nurses' stress, anxiety, and depression in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignA cross-sectional survey was conducted in five intensive care units in five hospitals in Alexandria, Egypt.MethodsAn online questionnaire was distributed. It included socio-demographic and work-related data and the depression, anxiety, and stress scale scores of the nurses under study. A multiple linear regression model was developed to identify the predictors of critical care nurses' stress, anxiety, and depression in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsTwo hundred (64%) of 308 nurses completed the electronic questionnaire. Significant predictors of stress included the number of infected colleagues (P < .001) and availability of hospital resources (P = .01). Significant predictors of anxiety were age, gender, satisfactory income (P < .001), years of experience, time spent caring for patients with COVID-19 (P = .04), continuous training, number of infected colleagues (P = .01), and availability of hospital resources (P = .02). Finally, significant predictors of depression included gender, history of physical problems (P = .04), educational attainment, availability of hospital resources, history of psychological problems (P < .001), and number of infected colleagues (P = .001).ConclusionThe hospital's lack of human and physical resources and the number of colleagues infected with COVID-19 were the strongest predictors of stress, anxiety, and depression among nurses.Relevance to clinical practiceIdentifying the predictors of stress, anxiety, and depression among nurses who care for patients with COVID-19 is a vital step in developing mental health promotion strategies to support nurses during this pandemic.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess association of clinical features on COVID-19 patient outcomes. DESIGN:Retrospective observational study using electronic medical record data. SETTING:Five member hospitals from the Mount Sinai Health System in New York City (NYC). PARTICIPANTS:28?336 patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 from 24 February 2020 to 15 April 2020, including 6158 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Positive test rates and in-hospital mortality were assessed for different racial groups. Among positive cases admitted to the hospital (N=3273), we estimated HR for both discharge and death across various explanatory variables, including patient demographics, hospital site and unit, smoking status, vital signs, lab results and comorbidities. RESULTS:Hispanics (29%) and African Americans (25%) had disproportionately high positive case rates relative to their representation in the overall NYC population (p<0.05); however, no differences in mortality rates were observed in hospitalised patients based on race. Outcomes differed significantly between hospitals (Gray's T=248.9; p<0.05), reflecting differences in average baseline age and underlying comorbidities. Significant risk factors for mortality included age (HR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.06; p=1.15e-32), oxygen saturation (HR 0.985, 95% CI 0.982 to 0.988; p=1.57e-17), care in intensive care unit areas (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.92; p=7.81e-6) and elevated creatinine (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.10; p=7.48e-10), white cell count (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.04; p=8.4e-3) and body mass index (BMI) (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.03; p=1.09e-2). Deceased patients were more likely to have elevated markers of inflammation. CONCLUSIONS:While race was associated with higher risk of infection, we did not find racial disparities in inpatient mortality suggesting that outcomes in a single tertiary care health system are comparable across races. In addition, we identified key clinical features associated with reduced mortality and discharge. These findings could help to identify which COVID-19 patients are at greatest risk of a severe infection response and predict survival.

Project description:Reduction of preventable hospital readmissions that result from chronic or acute conditions like stroke, heart failure, myocardial infarction and pneumonia remains a significant challenge for improving the outcomes and decreasing the cost of healthcare delivery in the United States. Patient readmission rates are relatively high for conditions like heart failure (HF) despite the implementation of high-quality healthcare delivery operation guidelines created by regulatory authorities. Multiple predictive models are currently available to evaluate potential 30-day readmission rates of patients. Most of these models are hypothesis driven and repetitively assess the predictive abilities of the same set of biomarkers as predictive features. In this manuscript, we discuss our attempt to develop a data-driven, electronic-medical record-wide (EMR-wide) feature selection approach and subsequent machine learning to predict readmission probabilities. We have assessed a large repertoire of variables from electronic medical records of heart failure patients in a single center. The cohort included 1,068 patients with 178 patients were readmitted within a 30-day interval (16.66% readmission rate). A total of 4,205 variables were extracted from EMR including diagnosis codes (n=1,763), medications (n=1,028), laboratory measurements (n=846), surgical procedures (n=564) and vital signs (n=4). We designed a multistep modeling strategy using the Naïve Bayes algorithm. In the first step, we created individual models to classify the cases (readmitted) and controls (non-readmitted). In the second step, features contributing to predictive risk from independent models were combined into a composite model using a correlation-based feature selection (CFS) method. All models were trained and tested using a 5-fold cross-validation method, with 70% of the cohort used for training and the remaining 30% for testing. Compared to existing predictive models for HF readmission rates (AUCs in the range of 0.6-0.7), results from our EMR-wide predictive model (AUC=0.78; Accuracy=83.19%) and phenome-wide feature selection strategies are encouraging and reveal the utility of such datadriven machine learning. Fine tuning of the model, replication using multi-center cohorts and prospective clinical trial to evaluate the clinical utility would help the adoption of the model as a clinical decision system for evaluating readmission status.