Arizona Thoracic Society Supports Mandatory Vaccination of Healthcare Workers

I watched much of the past year and a half of the COVID-19 pandemic in horror listening to the TV pundits and politicians argue against wearing masks, receiving vaccinations, and in general, undermining the safety and freedoms of all Americans. Nothing is done to regulate commentator or politician disinformation under the excuse that these pundits have the right of free speech as a fundamental liberty. Fundamental liberties are freedoms the population is entitled to fully enjoy without government intrusion. Nevertheless, the proper exercise of these liberties, taken in conjunction with the need for public order, national security, the preservation of moral values, as well as respect for the rights of one’s fellowman—all of this necessarily entails that some restrictions be placed upon these liberties (1).

Only the freedom of thought, conscience and opinion are subject to no real restriction. Each and every person is free to think what he or she likes without fear of government interference so long as his or her opinions remain private. Freedom of expression is limited, most notably as it pertains to the violation of moral values and to the transmission of messages that incite hatred and violence (racism, discrimination, etc.) and protection of the greater public.

Some healthcare workers are arguing that they should not be required to take a COVID-19 vaccination because it violates their fundamental rights. They are correct, they do not have to receive the vaccination, but at the same time their employer has an obligation to protect their patients/clients and other employees. That obligation exceeds the employee’s right to vaccine refusal. In other words, those acting out by refusing vaccination should not be guaranteed employment in the interest of public safety.

Due to the recent COVID-19 surge and the availability of safe and effective vaccines, most health care organizations and societies advocate that all health care and long-term care employers require their workers to receive the COVID-19 vaccine (2). This is the logical fulfillment of the ethical commitment of all health care workers to put patients as well as residents of long-term care facilities first and take all steps necessary to ensure their health and well-being.

Because of highly contagious variants, including the Delta variant, and significant numbers of unvaccinated people, COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations and deaths are once again rising throughout the United States (3). Vaccination is the primary way to put the pandemic behind us and avoid the return of more stringent public health measures.

Unfortunately, many health care and long-term care personnel remain unvaccinated. As we move towards full FDA approval of the currently available vaccines, all health care workers should get vaccinated for their own health, and to protect their colleagues, families, residents of long-term care facilities and patients. This is especially necessary to protect those who are vulnerable, including unvaccinated children and the immunocompromised. Indeed, this is why many health care and long-term care organizations already require vaccinations for influenza, hepatitis B, and pertussis.

The American Thoracic Society and the Arizona Thoracic Society stand with the majority of other medical societies in calling for all health care and long-term care employers to require their employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 (2). Recognizing that a small minority of workers cannot be vaccinated because of identified medical reasons and should be exempted from a mandate, should be assigned other duties as possible.

Existing COVID-19 vaccine mandates have proven effective (4,5). As the health care community leads the way in requiring vaccines for our employees, we hope all other employers across the country will follow our lead and implement effective policies to encourage vaccination. The health and safety of U.S. workers, families, communities, and the nation depends on it.

Richard A. Robbins, MD

Editor, SWJPCC

on behalf of the Arizona Thoracic Society

References

1. Humanium. Available on-line at https://www.humanium.org/en/fundamental-rights/freedom/restrictions/ (accessed 8/5/21)
2. AMA in support of COVID-19 vaccine mandates for health care workers. July 26, 2021. Available at: https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-support-covid-19-vaccine-mandates-health-care-workers (accessed 8/5/21).
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Covid Data Tracker Weekly Review. July 16, 2021.  https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covidview/index.html (accessed 8/5/21).
4. Bacon J. Condition of employment: Hospitals in DC, across the nation follow Houston Methodist in requiring vaccination for workers. USA Today. Available at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/06/10/dc-hospitals-others-follow-houston-methodist-requiring-vaccination/7633481002/ (accessed 8/5/21).
5. Paulin E. More Nursing Homes Are Requiring Staff COVID-19 Vaccinations. AARP. Available from: https://www.aarp.org/caregiving/health/info-2021/nursing-homes-covid-vaccine-mandate.html (accessed 8/5/21).

Cite as: Robbins RA. Arizona Thoracic Society supports mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers. Southwest J Pulm Crit Care. 2021;23(2):52-53. doi: https://doi.org/10.13175/swjpcc033-21 PDF 

Combating Morale Injury Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic

Healthcare burnout is on the rise during the great COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare burnout is emotional exhaustion, cynicism and depersonalization, reduced professional efficacy and personal accomplishment caused by work-related stress. Numerous factors cause healthcare burnout: long work hours, lack of respect, difficult patients, feeling of helplessness, lack of healthcare worker safety and leadership seemingly disconnected from the universal goal of all healthcare workers—saving people’s lives. Morale injury occurs when hands are tied from giving each and every patient the very best care, he/she deserves. Healthcare workers experience disappointment from doing a great job when saving lives. Hearing negative feedback about inconsequential small details and lack of praise for their great deeds can understandably lead to depression, anxiety and fear about the future. In order to combat negative feelings built up over time, it is important to fight back with positive feelings. This requires active positive thinking and not negative thoughts that can consume you. Throughout the day and night all kinds of thoughts flow through our mind. This cannot be controlled but you can counter negative thoughts by thinking of positive thoughts. There are things to be grateful for everyday in life: 1) life itself; 2) family; 3) purpose; 4) belonging to something greater than yourself; 5) the weather; and 6) all of the boundless opportunities that lay ahead. According to Gautama Buddha (1),

“to enjoy good health, to bring true happiness to one’s family, to bring peace to all, one must first discipline and control one’s own mind. If a man can control his mind, he can find the way to Enlightenment, and all wisdom and virtue will naturally come to him”.

Healthcare workers expend so much of their time and energy helping others, they themselves can end up in a void. Therefore, it is important that healthcare workers set aside a time for rejuvenation. (I personally find exercise as a great way to recover and let my mind clear after a long day in the hospital). Anything that gives you joy will suffice such as listening to music, singing, reading, laughing, playing with your children or having a funny conversation with your friends and family. Even something as simple as smiling at a stranger walking by and saying good morning will not only make you feel better, but it will also make the other person feel better. I say hello to everyone I pass in the hospital hallway and it makes me feel good.

It is always life or death in the intensive care unit (ICU). Working as an Intensivist, I am exposed to extraordinary situations every day. Thus, prior to walking into the ICU, I make it a point to think of something positive and smile because once those doors open up all Hell can break lose. Lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) because of the COVID-19 pandemic and staff isolation has demoralized everyone. I try my best to provide some encouragement in this very high mortality setting. It is important to let the staff know about those patients that survived so they know they are truly making a difference and see there is light at the end of the tunnel (2).

As Friedrich Nietzsche said, “that which does not kill us, makes us stronger” (1). That saying can be true for some but not all. You have to have a particular mindset in order to learn from these terrible situations and rise above like a phoenix from the ashes. “These life experiences have been called ‘crucibles’, severe test or trial that is unplanned, intense and often traumatic” (3). Unfortunately, not all of us can handle such diversity and may develop post-traumatic stress from such life experiences and never recover. That is why it is important to try and look at such profound life altering events as lessons. There is always something to be learned from every situation. Even negative events can be turned into positive experiences that build on a person’s character. For example, immediately after a COVID-19 surge descended on one hospital I was working at, I immediately learned to question the reliability of the estimated oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry (SpO₂) and to intubate as quickly and as safely as I could in order to avoid exposing staff to the SARS-CoV-2 virus as well as preventing cardiac arrest during intubation of those critically ill patients. It was a Sunday, the day before Doctor’s day 2020 in America when all of a sudden, the flood gates opened from the wards and literally five patients within minutes all required immediate intubation because all of them had critical oxygen levels despite maximal high-flow therapy. One after another the patients arrived in succession into the ICU and I went from bed-to-bed intubating all of them. This kicked off many months of treating very high numbers of critically ill patients two to three times the volume I was used to treating. Instead of being overwhelmed by the pressure, I focused on each patient and discovered the best treatment options all the while making sure that I did not add to the depressing morale by complaining about how difficult the working conditions were in order to keep the ICU team motivated. As Winston Churchill repeated during the daily bombardment of England by the Germans in WWII—keep calm and carry on (4).

I had never seen the need for so many arterial blood gas draws (ABG) and neither had the laboratory staff. One evening around midnight I needed around 20 ABGs. Instead of shrinking from the challenge, two laboratory technicians stepped up and brought the machine that processes the ABGs to the ICU and enthusiastically ran all of the tests. This made a huge difference in patients’ outcomes because what I was seeing was a big discrepancy between the continuous patient SpO₂ monitoring and the actual partial pressure oxygen (PaO₂). The true measurement of PaO₂ derived from the ABG helped confirm my suspicion that many patients were actually hypoxic despite having normal readings on the pulse oximeter, allowing me to adjust the ventilator appropriately and preventing death. I praised the laboratory workers in person and let their supervisors know what a terrific job had been done. They never complained despite being understaffed (some of their colleagues quit and never showed up for work that day). The lesson I learned from all of that was that as long as I kept pushing myself, I could save those patients despite the large volume and lack of supplies which gave me a great feeling of accomplishment. I then travelled to other hospitals facing similar situations and was able to continue this way for over a year.

Now I realize that not everyone can handle the pressure that follows a crucible event. I, myself, struggle as well and I have to remind myself to carry on and stay positive, which is not always an easy task. I definitely have not mastered this strategy yet, but I am trying. Marcus Aurelius said “you have the power over your mind – not (on) outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength” (1). Throughout our lives we will encounter hardships but as we get through one and then the other encounter, we realize that we can handle it. Know that the next life event is just another challenge. From the 2^nd century BCE Epicurus reminds us that “a person will never be happy if they are anxious about what they do not have” (1). Use that incredible focus and discipline you summoned from deep within during decades of study to train your mind into thinking positively. “Our life is shaped by our mind; we become what we think. Joy follows a pure thought like a shadow that never leaves,” Gautama Buddha (1). Remain altruistic and continue to take care of those in need and you will live a happy and joyous life.

Evan D. Schmitz, MD

La Jolla, CA USA

References

1. Robledo, IC. 365 Quotes to Live Your Life By. Powerful, Inspiring, & Life-Changing Words of Wisdom to Brighten Up Your Days. Published by I. C. Robledo, 2019.
2. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/521459-there-is-a-light-at-the-end-of-everytunnel#:~:text=Quotes%20%3E%20Quotable%20Quote,%E2%80%9CThere%20is%20a%20light%20at%20the%20end%20of%20every%20tunnel,to%20be%20longer%20than%20others.%E2%80%9D
3. Warren G. Bennis and Robert J. Thomas. Crucibles of Leadership. 2002. Harvard Business Review.
4. https://london.ac.uk/about-us/history-university-london/story-behind-keep-calm-and-carry.

Cite as: Schmitz ED. Combating Morale Injury Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic. Southwest J Pulm Crit Care. 2021;22(5):106-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.13175/swjpcc015-21 PDF

The Best Laid Plans of Mice and Men

When writing a grant proposal, many of us do a power analysis to ensure that we will have a sufficient number or “n” to detect a statistically significant difference between two populations. We estimate the number needed in each group by considering the likely intergroup difference and then add additional subjects depending on the number who will not give informed consent, refuse, die, are lost to follow up, etc. Often the number of nonparticipants is estimated based on previous experience, but sometimes a small study is done first called a feasibility study which tests the assumptions about recruitment. For both clinical trials and epidemiologic studies, a pilot or feasibility study also helps assure that participants will be representative of the relevant population (1). (For examples, will only the most seriously ill participate in a drug trial, or will the most vulnerable workers decline participation in a study. Will some drugs only make a difference in early stage or late stage disease, and having Latinx or Native American participants disproportionately refuse to participate in a workplace study creates biases).

In this monh’s SWJPCC we publish a feasibility study from New Mexico which was hoping to test the hypothesis that thoracic malignancies (TMs) are likely higher in New Mexico because of the relative high proportion of the population with occupational exposures in mining and oil/gas extraction which are known risk factors (2).

The authors conducted a feasibility study of adult lifetime occupational history among TM cases using the population-based New Mexico Tumor Registry (NMTR), from 2017- 2018. Despite identifying 400 eligible cases only 43 were able to complete the study mostly due to early mortality and refusals. This 11% completion rate was insufficient to reach a statistically significant conclusion whether New Mexico has statistically significant more TMs than the National average of 10-14%.

After some discussion we decided to publish the manuscript with this editorial to "educate" the SWJPCC readership about the challenges of population-based mortality studies, the persistent risk of occupational thoracic malignancies, and the concept of population burden. The authors worked just as hard getting these unsatisfying results as if they had a study demonstrating the study was feasible. If only the "successful and positive studies" are published, because planning is necessary and lack of planning often resulting in publication bias. Someone in the future will likely ask a similar question hoping to use similar methodology. However, they will now have numbers that might be more realistic or do interventions to decrease refusals, increase valid addresses or increase the number that could be reached by phone.

Richard A. Robbins, MD ¹

Philip Harber, MD, MPH ²

Allen R. Thomas, MD ³

¹ Phoenix Pulmonary and Critical Care Research and Education Foundation, Gilbert, AZ USA

² Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ USA

³ Happily retired, Scottsdale, AZ USA

References

1. Orsmond GI, Cohn ES. The Distinctive Features of a Feasibility Study: Objectives and Guiding Questions. OTJR (Thorofare N J). 2015 Jul;35(3):169-77. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Pestak CR, Boyce TW, Myers OB, Hopkins LO, Wiggins CL, Wissore BR, Sood A, Cook LS. A Population-Based Feasibility Study of Occupation and Thoracic Malignancies in New Mexico. Southwest J Pulm Crit Care. 2021;22(1):23-35. doi: [CrossRef]

Cite as: Robbins RA, Harber P, Thomas AR. The Best Laid Plans of Mice and Men. Southwest J Pulm Crit Care. 2021;22(1):21-22. doi: https://doi.org/10.13175/swjpcc003-21 PDF

Clinical Care of COVID-19 Patients in a Front-line ICU

Robert A. Raschke MD

Tyler J. Glenn MD

Kim I. Josen MD

HonorHealth Scottsdale Osborn Medical Center

Scottsdale, AZ USA

These are some clinical observations made after over the past 10 months, working in a busy COVID-19 ICU unit in Scottsdale, AZ. The opinions expressed here are those of the private practice authors.

Overview of triage and rounding on large numbers of COVID-19 patients in the ICU service. Our approach to bedside care of our ICU service has required abbreviation for the sake of efficiency in the face of more than a doubling of our census. Our approach to rounding is opinion-based. We’ve been forced to evolve our triage and rounding systems in order to survive.

Our hospital uses the Abbott ID-Now® rapid point-of -are test for screening all COVID-19-asymptomatic patients admitted to our hospital, but due to its low sensitivity in hospitalized patients (1). We do not trust it to rule-out COVID-19 in patients with pneumonia being admitted to the ICU and also order an in-house PCR for such patients prior to, or upon ICU admission. We are cautious about transferring COVID-19 patients out of the ICU on bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) or high-flow nasal cannula since many such patients have deteriorated and bounced-back to the unit within the subsequent week.

We try to see as many of our COVID-19 ICU patients (who are practically all our patients) sequentially, without interruption if possible, leaving our masks and gowns on continuously and moving quickly from room to room, changing only gloves between patients unless a bacterial pathogen that requires contact isolation has been identified. Little/no helpful information can be gleaned by entering the room of patient who is proned in a rotoprone bed. Such patients may only be supined for brief periods, sometimes in the middle of night shift; and discussion with the nurses regarding their physical exam findings during supine positioning is high yield. Auscultation of COVID-19 patients using isolation stethoscopes is seldom of value. Palpation of the neck/trunk for crepitus, neurological examination (especially in patients emerging from heavy sedation and/or supined after prolonged proning), and assessment of fluid status are high yield. We keep track of how many days the patient has received mechanical ventilation, the cumulative fluid balance (which sometimes gets very positive), and signs and lab values possibly related to complications of COVID-19 discussed below. The duration of antibiotics and sedation medications needs constant monitoring to avoid overuse. We do not routinely follow serial INR, ferritin, CRP, or D-dimer, since these do not affect patient management. We sometimes use BNP and procalcitonin to trigger further cardiac or infectious disease evaluations respectively. We do not treat isolated elevated procalcitonin with antibiotics, nor do we treat isolated d-dimer with therapeutic dose anticoagulation.

We have been conservative in our treatment of COVID-19, relying primarily on dexamethasone and usual evidence-based critical care practice. Over the course of the outbreak, our conservative approach has been validated; various hyped but off-label therapies (hydroxychloroquine, antirheumatic therapies, universal therapeutic anticoagulation) have failed to show benefit and possibly caused harm when subjected to evidence-based scrutiny (2,3). Benefits of remdesivir in patients with advanced respiratory failure seem unclear/minimal (4). Most of our patients present to the ICU in the second or third week of illness, already having developed IgG antibodies and therefore unlikely to benefit from convalescent serum or monoclonal antibodies.

Clinical course and management of respiratory failure. Many patients remain awake and able to tolerate spontaneous ventilation with non-invasive ventilation and/or high-flow nasal canula oxygen delivering high FiO2, for as long as two weeks before they either recover or require endotracheal intubation. Before the current outbreak, it was unusual to manage severely hypoxemic patients without intubation and mechanical ventilation. For COVID-19, it seems to be the norm, with intubation delayed until the last possible moment, as it is unclear that mechanical ventilation with its attendant complications (immobility, sedation, invasive support apparatus) offer any definite benefit. Once intubated, many patients seem to transition abruptly to refractory hypoxemia and hypercarbia, which previously would have made them candidates for Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) transfer. In one recent case, we requested ECMO evaluation for a patient prior to intubation, anticipating that he would deteriorate badly immediately thereafter. The consultant requested intubation before ECMO evaluation, and indeed, once intubated, the patient immediately became too unstable for uncannulated transfer. In general, the numbers of patients fulfilling historical criteria for ECMO consideration have greatly overwhelmed ECMO capacity.

We have tried several approaches to invasive mechanical ventilation, but each has drawbacks. Our primary mode of ventilation, pressure-regulated volume control, has sometimes resulted in high plateau and driving pressures as respiratory system compliance worsens. We’ve used pressure control ventilation in some patients to limit driving pressure, but this has led to unrecognized worsening of respiratory acidosis in some. We have managed several episodes of cardiac arrest due to uncontrolled combined respiratory and metabolic acidosis in COVID-19 patients being treated with permissive hypercapnia ventilation who subsequently developed acute renal failure. We are now trying airway pressure-release ventilation (APRV) as an optional approach in which we try to avoid proning and heavily sedating the patient, but aim for Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) of -1 to -2 and allow maintenance of spontaneous respiratory efforts by the patient during “T high”. It is not clear whether any of these approaches results in better clinical outcomes.

Our use of prone positioning has increased dramatically. Self-proning of awake patients receiving non-invasive mechanical ventilation or high-flow nasal canula oxygen has allowed some to survive episodes of severe oxygen desaturation and avoid intubation. We have extensively utilized proning in mechanically ventilated patients with PaO2/FiO2 <150. Several of our patients experienced cardiopulmonary arrest when briefly supined resulting in several fatalities. Consequently, we have learned to placed US-guided internal jugular central venous catheters and chest tubes in patients in proned and semi-proned positions. We have noted that at some point, prone positioning needs to be abandoned if the patient is ever going to recover, even if their PaO2/FiO2 ratio falls upon supine positioning. In such patients, supine positioning allows reduction of heavy sedation and resumption/improvement of spontaneous breathing efforts that may allow ventilator weaning to slowly proceed.

Complications of COVID-19 in the ICU. We have seen more barotrauma than previously described, some occurring during non-invasive ventilation prior to endotracheal intubation (5). Point of care chest ultrasonography has been instrumental in several cases in which anterior pneumothoraces were not clearly apparent on chest radiography, except perhaps as a deep sulcus sign, and also to rapidly rule-out pneumothorax as a cause of acute cardiopulmonary decompensation.

Hypotension requiring intravenous vasopressors is common (6). In many cases, it seems due to sepsis and sedation with propofol and/or dexmedetomidine. We have occasionally seen acute or chronic cardiomyopathy, but not as often as noted early in the pandemic (7). We have repeatedly diagnosed relative adrenal insufficiency later in the hospital course –after dexamethasone has been discontinued. Such patients commonly received etomidate during intubation which could possibly be contributory.

Bacterial co-infections are uncommon at presentation, consistent with published meta-analysis (8), and we do not routinely give antibiotics to all patients with COVID-19 pneumonia up front. Later in the course of mechanical ventilation, many patients experience recurrent fever, leukocytosis, elevated procalcitonin and/or worsening pulmonary status prompting endotracheal secretion and blood cultures and empirical antibiotics. We have commonly isolated a wide variety of potential bacterial pathogens from the respiratory secretions of such patients including methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), gram negative rods, some multi-drug resistant. We recently isolated carbapenem-resistant Enterobacter. It is uncertain whether these represent true cases of secondary pneumonia.

Coagulopathy related to COVID-19 is complex and increased risk of thrombosis and bleeding seem apparent (9). We administer enhanced prophylactic-dose anticoagulation to all our patients (typically 40mg enoxaparin every 12 hours in patients without morbid obesity or renal failure), but do not treat elevated d-dimers with therapeutic anticoagulation in the absence of documented venous thromboembolism (4). A minority of our patients have had documented venous thromboemboli prior to ICU admission and a few have had acute myocardial infarctions and strokes. We try to get CT angiography of the chest and doppler ultrasound of the lower extremities on all patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Bedside ultrasonography demonstrating acute right heart failure has been helpful in a few cases in which pulmonary emboli were suspected but the patient too unstable for CT angio or VQ scan. Three of our patients experienced CNS hemorrhages, two of which were fatal. Gastrointestinal bleeding is not uncommon.

Acute renal failure is common and complicates permissive hypercarbia, sometimes necessitating high dose bicarbonate infusions (6). Circuit thrombosis during dialysis is common, perhaps a manifestation of COVID-19 coagulopathy, and sometime necessitating therapeutic anticoagulation.

End of life issues. It is our impression that the mortality in intubated patients is higher this winter than it was previously in the pandemic. This might be because patients are receiving more aggressive therapy earlier in the course of illness, and often are only intubated after failing a prolonged course of non-invasive mechanical ventilation. Perhaps this selects treatment-unresponsive patients for intubation. Prognostication seems very difficult. We treated an 89-year patient with severe comorbidities who rapidly recovered after a 4-day course of mechanical ventilation and a 28-year-old previously healthy man who died despite receiving veno-venous ECMO. We have not found clinical scoring systems such as

Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) to be helpful in prognosis, since many patients have isolated severe single organ dysfunction at the time of ICU admission, and therefore have similar SOFA scores – mostly comprised of points given for severe respiratory failure. Old-fashioned bedside common sense and family discussion still seem the best approach to determining code status. It is logistically difficult/impossible to safely administer CPR to some patients who are proned, especially those that are morbidly obese. We have told families that we are instituting limited code status (no CPR, no ACLS) in such situations, subsequently discussing resumption of full code status if/when the patient recovers enough to tolerate resumption of supine positioning.

Psychosocial issues. Incredible emotional injury is being experienced by patients’ families. Several of our patients come from families in which two or three primary relatives have already died from COVID-19. We called one patient’s wife to inform her that her husband had narrowly survived a prolonged arrest secondary to pneumothorax, interrupting her during her son’s funeral, who had died from COVID-19 pneumonia the previous week. Eventually, that family suffered the death of three primary relatives from COVID-19 over the course of three weeks.

We have tried to use cellular technology to help mitigate restricted family visitation, but it seems a poor substitute. Our nurses have had some patients make cell phone video messages to their loved ones before intubation – sometimes the last memory their families will ever have of them. We have held our cellphones by the ears of COVID-19 patients as they are dying so that their loved ones can say goodbye. It was heart-wrenching to hear a husband of 42 years sobbing uncontrollably over the phone, telling his dying wife that he loved her, and how much he’s going to miss her as we prepared to remove her endotracheal tube to let her die.

The nurses, respiratory techs and physicians have shown incredible bravery and self-sacrifice and outward morale is good. But all are suffering severe vicarious injuries the full effect of which may not be apparent for years to come. Much of the human connection previously so important to ICU practice has been lost – few of the patients can interact, and the families are generally not allowed to visit. We simply don’t have the time anymore to call them as often as we would like, and it’s unusual to call them with good news. We should plan for a future increase in PTSD and burn-out among healthcare providers.

We are grateful to have received my COVID-19 vaccination, and I was sincerely astounded by the organizational excellence of the vaccination event implemented by HonorHealth here in Phoenix. They did a very good job that will serve our entire vaccine-willing population in the coming months.

References

1. Basu A, Zinger T, Inglima K, Woo KM, Atie O, Yurasits L, See B, Aguero-Rosenfeld ME. Performance of Abbott ID Now COVID-19 Rapid Nucleic Acid Amplification Test Using Nasopharyngeal Swabs Transported in Viral Transport Media and Dry Nasal Swabs in a New York City Academic Institution. J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Jul 23;58(8):e01136-20. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. WHO Solidarity Trial Consortium, Pan H, Peto R, Henao-Restrepo AM, et al. Repurposed Antiviral Drugs for Covid-19 - Interim WHO Solidarity Trial Results. N Engl J Med. 2020 Dec 2:NEJMoa2023184. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Salama C, Han J, Yau L, et al. Tocilizumab in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 Pneumonia. N Engl J Med. 2020 Dec 17. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. American Society of Hematology. COVID-19 Resources: COVID-19 and VTE/Anticoagulation: Frequently asked questions. Version 5.1 (last updated December 24, 2020). Available at: https://www.hematology.org/covid-19/covid-19-and-vte-anticoagulation (accessed 1/3/21).
5. Botta M, Tsonas AM, Pillay J, et al., PRoVENT-COVID Collaborative Group. Ventilation management and clinical outcomes in invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19 (PRoVENT-COVID): a national, multicentre, observational cohort study. Lancet Respir Med. 2020 Oct 23:S2213-2600(20)30459-8. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Cummings MJ, Baldwin MR, Abrams D, et al. Epidemiology, clinical course, and outcomes of critically ill adults with COVID-19 in New York City: a prospective cohort study. Lancet. 2020 Jun 6;395(10239):1763-1770. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Arentz M, Yim E, Klaff L, Lokhandwala S, Riedo FX, Chong M, Lee M. Characteristics and Outcomes of 21 Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19 in Washington State. JAMA. 2020 Apr 28;323(16):1612-1614. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
8. Langford BJ, So M, Raybardhan S, Leung V, Westwood D, MacFadden DR, Soucy JR, Daneman N. Bacterial co-infection and secondary infection in patients with COVID-19: a living rapid review and meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 Dec;26(12):1622-1629. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
9. Helms J, Tacquard C, Severac F, et al., CRICS TRIGGERSEP Group (Clinical Research in Intensive Care and Sepsis Trial Group for Global Evaluation and Research in Sepsis). High risk of thrombosis in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection: a multicenter prospective cohort study. Intensive Care Med. 2020 Jun;46(6):1089-1098. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
10. Hayek SS, Brenner SK, Azam TU, et al. In-hospital cardiac arrest in critically ill patients with covid-19: multicenter cohort study. BMJ. 2020 Sep 30;371:m3513. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Cite as: Raschke RA, Glenn TJ, Josen KI. Clinical Care of COVID-19 Patients in a Front-line ICU. Southwest J Pulm Crit Care. 2021;22(1):11-15. doi: https://doi.org/10.13175/swjpcc070-20 PDF

Why My Experience as a Patient Led Me to Join Osler’s Alliance

There are a number of books and articles written by doctors that relate their own experience as patients. Count this as another although I promise it will not be nearly as entertaining as “The House of God”. Over a month ago I became short of breath and a chest x-ray revealed left lower lobe consolidation. Despite lack of fever, it seemed that an infectious process was most likely, and when multiple tests for COVID-19 were negative, it was felt by my pulmonary physician to be most likely coccidioidomycosis despite a negative cocci serology. After beginning on empirical therapy with fluconazole for nearly a month, I am feeling better.

Most of us know that there is considerable laboratory to laboratory variation in serologic tests for Valley Fever (1). However, when my initial cocci serology was negative, efforts to send it a good reference lab such as Pappagianis’ Lab at UC Davis became nearly impossible. After making an appointment at Sonora Quest and waiting a week for an appointment to get my blood drawn, it was apparently sent to Davis, but when payment was not assured, it was not run. I would have been paid for it out of pocket but there seemed no way to communicate this.

Similarly, it took 3 visits to a commercial outpatient radiology practice, Simon Med, to get a routine chest x-ray. I can understand the need for appointments for CT scans. However, routine x-rays were so backed up that I waited several hours to get a chest x-ray performed although I did get an electronic copy. Fortunately, I am able to read my own chest x-ray and did not need to wait for a radiologist’s report which arrived on a Tuesday after the chest x-ray was taken late on a Friday.

Honestly, I had no idea that our patients were receiving such poor care. Delays of this magnitude go beyond what I view as acceptable. Overall, I think my doctors are great but I have concerns about an overall decline in patient care. It should not take a week to get routine labs drawn. Sick people should not be making multiple trips to get a simple chest x-ray. This may be another symptom of the hyperfinancializaton of medicine where patient care is sacrificed for profit. The hospital labs and x-ray departments of years ago were run by physicians and mostly concerned with patient care and not losing money. Today with businessmen controlling nearly all aspects of healthcare patient care is less important than maximizing profits.

I worry that our businessmen/managers are buying medical practices and directly supervising healthcare professionals. Healthcare is a business to them, no different than selling hamburgers at McDonalds. Their goals of increasing income and reducing expenses to maximize profits while hiding behind the façade of a non-profit organization is quite apparent. However, what is equally clear is that there is a lack of medical knowledge in these medical managers and decisions can be “penny wise but dollar foolish”. Look at the decision to not pay for a more reliable cocci serology which costs $80. They have spent more than this on fluconazole. Bad medicine is usually costly.  

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought to light many of the inadequacies of business interests dominating medicine (2). Hospitals are overflowing and inadequate personnel with inadequate personal protective equipment are available to care for them. Those remaining providers are expected to just “pick up the slack”.

Although I have long lamented (some say whined) about the businessmen’s mismanagement of medicine, what could we do? Business interests seemed to control the hospitals, the insurance companies, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and the licensing boards. We were being squeezed and trainees just beginning practice were in no position either financially or professionally to confront business interests which could end their career.

I appear to not be the only one who feels way. Last year, Eric Topol MD, founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute and editor-in-chief of Medscape, wrote a piece published in The New Yorker, "Why Doctors Should Organize” (3). In it, he explained his view that the nation's nearly 900,000 practicing doctors needed to organize to bring back the doctor-patient relationship that existed before the business part of medicine took over its soul. Physician organizations such as the American Medical Association (AMA) represents only about 17% of US physicians, and have done little for medicine as a profession. The next largest, the American College of Physicians, represents internal-medicine specialists. Most of the smaller societies (e.g., ATS, American College of Chest Physicians) represent a subspecialty and have correspondingly fewer members each. The AMA once represented three-fourths of American doctors; the growth of subspecialty societies may have contributed to its diminishment. In any case, there is no single organization that unifies all doctors. The profession is balkanized into different specialties each hostilely eyeing the other specialty organizations.

Therefore, Topol has led the formation of Osler's Alliance (now Medicine Forward) (4). This organization, named for William Osler, hopes to draw together the nation's doctors, who come from different backgrounds, specialties, and political leanings but agree that the way they interact with patients is not what they envisioned when they decided to devote their lives to medicine.

"Such an organization wouldn't be a trade guild protecting the interests of doctors," Topol wrote. "It would be a doctors' organization devoted to patients (5)."Another organizer of Osler's Alliance, Esther Choo, MD, MPH, an emergency physician and professor at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, described physicians' widespread daily feeling that "this can't be the way it's supposed to be," but also a lack of empowerment to make changes (5). That's where the numbers come in, she said. A massive group of physicians standing up against practices could force change.

The first step, Choo said, is to break down the fundamental mission into "bite-sized advocacy (5)." That might entail advocating for answers to why increased documentation demands are necessary and how, specifically, they help the patient rather than dutifully complying with directives for more charting.

The leaders emphasize that membership in the group is not about money, which is why it's only $5 a year. Signing up builds support and allows access to chat streams and information in a broad network. "When you start seeing advertisements for health systems that say, 'We give the gift of time to patients and clinicians,' " answered Topol, "then we'll know we're turning the right corner (5)."

If you are a physician or other provider, you might consider joining Osler’s Alliance. What have you and your patients got to lose? Staying the present course would seem to lead to nowhere.

Richard A. Robbins, MD

Editor, SWJPCC

References

1. Galgiani JN, Knox K, Rundbaken C, Siever J. Common mistakes in managing pulmonary coccidioidomycosis. Southwest J Pulm Crit Care. 2015;10(5):238-49. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13175/swjpcc054-15
2. Dorsett M. Point of no return: COVID-19 and the U.S. healthcare system: An emergency physician's perspective. Sci Adv. 2020 Jun 26;6(26):eabc5354. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Topol E. Why Doctors Should Organize. The New Yorker. August 5, 2019. Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/annals-of-inquiry/why-doctors-should-organize (accessed 11/30/20).
4. Osler’s Alliance website. Available at: https://oslersalliance.mn.co/about (accessed 11-30-20).
5. Frellick M. Medical Leaders Launch Grassroots Doctors' Alliance. Medscape. November 25, 2020. Available at https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/941623 (accessed 12/30/20).

Cite as: Robbins RA. Why My Experience as a Patient Led Me to Join Osler’s Alliance. Southwest J Pulm Crit Care. 2020;21(6):138-40. doi: https://doi.org/10.13175/swjpcc066-20 PDF