COVID-19 critical care triage across Canada: a narrative synthesis and ethical analysis of early provincial triage protocols.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-08 DOI:10.1007/s12630-024-02744-y
Sarah K Andersen, Nathan Gamble, Oleksa Rewa
{"title":"COVID-19 critical care triage across Canada: a narrative synthesis and ethical analysis of early provincial triage protocols.","authors":"Sarah K Andersen, Nathan Gamble, Oleksa Rewa","doi":"10.1007/s12630-024-02744-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic created conditions of scarcity that led many provinces within Canada to develop triage protocols for critical care resources. In this study, we sought to undertake a narrative synthesis and ethical analysis of early provincial pandemic triage protocols.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected provincial triage protocols through personal correspondence with academic and political stakeholders between June and August 2020. Protocol data were extracted independently by two researchers and compared for accuracy and agreement. We separated data into three categories for comparative content analysis: protocol development, ethical framework, and protocol content. Our ethical analysis was informed by a procedural justice framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We obtained a total of eight provincial triage protocols. Protocols were similar in content, although age, physiologic scores, and functional status were variably incorporated. Most protocols were developed through a multidisciplinary, expert-driven, consensus process, and many were informed by influenza pandemic guidelines previously developed in Ontario. All protocols employed tiered morality-focused exclusion criteria to determine scarce resource allocation at the level of regional health care systems. None included a public engagement phase, although targeted consultation with public advocacy groups and relevant stakeholders was undertaken in select provinces. Most protocols were not publicly available in 2020.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Early provincial COVID-19 triage protocols were developed by dedicated expert committees under challenging circumstances. Nonetheless, few were publicly available, and public consultation was limited. No protocols were ever implemented, including during periods of extreme critical care surge. A national approach to pandemic triage that incorporates additional aspects of procedural justice should be considered in preparation for future pandemics.</p>","PeriodicalId":56145,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","volume":" ","pages":"1126-1136"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11269410/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-024-02744-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic created conditions of scarcity that led many provinces within Canada to develop triage protocols for critical care resources. In this study, we sought to undertake a narrative synthesis and ethical analysis of early provincial pandemic triage protocols.

Methods: We collected provincial triage protocols through personal correspondence with academic and political stakeholders between June and August 2020. Protocol data were extracted independently by two researchers and compared for accuracy and agreement. We separated data into three categories for comparative content analysis: protocol development, ethical framework, and protocol content. Our ethical analysis was informed by a procedural justice framework.

Results: We obtained a total of eight provincial triage protocols. Protocols were similar in content, although age, physiologic scores, and functional status were variably incorporated. Most protocols were developed through a multidisciplinary, expert-driven, consensus process, and many were informed by influenza pandemic guidelines previously developed in Ontario. All protocols employed tiered morality-focused exclusion criteria to determine scarce resource allocation at the level of regional health care systems. None included a public engagement phase, although targeted consultation with public advocacy groups and relevant stakeholders was undertaken in select provinces. Most protocols were not publicly available in 2020.

Conclusions: Early provincial COVID-19 triage protocols were developed by dedicated expert committees under challenging circumstances. Nonetheless, few were publicly available, and public consultation was limited. No protocols were ever implemented, including during periods of extreme critical care surge. A national approach to pandemic triage that incorporates additional aspects of procedural justice should be considered in preparation for future pandemics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19 加拿大各地重症监护分流:早期省级分流协议的叙事综述和伦理分析。
目的:COVID-19 大流行造成了资源匮乏,导致加拿大许多省份制定了重症监护资源分流协议。在这项研究中,我们试图对早期的省级大流行病分流协议进行叙事综述和伦理分析:我们在 2020 年 6 月至 8 月期间通过与学术界和政界相关人士的个人通信收集了各省的分流协议。协议数据由两名研究人员独立提取,并比较其准确性和一致性。我们将数据分为三类进行比较内容分析:协议制定、伦理框架和协议内容。我们的伦理分析参考了程序正义框架:我们共获得了 8 份省级分诊协议。尽管在协议中加入了年龄、生理评分和功能状态等内容,但协议内容大同小异。大多数规程都是通过多学科、专家驱动、协商一致的过程制定的,其中许多规程都参考了安大略省之前制定的流感大流行指南。所有方案都采用了以道德为重点的分级排除标准,以确定地区医疗保健系统的稀缺资源分配。尽管在部分省份与公共倡导团体和相关利益方进行了有针对性的磋商,但没有一个省份包括公众参与阶段。大多数方案在 2020 年尚未公开:结论:早期的省级 COVID-19 分流方案是由专门的专家委员会在充满挑战的情况下制定的。然而,公开发布的协议很少,公众咨询也很有限。在危重症患者激增等情况下,从未实施过任何规程。在为未来的大流行病做准备时,应考虑采用一种包含更多程序正义内容的全国性大流行病分流方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
161
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Anesthesia (the Journal) is owned by the Canadian Anesthesiologists’ Society and is published by Springer Science + Business Media, LLM (New York). From the first year of publication in 1954, the international exposure of the Journal has broadened considerably, with articles now received from over 50 countries. The Journal is published monthly, and has an impact Factor (mean journal citation frequency) of 2.127 (in 2012). Article types consist of invited editorials, reports of original investigations (clinical and basic sciences articles), case reports/case series, review articles, systematic reviews, accredited continuing professional development (CPD) modules, and Letters to the Editor. The editorial content, according to the mission statement, spans the fields of anesthesia, acute and chronic pain, perioperative medicine and critical care. In addition, the Journal publishes practice guidelines and standards articles relevant to clinicians. Articles are published either in English or in French, according to the language of submission.
期刊最新文献
Methods for determining optimal positive end-expiratory pressure in patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation: a scoping review. Dexmedetomidine versus propofol for postoperative recovery after cardiac surgery: a historical cohort study. Important features of hospitals, intensive care unit waiting rooms, and patient care rooms: perspectives of intensive care unit visitors. Squats, spinach, and soul: considering disparities in prehabilitation medicine before programmatic implementation. The implementation of preoperative optimization in British Columbia: a quality improvement initiative.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1