Authors: Jessica J. Kirby, DO, FACEP; Meredith Brim, MD; Armando Moreno, DO, MPH; Daniel Phillips, MD; Alejandra Powers, MHA; James P. d’Etienne, MD, MBA, FACEP; Chukwuagozie Iloma, DO, MHA/INF; Amy Khong, MD; Michael Magee, Jr, DO; Naomi Alanis, MS, MBA; and Jared Willis, MD; John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, Texas
During pandemics, many patients infected or potentially infected with highly contagious respiratory viruses like COVID-19 seek care in the emergency department, increasing demand for hospital services.1 Emergency department crowding is a serious problem during disaster management when acute, unscheduled care may be in high demand and processes must be adapted for safety.
During the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, demand in already overcrowded emergency departments increased by 18% in the United States.2 That pandemic exemplified the need for emergency departments to have disaster management plans in place to efficiently manage surging volumes while mitigating potential harm to patients, visitors, and staff. Staging areas — such as tents, split-flow models, and split-cohort models — are key to minimizing the spread of infection and managing increased patient volumes safely and efficiently.
For more information, see “Creating a COVID-19 Surge Clinic to Offload the Emergency Department.”
Emergency physicians are accustomed to modifying processes as the need arises. A common management strategy to increase efficiency as patient volumes increase is the split-flow model of care. Split-flow models decrease the patient variability within different areas of the emergency department, which shortens door-to-clinician and door-to-disposition times.3
A split-flow emergency department model triages patients into the categories “sick” and “less sick.” Initial decisions for categorization are often based on a nurse-assigned emergency severity index (ESI) score at the first point of entry or triage (the staff assigned to triage varies in different health systems). ESI is a widely used, five-level triage system based on patient acuity and anticipated resource utilization.1 The five-level system ranges from level 1, which represents the most life-threatening conditions, to level 5, which represents conditions that require no resources. Studies in nonpandemic situations have shown that a split-flow model reduces emergency department door-to-physician times and decreases emergency department length-of-stay (LOS).2-5 Both metrics are essential in high resource utilization situations like infectious disease pandemics.
Emergency departments across the country must put plans in place to identify and sort patients at the front-end of emergency care, before entry. The following recommendations can be adapted to suit the resources at individual sites. Rural emergency departments will face different challenges from referral centers or urban academic centers.6
Some process modifications to consider in an infectious disease pandemic include:
Any change to front-end processes should include a quality monitoring system.
Patients should be screened and triaged appropriately at the first point of contact with the health care system.9 The screening process should aim for high sensitivity to correctly identify as many high-risk patients as possible. Front-end triage should categorize patients into three categories ranging from a low to a moderate to a high likelihood of being infected. A front-end triage of patients using COVID-19 as an example is shown below:
COVID-19 is not suspected
COVID-19 is considered — likely mild illness
COVID-19 is suspected — high risk
For more information, see ACEP’s “COVID-19 ED Management Tool Now Available, Updated.”
Back-end processes take place after entering the main emergency department. A modified emergency department process includes separating patients based on suspicion of infectious status and the level of care needed.
Ideally, the emergency department should be separated into the following three areas with physical barriers between them, if possible, and easily visualized designations and signage:
Although the separation of these areas works well in emergency departments with multiple physician and APP shifts, it can be modified so that nurses and patients are separated into different sections, while physicians cover all areas. Physical barriers that require staff to navigate more between areas can slow the speed of care. Donning and doffing stations may need to be placed at appropriate entrances and exits for each area.
By modifying front-end processes and implementing split-flow processes based on both patient acuity and the level of suspected infection, patients are cohorted into areas that are clean, have moderate suspicion, and are contaminated, as previously described. This process allows emergency departments to minimize the volume of patients and clinicians in triage (or tents) and to isolate patients with respiratory symptoms away from others. Split cohorting can be extrapolated to other settings, such as physician clinics, hospital wards, and even residential care facilities.
Using tents to screen patients and perform initial assessments is a valuable tool when triaging and separating COVID-19–suspected patients. Tents erected external to but near the emergency department reduce the volume of patients seen in the emergency department and decrease the potential exposure of non–COVID-19 patients and staff to infected patients. If nurse-only triage is done in the tent, the protocols performed should be designed for high sensitivity to rule in COVID-19–suspected patients.
Tent use during the H1N1 pandemic decreased elopement rates (from 12.9% to 1.8%) and door-to-disposition time (from 282 to 152 minutes).12 During peak COVID-19 times, tent treatment areas decreased disposition times from 155 to 45 minutes.13,14
On arrival to the tent, patients should receive an initial screening. Patients who are too ill for tent triage or have COVID-19 symptoms should be taken to the higher-acuity, contaminated area and be cohorted for respiratory isolation. Patients who are well enough to be evaluated in the tent can be seen by a clinician on-site or via telehealth. Some patients can be safely discharged to receive “hospital-at-home” care (ie, supplemental oxygen, pulse oximeter, sphygmomanometer) and daily telemedicine visits or outpatient care. Patients discharged with hospital-at-home care should be educated on emergency department return precautions and how to use their equipment (including telemedicine calls). They should also have the ability to connect with EMS and should have scheduled follow-up care.
Patients should be given standard respiratory infection precautions (ie, surgical mask, appropriate spacing between patients, physical barriers for respiratory particles, negative-pressure or HEPA-filtered air circulation, etc). Staff safety includes PPE and, for those working in high-stress areas, full positive-pressure personnel suits and regular staff rotation to reduce fatigue and stress. An appropriate goal is to move patients through the tent and have a final disposition decision (home or further evaluation in the emergency department) within 10 to 15 minutes of arrival.12
The use of Alternate Care Sites (ACSs) can be an important aspect of surge planning. ACSs are key to off-loading the impact of a patient volume that outweighs a health system’s capacity and capabilities.15 The US government developed resources on ACSs to help state, local, tribal, and territorial entities address potential shortages in medical facilities during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. These resources can be used for other federal agencies, states, or local jurisdictions to establish a similar capability.
Additional crisis standards of care for EMS documents, including sample state protocols, can be found on the EMS.gov COVID-19 resources website.
COVID-19Surge is a spreadsheet-based tool that hospital administrators and public health officials used to estimate the surge in demand for hospital-based services during the COVID-19 pandemic. The tool produced estimates of the number of COVID-19 patients that needed to be hospitalized, the number that required ICU care, and the number that required ventilator support. The user could then compare those estimates with a hospital’s capacity, using either existing capacity or estimates of expanded capacity.
Additional Information can be found in “Allocation of Scarce Resources in a Pandemic: A Systematic Review of U.S. State Crisis Standards of Care Documents.”
When planning a surge response, COVID-19 projection data can assist with allocating resources, including staff, supplies, and space.16 Potential supply shortages can be identified early by keeping an inventory of equipment and referencing COVID-19 surge projection data. To mitigate health care staffing shortages, at a minimum, health care facilities should:
Additionally, protecting staff from exposure to COVID-19 can mitigate health care staffing shortages.
Additional information, including the CDC’s contingency and crisis capacity strategies, can be found in “Strategies to Mitigate Healthcare Personnel Staffing Shortages.”
Some strategies for mitigating staffing shortages include:
Disclaimer: The following resource has not been published or reviewed by ACEP and is meant to serve as an example for clinicians to use to help develop their own tools.
Although much has been written about crisis standards of care (CSC), the triggers that give a hospital a CSC status remain unclear. Teams from the University of Maryland (UMS) and Johns Hopkins Medicine (JHM) have developed interim guidance to allow some standardization for a CSC status across institutions. This guidance is based on the criteria that several hospitals in Maryland used to notify the state’s governor and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that they needed a CSC status.
This section is designed to address the challenges that hospitals may face, which, in turn, will define the standard of care applicable under challenging circumstances. Standards of care are determined by the circumstances under which health care staff are working and are defined by what is reasonable under the same or similar circumstances. What is reasonable operationally for a hospital without taxed resources is different from what is reasonable for a hospital facing significant resource challenges. Under conventional conditions, hospitals are not facing resource or other challenges and can provide care that is considered customary and usual. When a hospital is confronted with resource challenges but can reasonably adapt to those challenges, the care delivered may be different but is still functionally similar to conventional care (ie, contingency conditions). Crisis conditions exist when challenges to resources place such a burden on hospitals that they cannot adequately adapt and must modify their practice standards to provide care. The literature often refers to these modified practices as CSC.
As the COVID-19 pandemic affected Maryland, hospitals across the state acted urgently to build bed, equipment, and skilled caregiver capacity. However, as the pandemic ensued, Maryland faced more challenges with maintaining critical resources for hospitalized patients and had to consider implementing a CSC. Based on their experience, these Maryland hospitals were able to outline the indicators, triggers, and process for determining when a CSC should be implemented.
Indicator and trigger guidelines
Hospitals that implement CSC should have exhausted all efforts to resolve their resource deficiencies. Resolution efforts include transferring patients to other hospitals and recruiting or redeploying staff, equipment, or supplies from within a hospital system, from affiliated hospitals, or from hospitals throughout the state or region. Before implementing a CSC, hospitals should have reached their highest surge capacity, and hospitals within larger health systems should have leveraged all available system resources.
At least daily, hospitals should track potential CSC indicators involved in caring for patients. These indicators generally fall into three categories: census, staffing, and material resource availability. By tracking the data for these indicators, hospitals can determine when their demands exceed their resources and then consider implementing a CSC.
There are specific metrics to be monitored for triggering a CSC status. A hospital must demonstrate and document that it has at least three of the triggers listed below. Some of these metrics can trigger CSC implementation independently or in combination with other metrics. One of the triggers must include either 1, 2, or 3.
Process for implementing a CSC
CSC status should be implemented ethically and transparently. Based on specific pre-identified trigger thresholds, the hospital CEO, in consultation with the hospital incident command (HIC), has the authority to decide that the hospital needs to consider implementing a CSC and which resources warrant the implementation. That decision should be immediately communicated to the health system or hospital unified command (HUC) for final approval prior to implementation. The date and time that CSC begins and ends should be documented within the HIC structure and the HUC. In addition, the metrics and data to support an ongoing CSC should be reviewed daily.
Once the hospital has submitted the data that support its plan for CSC implementation, hospital leadership should work with regulatory and compliance units to ensure that state and federal notification requirements are met. If the state governor has not declared a state of emergency, any plans for CSC must be submitted to the state’s secretary of health prior to implementation — once the submission is made, approval from the secretary of state prior to implementation is unnecessary. However, the submission will need to be supported by documented data that reflect the triggering metrics of the CSC.
Certain administrative or routine tasks can also be modified when a CSC status is designated to a hospital. Such activities may include, but are not limited to:
This process should also be communicated to the HUC and documented within the HIC structure. Communications should then be shared with hospital leaders, staff, frontline workers, and the community, as approved by the HUC.
Allocation of scarce resources
The allocation of scarce resources (ASR) may be part of a CSC implementation but is implemented in accordance with separately developed ASR algorithms and frameworks, depending on the specific scarce resource identified (eg, ventilators, medication).
Termination of a CSC
In general, a CSC status is intended to be used for an extended period, as opposed to hours or one shift. This concept should be kept in mind as hospitals put their processes in place for triggering and rescinding a CSC status. For instance, a CSC status may be triggered on day 1 if certain equipment is unavailable and then resolved on day 2 once that equipment’s supply is restored. However, it may not be beneficial to rescind the CSC on day 2 unless the metrics demonstrate no risk of equipment scarcity for the next several days. Monitoring of staffing metrics for the near future should especially be considered before rescinding a CSC status based on staffing because staffing is particularly fluid.
The hospital is responsible for monitoring the criteria and rescinding their CSC status once it is no longer applicable. The hospital CEO, in consultation with the HIC and HUC, should immediately communicate any CSC rescission within the HIC structure and should document its date and time.
Authors: Christopher S. Amato; James (Jim) Homme; Marianne Gausche-Hill; Dale Woolridge; Paul Ishimine; Mike Gerardi; and the ACEP Pediatric Emergency Medicine Committee
ACEP recognizes that the training (in medical school and the reciprocal training in fellowship) of American Board of Pediatrics (ABP)–based Pediatric Emergency Medicine (PEM) physicians may allow these individuals to safely care for certain patients with common disease patterns that extend beyond traditionally assigned age limits.
ACEP supported redeployment and utilization of ABP-boarded or ABP-eligible PEM physicians to meet patients’ increased demand for care during the COVID-19 pandemic. In a variety of hospital settings during the pandemic, pediatric physicians provided care above the typical age limits set for pediatrics and were instrumental in helping with the surge of patients who needed acute and prolonged care. ACEP appreciates the preparation and efforts implemented by pediatric and PEM clinicians in pediatric emergency departments and hospitals to meet surges in demand for care. These clinicians are also an important resource during mass-casualty events or other health emergencies that may overwhelm a hospital system.