Critical care is a complicated, high risk, resource-dependent environment.
Developing countries face common barriers to delivering quality emergent care
due to the lack of supplies, coordination, infrastructure, technology, and human
resources (e.g., competency-based education, multi-disciplinary staff and access
to the most recent literature).( More importantly, the capacity to provide care for
critically illpatients in intensive care units (ICUs) of low-income countries
is unknown. Most developing countries lack published data on ICU
capacity.(
Importantly, a previous observational study aimed to assess the worldwide burden
of critical illness, but only an insignificant sample (2 of 730 centers) of ICUs
in low-income countries was taken into account.(Poor access to material resources and skilled personal pose a significant barrier
to care improvement. Indeed, severity-of-illness-adjusted mortality is inversely
related to gross national income.( Nevertheless, a recent survey performed by the CERTAIN
(Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and INjury;
www.icertain.org) Investigators network in 15 ICUs from 11 low-
and middle-income countries showed that 77% of ICUs singled out lack of
protocols and trained staff, which are the most important barriers to improving
the care and outcomes of critically illpatients as opposed to cost-dependent
variables, such as equipment or supplies.( Basic resources, such as standardized supportive care
and trained personnel have been cited as instrumental in changing the outcomes
for catastrophic/challenging diseases, such as the Ebola virus disease in
resource-limited settings.(
Outcome research
The first step in solving the problem is to measure the problem, i.e., collect
data for processes of care and patient outcome measures. Out of the various
critical care syndromes, sepsis heavily afflicts morbidity and mortality in
ICUs( regardless of the resources
at hand. Thus, focused efforts to understand sepsis outcomes and interventional
studies are essential in unlocking the keys to the success of critical care in
developing countries. Developing countries in Asia and Africa report mortalities
as high as 45% for sepsis.( The common denominators for
such high mortality rates are low adherence to protocols( and the lack of
adaptive-innovative quality improvement strategies.(Nevertheless, low- to non-cost interventions, such as early sepsis management
provided by a dedicated study medical officer was shown to substantially reduce
the 30-day mortality rate for sepsispatients.( Additionally, in a national study in Brazil,
implementation of a multifaceted sepsis education program increased compliance
with the entire sepsis bundle by four-fold (from 13% to 62%), resulting in
patients being identified progressively earlier and at a lower illness severity,
and a decrease in hospital mortality and costs.(
Checklists in critical care
Intensive care units heavily rely on continuous electronic monitoring, frequent
blood tests and imaging modalities. This surplus of complex information may
overwhelm clinicians and impair decision-making. As previously described,
establishing a systematic approach improves outcomes without consuming means. A
structured approach to the management of sepsis or ventilatory failure (i.e.,
care bundles) has become nearly universal in the ICUs of high-income
countries.The use of checklists is an effective strategy that ensures timely error-free
compliance with care bundles. Checklists have emerged from the nuclear and
aviation industry into high-risk hospital settings, such as trauma resuscitation
and surgical suits. In the ICU, checklists have improved the processes of care,
patient safety and morbidity.( However, despite clear benefits and wide appeal, only 38%
of ICUs in low-middle income countries report the use of some checklists during
daily rounds upon admission. Only 15% of ICUs have reported the use of any type
of checklists for acute resuscitation.( When used in trauma resuscitation in a randomized,
controlled interventional study, the computer-assisted decision support
(checklist) decreased the number of errors and improved protocol
compliance.(The CERTAIN initiative is a multidisciplinary international quality improvement
effort, which uses cloud-based electronic checklist and decision support tools
to facilitate the best practices during admission/resuscitation and daily rounds
of critically illpatients. CERTAIN methodologies and algorithms are applicable
to a wide variety of pre-hospital, austere setting, and transport scenarios.
Current and future development of CERTAIN methodologies and algorithms are
important in the care of patients with life-threatening physiological conditions
who manifest ongoing surveillance and resuscitation requirements.
Remote education
Importantly, mere physical space does not make an ICU education and retaining
skills are crucial to effectively care for critically illpatients. Nearly
one-third of low-middle income countries are not staffed by specialists in
critical care, and only approximately half of these countries had access to
medical journals (54%) and continuing health education (61%).( This number is even lower, in
some parts of the world. More importantly, access to ICU care is limited. Most
critically illpatients are treated outside of the ICU during the early, golden
hours of critical illness when error-free care is the most important but is the
least likely to occur. To overcome this barrier, there is a need for low cost
and easily available training resources.In 2011, over 135 web-based education resources for critical care were identified,
including tutorials, self-directed learning modules, interactive case studies,
webcasts, podcasts, and video-enhanced programs.( Even practice-based skills, such as
procedural ultrasound can be acquired effectively via remote
education.( Web-based education can
convey the same results as classroom instruction with greater time
flexibility,(
and, in some cases, may even lead to greater proficiency.(Although there are a wide variety of resources, critical care remote education is
still in its infancy. Education and research needs to be built around the needs
of developing countries. These countries have limited access to resources, and
thus, there is a need to design innovative approaches to bypass their
constricted states and reach a wider audience. Currently, the CERTAIN group
investigators are testing the delivery best-care practice on critical care
patients via a novel, web-based, simple, electronic decision support tool with
remote education, use of checklists and two-way video remote simulation
assessment.(
Advances in telemedicine (e-ICU) are likely to complement remote education and
further enhance knowledge delivery to the patient bedside anywhere.(
Conclusion
Critical care clinicians face a myriad of challenges while delivering quality
care. Research endeavors in developing countries require strategic, low-cost
solutions. The use of checklists, bundles and structured processes have been
instrumental in decreasing the number of errors of omission and complications in
critically illpatients (Table 1).
Table 1
Checklist and remote education for outcome improvement
How checklists and remote education
improve outcomes for critically ill patients in developing
countries
•
Increase adherence to protocols
•
Decrease errors of omission
•
Standardize care despite resource constrictions
•
Enhance knowledge base
•
Streamline the workflow
•
Improve outcome and decrease cost
Checklist and remote education for outcome improvementMulti-national quality improvement projects should focus on high-risk conditions
for which simple, timely, error-free interventions can make the most difference
(e.g., early recognition of sepsis, shock and respiratory failure; adequate
resuscitation; appropriate sedation and ventilation policies, and, when
appropriate, palliative care). Furthermore, there is a need for translating
research outcomes into sustainable education platforms. The CERTAIN initiative,
as a multidisciplinary international effort, has the potential to create a model
for future investigations for 'how to' implement novel knowledge translation
interventions in resource-poor settings for better care and lower cost.
Authors: Elke Platz; Katja Goldflam; Maria Mennicke; Emilio Parisini; Michael Christ; Christian Hohenstein Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2010-06-11 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Ruth Kleinpell; E Wesley Ely; Ged Williams; Antonios Liolios; Nicholas Ward; Samuel A Tisherman Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Curtis H Weiss; Farzad Moazed; Colleen A McEvoy; Benjamin D Singer; Igal Szleifer; Luís A N Amaral; Mary Kwasny; Charles M Watts; Stephen D Persell; David W Baker; Jacob I Sznajder; Richard G Wunderink Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2011-05-26 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Mark Fitzgerald; Peter Cameron; Colin Mackenzie; Nathan Farrow; Pamela Scicluna; Robert Gocentas; Adam Bystrzycki; Geraldine Lee; Gerard O'Reilly; Nick Andrianopoulos; Linas Dziukas; D Jamie Cooper; Andrew Silvers; Alfredo Mori; Angela Murray; Susan Smith; Yan Xiao; Dion Stub; Frank T McDermott; Jeffrey V Rosenfeld Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2011-02
Authors: Shevin T Jacob; Patrick Banura; Jared M Baeten; Christopher C Moore; David Meya; Lydia Nakiyingi; Rebecca Burke; Cheryl Lynn Horton; Boaz Iga; Anna Wald; Steven J Reynolds; Harriet Mayanja-Kizza; W Michael Scheld Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Jason Phua; Younsuck Koh; Bin Du; Yao-Qing Tang; Jigeeshu V Divatia; Cheng Cheng Tan; Charles D Gomersall; Mohammad Omar Faruq; Babu Raja Shrestha; Nguyen Gia Binh; Yaseen M Arabi; Nawal Salahuddin; Bambang Wahyuprajitno; Mei-Lien Tu; Ahmad Yazid Haji Abd Wahab; Akmal A Hameed; Masaji Nishimura; Mark Procyshyn; Yiong Huak Chan Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-06-13