| Literature DB >> 33843005 |
Eugene Furman1, Alex Cressman2, Saeha Shin3, Alexey Kuznetsov4, Fahad Razak5, Amol Verma5, Adam Diamant6.
Abstract
Demand for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) such as surgical masks, gloves, and gowns has increased significantly since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. In hospital settings, both medical staff and patients are required to wear PPE. As these facilities resume regular operations, staff will be required to wear PPE at all times while additional PPE will be mandated during medical procedures. This will put increased pressure on hospitals which have had problems predicting PPE usage and sourcing its supply. To meet this challenge, we propose an approach to predict demand for PPE. Specifically, we model the admission of patients to a medical department using multiple independent [Formula: see text] queues. Each queue represents a class of patients with similar treatment plans and hospital length-of-stay. By estimating the total workload of each class, we derive closed-form estimates for the expected amount of PPE required over a specified time horizon using current PPE guidelines. We apply our approach to a data set of 22,039 patients admitted to the general internal medicine department at St. Michael's hospital in Toronto, Canada from April 2010 to November 2019. We find that gloves and surgical masks represent approximately 90% of predicted PPE usage. We also find that while demand for gloves is driven entirely by patient-practitioner interactions, 86% of the predicted demand for surgical masks can be attributed to the requirement that medical practitioners will need to wear them when not interacting with patients.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Health Care; Operations research; Personal Protective Equipment; Queueing Systems
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33843005 PMCID: PMC8038877 DOI: 10.1007/s10729-021-09561-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Health Care Manag Sci ISSN: 1386-9620
Summary of the notation
| Class- | |
| Random variable corresponding to the hospital length-of-stay of a class- | |
| Desired quantile value chosen for the length-of-stay distribution of a class- | |
| Cumulative distribution function for the length of stay of class- | |
| Stochastic process counting the number of class- | |
| Stochastic process counting the number of class- | |
| Total stochastic demand for type | |
| Total stochastic demand for type | |
| Total stochastic demand for type | |
Average PPE usage per patient-practitioner interaction
| Interaction Types, | Gowns, | Gloves, | Surgical Masks, | N95 Masks, | Shields, | Bouffants, | Boot Covers, |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vital signs measurement | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Medication administration | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lab Test Collection | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| X-ray | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| CT | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MRI | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ultrasound | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nuclear Medicine | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Interventional Radiology | 3.5 | 3.5 | 0 | 3.5 | 0 | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| Transthoracic Echocardiography (TTE) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Transesophageal Echocardiography (TEE) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Bronchoscopy | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Dialysis | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Surgical Procedure | 5.5 | 5.5 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 5.5 | 5.5 |
| Room Transfer | 0 | 1.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Average counts of interactions per patient type for the seven-cluster analysis
| Interaction Types, | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vital signs measurement | 4.17 | 3.72 | 3.55 | 3.65 | 3.52 | 3.47 | 3.12 |
| Medication administration | 13.05 | 3.78 | 2.40 | 1.98 | 1.51 | 1.22 | 0.66 |
| Lab Test Collection | 10.79 | 3.86 | 2.42 | 2.49 | 2.05 | 1.99 | 1.22 |
| X-ray | 1.79 | 0.41 | 0.24 | 0.20 | 0.16 | 0.14 | 0.07 |
| CT | 0.87 | 0.24 | 0.15 | 0.11 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.03 |
| MRI | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
| Ultrasound | 0.22 | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
| Nuclear Medicine | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Interventional Radiology | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
| Transthoracic Echocardiography (TTE) | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Transesophageal Echocardiography (TEE) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Bronchoscopy | 0.10 | 0.09 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
| Dialysis | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Surgical Procedure | 0.34 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.03 |
| Room Transfer | 0.92 | 0.38 | 0.24 | 0.19 | 0.14 | 0.10 | 0.05 |
Testing the non-homogeneous Poisson assumption for different time intervals
| Number of Intervals | Length (days) | % Not Rejected By KS Test |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | 90.8 | 0.00 |
| 20 | 43.0 | 35.00 |
| 30 | 28.2 | 63.30 |
| 40 | 21.0 | 80.00 |
| 80 | 10.3 | 88.75 |
| 800 | 1.00 | 90.38 |
Fig. 1Clustering results. a UMAP visualization for 7 clusters. b Elbow plot
Within cluster variation as a function of the number of clusters used
| Number of clusters, k | Total squared error within clusters |
|---|---|
| 1 | 290,250 |
| 2 | 140,491.9 |
| 3 | 86,060.95 |
| 4 | 56,175.68 |
| 5 | 42,133.06 |
| 6 | 33,761.11 |
| 7 | 25535.31 |
| 8 | 20880.25 |
| 9 | 17563.34 |
| 10 | 15222.13 |
The effect of clustering on the different quantiles for the LoS distribution (days)
| 0% | 25% | 50% | 75% | 100% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cluster 1 of 1 (100 | 0.0 | 1.9 | 3.9 | 7.9 | 354.2 |
| Cluster 1 of 7 (18 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 4.8 |
| Cluster 2 of 7 (27 | 0.1 | 1.7 | 2.3 | 2.9 | 6.4 |
| Cluster 3 of 7 (22 | 0.4 | 3.7 | 4.5 | 5.2 | 7.1 |
| Cluster 4 of 7 (17 | 5.3 | 6.9 | 7.9 | 9.3 | 11.7 |
| Cluster 5 of 7 (10 | 10.8 | 12.7 | 14.3 | 16.6 | 20.9 |
| Cluster 6 of 7 (6 | 20.4 | 24.2 | 29.2 | 35.8 | 57.0 |
| Cluster 7 of 7 (1%) | 59.0 | 65.6 | 82.0 | 128.2 | 354.2 |
Prediction of PPE usage as a function of the number of clusters
| LoS Quartile | Gloves | Gowns | Surgical Masks | N95 Masks | Face Shields | Bouffants | Boot Covers |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Five Clusters ( | |||||||
| Q1 | 122,771 | 6,422 | 169,193 | 4,094 | 3,906 | 6,422 | 6,422 |
| Median | 206,459 | 10,748 | 180,093 | 6,891 | 3,906 | 10,748 | 10,748 |
| Q3 | 264,107 | 13,785 | 187,28 | 8,787 | 3,906 | 13,785 | 13,785 |
| Six Clusters ( | |||||||
| Q1 | 134,232 | 6,935 | 169,917 | 4,385 | 3906 | 6,935 | 6,935 |
| Median | 219,111 | 11,348 | 180,954 | 7,239 | 3906 | 11,348 | 11,348 |
| Q3 | 279,440 | 14,517 | 188,221 | 9,203 | 3906 | 14,517 | 14,517 |
| Seven Clusters ( | |||||||
| Q1 | 129,216 | 6,779 | 169,233 | 4,229 | 3,906 | 6,779 | 6,779 |
| Median | 226,007 | 11,721 | 181,774 | 7,476 | 3,906 | 11,721 | 11,721 |
| Q3 | 277,995 | 14,433 | 187,989 | 9,161 | 3,906 | 14,433 | 14,433 |
| Eight Clusters ( | |||||||
| Q1 | 151,878 | 7,839 | 171,964 | 4,980 | 3,906 | 7,839 | 7,839 |
| Median | 229,751 | 11,850 | 182,296 | 7,610 | 3,906 | 11,850 | 11,850 |
| Q3 | 274,123 | 14,163 | 187,491 | 9,051 | 3,906 | 14,163 | 14,163 |