Evaluation of score-based tertiary triage policies during the COVID-19 pandemic: simulation study with real-world intensive care data

Author:

Bartenschlager Christina C.,Brunner Jens O.,Kubiciel Michael,Heller Axel R.

Abstract

Abstract Objective The explicit prohibition of discontinuing intensive care unit (ICU) treatment that has already begun by the newly established German Triage Act in favor of new patients with better prognoses (tertiary triage) under crisis conditions may prevent saving as many patients as possible and therefore may violate the international well-accepted premise of undertaking the “best for the most” patients. During the COVID-19 pandemic, authorities set up lockdown measures and infection-prevention strategies to avoid an overburdened health-care system. In cases of situational overload of ICU resources, when transporting options are exhausted, the question of a tertiary triage of patients arises. Methods We provide data-driven analyses of score- and non-score-based tertiary triage policies using simulation and real-world electronic health record data in a COVID-19 setting. Ten different triage policies, for example, based on the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II), are compared based on the resulting mortality in the ICU and inferential statistics. Results Our study shows that score-based tertiary triage policies outperform non-score-based tertiary triage policies including compliance with the German Triage Act. Based on our simulation model, a SAPS II score-based tertiary triage policy reduces mortality in the ICU by up to 18 percentage points. The longer the queue of critical care patients waiting for ICU treatment and the larger the maximum number of patients subject to tertiary triage, the greater the effect on the reduction of mortality in the ICU. Conclusion A SAPS II score-based tertiary triage policy was superior in our simulation model. Random allocation or “first come, first served” policies yield the lowest survival rates, as will adherence to the new German Triage Act. An interdisciplinary discussion including an ethical and legal perspective is important for the social interpretation of our data-driven results.

Funder

Technische Hochschule Nürnberg

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3