Construction of a demand and capacity model for intensive care and hospital ward beds, and mortality from COVID-19

Author:

McDonald Stuart,Martin ChrisORCID,Bale Steve,Luteijn MichielORCID,Sarkar RahulORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThis paper describes the construction of a model used to estimate the number of excess deaths that could be expected as a direct consequence of a lack of hospital bed and intensive care unit (ICU) capacity.MethodsA series of compartmental models was used to estimate the number of deaths under different combinations of care required (ICU or ward), and care received (ICU, ward or no care) in England up to the end of April 2021. Model parameters were sourced from publicly available government information, organisations collating COVID-19 data and calculations using existing parameters. A compartmental sub-model was used to estimate the mortality scalars that represent the increase in mortality that would be expected from a lack of provision of an ICU or general ward bed when one is required. Three illustrative scenarios for admissions numbers, ‘Optimistic’, ‘Middling’ and ‘Pessimistic’, are described showing how the model can be used to estimate mortality rates under different scenarios of capacity.ResultsThe key output of our collaboration was the model itself rather than the results of any of the scenarios. The model allows a user to understand the excess mortality impact arising as a direct consequence of capacity being breached under various scenarios or forecasts of hospital admissions. The scenarios described in this paper are illustrative and are not forecasts.There were no excess deaths from a lack of capacity in any of the ‘Optimistic’ scenario applications in sensitivity analysis.Several of the ‘Middling’ scenario applications under sensitivity testing resulted in excess deaths directly attributable to a lack of capacity. Most excess deaths arose when we modelled a 20% reduction compared to best estimate ICU capacity. This led to 597 deaths (0.7% increase).All the ‘Pessimistic’ scenario applications under sensitivity analysis had excess deaths. These ranged from 49,219 (19.4% increase) when we modelled a 20% increase in ward bed availability over the best-estimate, to 103,845 (40.9% increase) when we modelled a 20% shortfall in ward bed availability below the best-estimate. The emergence of a new, more transmissible variant (VOC 202012/01) increases the likelihood of real world outcomes at, or beyond, those modelled in our ‘Pessimistic’ scenario.The results can be explained by considering how capacity evolves in each of the scenarios. In the Middling scenario, whilst ICU capacity may be approached and even possibly breached, there remains sufficient ward capacity to take lives who need either ward or ICU support, keeping excess deaths relatively low. However, the Pessimistic scenario sees ward capacity breached, and in many scenarios for a period of several weeks, resulting in much higher mortality in those lives who require care but do not receive it.ConclusionsNo excess deaths from breaching capacity would be expected under the unadjusted ‘Optimistic’ assumptions of demand. The ‘Middling’ scenario could result in some excess deaths from breaching capacity, though these would be small (0.7% increase) relative to the total number of deaths in that scenario. The ‘Pessimistic’ scenario would certainly result in significant excess deaths from breaching capacity. Our sensitivity analysis indicated a range between 49,219 (19.4% increase) and 103,845 (40.9% increase) excess deaths.Without the new variant, exceeding capacity for hospital and ICU beds did not appear to be the most likely outcome but given the new variant it now appears more plausible and, if so, would result in a substantial increase in the number of deaths from COVID-19.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference18 articles.

1. ONS. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey: characteristics of people testing positive for COVID-19 in England and antibody data for the UK: December 2020. Off Natl Stat. 2020;(December).

2. Adapting hospital capacity to meet changing demands during the COVID-19 pandemic;BMC Med [Internet],2020

3. NHS England. Management of surge and escalation in critical care services?: standard operating procedure for adult critical care [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2020 Feb 15]. Available from: https://www.england.nhs.uk/commissioning/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2013/11/sop-burns.pdf

4. Chong MSF , Hla TW , Sartori G. ICU surge capacity in a busy London district general hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic [Internet]. Association of anaesthetists. 2020 [cited 2020 Dec 20]. Available from: https://anaesthetists.org/Home/Resources-publications/COVID-19-guidance/ICU-surge-capacity-in-a-busy-London-district-general-hospital-during-the-COVID-19-pandemic

5. ICNARC. ICNARC report on COVID-19 in critical care: England, Wales and Northern Ireland 24 December 2020 [Internet]. 2020. Available from: https://www.icnarc.org/Our-Audit/Audits/Cmp/Reports

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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