Objective. To determine the national distribution of intensive care unit (ICU)/high care (HC) beds and the implications for ICU bed availability in the envisaged national health insurance (NHI) scheme. Methods. A descriptive, non-interventional, observational study design was used. A desk-top audit of all public and private sector ICUs, including ICU/HC beds, in South Africa was undertaken for the period 2008 -2009. For this study, both categories were analysed and referred to as ICU beds, as they reflect the critical care component of the health service in South Africa. Results. In 2008 -2009, there were 4 719 ICU beds in the private and public sectors in South Africa, with 75% (3 533) in the former and 25% (1 186) in the latter. The majority of ICU beds in the two sectors were located in three provinces: Gauteng (49%), KwaZulu-Natal (14%) and Western Cape (15%), representing 78% of ICU beds (3 703/4 719) and catering for 54% of the country's population. Eastern Cape had fewer than 300 beds, North West and Mpumalanga had fewer than 150 beds, and Limpopo and Northern Cape had 66 and 47 beds respectively. With the proposed NHI scheme, the number of ICU beds available would be 4 719, which would translate into a bed:population ratio of approximately 1:10 000. However, there are large variations across the provinces, which makes the availability of this level of care in some provinces non-existent. Conclusion. While increasing the number of ICU beds in the public sector will open critical care services to more users, the NHI scheme would not solve the huge discrepancies of access to ICUs, and availability of critical care staff, across the provinces.

No abstract

Background The worsening COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa poses multiple challenges for clinical decision making in the context of already-scarce ICU resources. Data from national government and the last published national audit of ICU resources indicate gross shortages. While the Critical Care Society of Southern Africa (CCSSA) guidelines provide a comprehensive guideline for triage in the face of overwhelmed ICU resources, such decisions present massive ethical and moral dilemmas for triage teams. It is therefore important for the health system to provide clinicians and critical care facilities with as much support and resources as possible in the face of impending pandemic demand. Following a discussion of the ethical considerations and potential challenges in applying the CCSSA guidelines, the authors propose a framework for regional triage committees adapted to the South African context. Discussion Beyond the national CCSSA guidelines, the clinician has many additional ethical and clinical considerations. No single ethical approach to decision-making is sufficient, instead one which considers multiple contextual factors is necessary. Scores such as the Clinical Frailty Score and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment are of limited use in patients with COVID-19. Furthermore, the clinician is fully justified in withdrawing ICU care based on medical futility decisions and to reallocate this resource to a patient with a better prognosis. However, these decisions bear heavy emotional and moral burden compounded by the volume of clinical work and a fear of litigation. Conclusion We propose the formation of Provincial multi-disciplinary Critical Care Triage Committees to alleviate the emotional, moral and legal burden on individual ICU teams and co-ordinate inter-facility collaboration using an adapted framework. The committee would provide an impartial, broader and ethically-sound viewpoint which has time to consider broader contextual factors such as adjusting rationing criteria according to different levels of pandemic demand and the latest clinical evidence. Their functioning will be strengthened by direct feedback to national level and accountability to a national monitoring committee. The potential applications of these committees are far-reaching and have the potential to enable a more effective COVID-19 health systems response in South Africa.

Background: Emergency centres in South Africa are among the busiest in the world and serve as entry points for hospital care for most of the population. The South African Triage Scale (SATS) is a validated tool introduced nationally in 2006 and intended to increase the efficiency of emergency centres through a process of prioritisation of the severely ill patient. The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of the SATS in a busy urban district hospital in Durban, South Africa. Methods: A chart review of triaged patients was performed. The hospital uses a one-page SATS sheet and manages both medical and surgical patients. The triage history, physiological parameters, application of discriminator lists, final triage code and outcome was audited and compared with findings from the patients' clinical records. Results: The mean triage early warning score was 1.50 (95% CI 1-2) and average time to treatment was 59 min (95% CI 51-67). Essential bedside investigations were missing on some very ill patients, there was poor documentation in many fields and confirmed time to treatment was within recommended timescales for only 48% of patients. Use of the discriminator list resulted in over-triage of 66.7% and an under-triage of 14%. Some 76% of patients were discharged from the emergency centre, 15% were admitted and 5.5% were transferred out. Conclusion: Nurse-led triage has been successfully implemented at the emergency centre of this hospital using SATS but some notable gaps were identified.

Background. Maturing of the burgeoning HIV epidemic in South Africa has resulted in an increased demand for intensive care. Objectives. To investigate the influence of ethical dilemmas facing South African intensivists on decisions about access to intensive care for patients with HIV infection in resource-limited settings. Methods. A cross-sectional, descriptive, quantitative, analytical, anonymous attitudes-and-perception questionnaire survey of 90 intensivists. The main outcome measure was the rating of factors influencing decisions on admission to intensive care and responses to 5 hypothetical clinical scenarios.Results. The number of intensivists who considered the prognosis of the acute disease and of the underlying disease to be most important was 87.9% (n=74). Most (71.6%; n=63) intensivists cited availability of an intensive care unit (ICU) bed as influencing the decision to admit. Intensivists comprising 26.8% (n=22) of the total group rated as probably important or least important the 'resources available'; 'bed used to the prejudice of another patient' was stated by 16.4% (n=14); and 'policy of the intensive care unit' by 17% (n=14). Nearly two-thirds (65.9%; n=58) would respect an informed refusal of treatment. A similar number would comply with a written 'Do not resuscitate' (DNR) order. In patients with no real chance of recovering a meaningful life, 81.6% (n=71) of intensivists would withhold sophisticated therapy (e.g. not start mechanical ventilation or dialysis etc.) and 75.9% (n=63) would withdraw sophisticated therapy (e.g. discontinue mechanical ventilation, dialysis etc.). Conclusions. A combination of factors was identified as influencing the decision to admit patients to intensive care. Prognosis and disease status were identified as the main factors influencing admission. Patients with HIV/AIDS were not discriminated against in admission to intensive care.