BACKGROUND: Burnout is a major challenge in health care, but its prevalence has not been evaluated in practicing respiratory therapists (RTs). The purpose of this study was to identify RT burnout prevalence and factors associated with RT burnout. METHODS: An online survey was administered at 26 centers in the United States between January and March 2021. Validated quantitative cross-sectional surveys were used to measure burnout and leadership domains. The survey was sent to department directors and distributed by the department directors to their staffs. Data analysis was descriptive, and logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate risk factors, expressed as odds ratios (OR), for burnout. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 3,010 RTs; the response rate was 37%. Seventynine percent of the respondents reported burnout, 10% with severe, 32% with moderate, and 37% with mild burnout. Univariate analysis revealed that those with burnout worked more hours per week, worked more hours per week in the ICU, primarily cared for adult patients, primarily delivered care via RT protocols, reported inadequate RT staffing, reported being unable to complete assigned work, had more frequent exposure to COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), had a lower leadership score, and fewer had a positive view of leadership. Logistic regression revealed that burnout climate (OR 9.38; P < .001), inadequate RT staffing (OR 2.08 to 3.19; P 5 .004 to .05), unable to complete all work (OR 2.14 to 5.57; P 5 .003 to .02), and missed work for any reason were associated with an increased risk of burnout (OR 1.96; P 5 .007). Not providing patient care (OR 0.18; P 5 .02) and a positive leadership score (.55; P 5 .02) were associated with a decreased risk of burnout. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout was common among the RTs in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Good leadership was protective against burnout, whereas inadequate staffing, an inability to complete work, and a burnout climate were associated with burnout.

Background: Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is used to optimize oxygenation by preventing alveolar collapse. However, PEEP can potentially decrease cardiac output through cardiopulmonary interactions. The effect of PEEP on cardiac output during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is not known. Methods: This was a preclinical randomized, controlled, animal study conducted in an animal research facility on 25 Landrace-Yorkshire pigs. After inducing cardiac arrest, CPR was performed with LUCAS 3. During CPR, pigs were ventilated at a PEEP of 0, 5, 10, 15, 20 cmH 2 O (randomly determined via lottery) for 9 min. Cardiac output, obtained via ultrasound dilution, and PaO 2 were measured, and oxygen delivery calculated for each PEEP. Results: A mixed-effects repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare the baseline value adjusted mean cardiac output, PaO 2 , and oxygen delivery between PEEP groups. Least significant difference test was used to conduct pairwise comparisons between PEEP groups. To determine optimum PEEP, Gaussian mixture model was applied to the adjusted means of cardiac output and oxygen delivery. Increasing PEEP to 10 and higher resulted in significant declines in cardiac output. A PEEP of 15 and higher resulted in significant declines in oxygen delivery. As PEEP was increased from 0 to 20, PaO 2 increased significantly. Gaussian mixture model identified the 0-5 PEEP group as providing optimal cardiac output and oxygen delivery, with PEEP of 5 providing the highest oxygen delivery. Conclusions: A PEEP of 0-5 resulted in the optimal oxygen delivery and cardiac output during CPR, with PEEP of 5 resulting in higher oxygen delivery, and a slightly lower, statistically insignificant cardiac output than PEEP of 0.

No abstract

No abstract