No abstract

Background In-house night call systems for ICUs are frequently implemented to enable hands-on patient care and provide direct supervision of resident physicians at night. Previous studies have highlighted the benefits of an in-house night float (NF) such as minimized time to intervention but failed to consistently demonstrate an improvement in patient outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of an in-house critical care fellow at night on the resident experience and assess for impact on patient morbidity and mortality. Methods An in-house overnight critical care fellow shift was implemented at West Virginia University Hospital in 2018. Resident physicians rotating overnight in the medical ICU (MICU) for six-month periods before and after the intervention were anonymously surveyed. A retrospective chart review of 300 patients admitted overnight to the MICU was performed. Multiple patient outcomes from the pre (2017) and post (2018) intervention periods were collected and compared using a two-sample t-test. Results In the post-intervention survey, nearly every element of resident experience improved (availability of support, comfort in performing invasive procedures, and input in treatment plans), and far fewer residents felt overwhelmed relative to the pre-intervention survey. The resident experience markedly improved with the addition of an in-house critical care fellow. For the retrospective chart review, both groups had similar severity of illness and there was no change in ICU or hospital length of stay. No difference in mortality was found, though the study was underpowered for this outcome. For secondary measures, there was no difference in mechanical ventilation or use days, though more procedures performed were overnight compared to the former staffing model. Conclusions Implementation of an in-house overnight critical care fellow shift in the MICU positively impacted resident experience without worsening patient outcomes. The intervention did not worsen measures of morbidity or mortality but did lead to an increased number of procedures performed overnight. The model of in-house NF coverage continues to be preferred by clinicians.

No abstract

Purpose of Review The increase in wildfire prevalence and severity has generated alarm as wildfire air pollution is associated with significant respiratory morbidity. We aim to summarize the pathophysiology of wildfire air pollution causing lung disease, current knowledge of pulmonary health effects, and precautionary guidance to the public. We also propose specific guidance for high-risk patients during wildfires. Recent Findings Health effects of wildfire air pollution have been difficult to evaluate; however, respiratory morbidity has been firmly established including exacerbation of known pulmonary disease and increased hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and dispensation of reliever medications. Public health agencies and officials provide wildfire preparation recommendations and active updates to the public during a wildfire event but fail to address specific needs of chronic lung disease patients considered high-risk for pulmonary complications. To fill this void, it is increasingly important for pulmonary physicians to understand wildfire-related pulmonary morbidity and provide specific guidance to their patients. Summary This review summarizes the health effects of wildfire air pollution and provides guidance for the management of high-risk patients during wildfires.

No abstract