Christian Michael D, Sprung Charles L, King Mary A, Dichter Jeffrey R, Kissoon Niranjan, Devereaux Asha V, Gomersall Charles D
Chest. 2014 Oct;146(4 Suppl):e61S-74S. doi: 10.1378/chest.14-0736.
Pandemics and disasters can result in large numbers of critically ill or injured patients who may overwhelm available resources despite implementing surge-response strategies. If this occurs, critical care triage, which includes both prioritizing patients for care and rationing scarce resources, will be required. The suggestions in this chapter are important for all who are involved in large-scale pandemics or disasters with multiple critically ill or injured patients, including front-line clinicians, hospital administrators, and public health or government officials.
The Triage topic panel reviewed previous task force suggestions and the literature to identify 17 key questions for which specific literature searches were then conducted to identify studies upon which evidence-based recommendations could be made. No studies of sufficient quality were identified. Therefore, the panel developed expert opinion-based suggestions using a modified Delphi process. Suggestions from the previous task force that were not being updated were also included for validation by the expert panel.
The suggestions from the task force outline the key principles upon which critical care triage should be based as well as a path for the development of the plans, processes, and infrastructure required. This article provides 11 suggestions regarding the principles upon which critical care triage should be based and policies to guide critical care triage.
Ethical and efficient critical care triage is a complex process that requires significant planning and preparation. At present, the prognostic tools required to produce an effective decision support system (triage protocol) as well as the infrastructure, processes, legal protections, and training are largely lacking in most jurisdictions. Therefore, critical care triage should be a last resort after mass critical care surge strategies.
大流行病和灾难可能导致大量危重症或受伤患者,尽管实施了激增应对策略,但仍可能使可用资源不堪重负。如果发生这种情况,就需要进行重症监护分诊,这包括对患者进行护理优先级排序和对稀缺资源进行配给。本章中的建议对所有参与处理有多名危重症或受伤患者的大规模大流行病或灾难的人员都很重要,包括一线临床医生、医院管理人员以及公共卫生或政府官员。
分诊专题小组回顾了之前特别工作组的建议和文献,以确定17个关键问题,然后针对这些问题进行了具体的文献检索,以找出可据此提出循证建议的研究。未找到质量足够高的研究。因此,该小组采用改良的德尔菲法制定了基于专家意见的建议。之前特别工作组未更新的建议也被纳入,以供专家小组验证。
特别工作组的建议概述了重症监护分诊应基于的关键原则,以及制定所需计划、流程和基础设施的路径。本文提供了11条关于重症监护分诊应基于的原则以及指导重症监护分诊的政策的建议。
符合伦理且高效的重症监护分诊是一个复杂的过程,需要大量的规划和准备。目前,大多数司法管辖区在很大程度上缺乏建立有效决策支持系统(分诊方案)所需的预后工具以及基础设施、流程、法律保护和培训。因此,重症监护分诊应作为大规模重症监护激增策略之后的最后手段。