Download The Emergency Department in the Post SARS era

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

African trypanosomiasis wikipedia , lookup

Oesophagostomum wikipedia , lookup

Chickenpox wikipedia , lookup

Bioterrorism wikipedia , lookup

Sexually transmitted infection wikipedia , lookup

Carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae wikipedia , lookup

Hepatitis B wikipedia , lookup

Hepatitis C wikipedia , lookup

Middle East respiratory syndrome wikipedia , lookup

Marburg virus disease wikipedia , lookup

Timeline of the SARS outbreak wikipedia , lookup

Hospital-acquired infection wikipedia , lookup

Transcript
The Emergency
Department in the Post
SARS era
Peter Cameron
Previously
Prince of Wales Hospital
Chinese University of Hong Kong
Emergency Department First line
-The Problem
• Ability of ED to identify Potential high risk patients
– SARS demonstrated that non specific features most common
• EDs Poorly constructed to manage an Infectious
Disease Outbreak
• Processes within ED increase risk
• Staff not good at basic ID control procedures
• Balance between high volume service commitments
and potential risk
ED as first line
• Communication with hospital
• Communication with community
• Communication with region
SARS
It is not ”Severe”
Or “Acute”
Or “Respiratory”
At the outset
Front line experience with SARS
• ICU and Ward healthcare workers more at risk
than ED
• Cross infection amongst patients was less than
expected
• Despite high risk environment many HCWs did
not follow guidelines
• Virtually all hospital infections could have been
prevented by basic infection control
Staff getting sicker
Future Potential Risk
• SARS could come back
• Other infectious disease outbreaks could occur
– Most likely Influenza
• Routine presentations(eg TB,gastro) put
patients/staff at risk
• Therefore at a staff health and safety level
action should be taken
Response
•
•
•
•
•
Engineering
Patient Processes
Staff training
PPE
Outbreak response
Engineering
• Avoid crowded EDs
– >1 m between pts
• Where possible have physical
barriers between patients
– Separate hand washing for
each pt
• Avoid prolonged stay in ED
– Separate toileting
– Washing
• Ventilation – negative
pressure rooms?
• Adequate sewage system
Busy ED
Shut Down By the Plague?
• Emergency closed at
PWH
• No elective operations at
PWH
Patient Processes
• Track pt cohorts through different areas
– Eg injury/fever
• Avoid unnecessary pt contact
• Separate work bench areas from pt care areas
• Avoid high risk procedures where possible
– Eg nebulisers/NIVA
• Avoid unnecessary admissions
– Hospitals dangerous places
– Avoid Unnecessary Patient movement b/n areas
• Only necessary Traffic through ED
Staff Training
• Accredit staff in ID procedures
• Audit infection control
• Incorporate into undergraduate training
Droplet Precautions in every ward
Personal Protective equipment
• Simplicity
• Long term practicality
• Masks/handwashing easy
– N95 vs surgical masks?
• Space suits expensive and impractical
• Identify particularly high risk groups
– Eg contact history/atypical/severe presentation or
procedures – eg ETT
– ?triage to different area/negative pressure
Outbreak response
• Local
• Regional
• National/International
Local
• Identification of
Outbreak
– Background monitoring
– Awareness through health
department
– Unusual case
• ++High Index of
Suspicion
• Command team
• Communication
• Contact tracing
Predetermined Communication
Protocol
•
•
•
•
•
Meetings of Senior staff
Departmental meeting
Staff Forum
Email
Web site
Rumours are always worse than reality
Local
• Screening – in community + hospital
– Best site?
• ED
• OPD
• Health Department
– Facilities
• XRAY
• CT
• PATHOLOGY
• PPE
• VENTILATION
• SPACE
Local
•
•
•
•
Plan for service distribution in outbreak
Knowledge of resources
Practice
Incorporation of plan into normal service
Regional
• Above issues +
• Schools
• Public announcements – panic vs ignorance
– Experience suggests that transparency creates less panic
• Quarantine
–
–
–
–
Restrictions on movement cause panic
May lead to opposite effects to what you want
Effectiveness of home quarantine?
Is it right to house those with disease and without together?
National/International
• Effect on economy/business/Travel
Vs International responsibilities
• Resources diverted to maintain
infrastructure/training for possible outbreak vs
provide routine services
Every Hospital Should Have
•
•
•
•
A disaster Plan
An infectious disease outbreak plan
Regular review/audit and practice of plan
Integration with regional hospitals and
ambulance
• Disease monitoring and reporting capability
Unsolved Problems
• Specialised ID hospital takes all?
– At Princess Margaret in HK–quickly overwhelmed
– Danger that expertise is concentrated
– Also abrogation of responsibility from non specialised
hospitals
– Primary triage to right hospital first time preferable
– However
• In small numbers –processes at ID hospital good
• Allows collaboration b/n experts
– Mixed model may be best
Unsolved Problems
• Staff Quarantine?
– May lose staff
• Immediate
• Long term
– Alternatives can be almost as bad
• Eg no physical contact etc
• Visitor policy
– Introduce early
• But very hard on pts/relatives
Unsolved Problems
• Contact Quarantine
– Ideally all isolated
– BUT
• Facilities
• Cross infection
• Deters people from coming forward
– Compromise
• High risk – formal quarantine
• Low risk - +responsible
Home with restrictions
Conclusion
• The biggest gains in risk reduction
–
–
–
–
Simple infection control measures
Simple ED design changes
Staff training/auditing
Good ED pt processes
• ie avoid overcrowding etc
• Little evidence for negative pressure/space suits/ID
hospitals
– This is probably true even for diseases other than SARS