Skip header and navigation

34 records – page 1 of 4.

Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
CC120301 RR
Question Submitted
December 3, 2020
Date Completed
December 10, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
is recommended to meet surge capacity needs in the ICU: High critical care nurse to patient ratios (1:1 or 1:2
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
CC120301 RR
Question Submitted
December 3, 2020
Date Completed
December 10, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
Key Findings
No studies directly evaluated the association between level of surge capacity and quality of care indicators for COVID-19 patients. However, in more broad studies, the findings suggest that mortality and other adverse events increase when the strain on the intensive care capacity increases.
A tiered staffing strategy is recommended to meet surge capacity needs in the ICU: High critical care nurse to patient ratios (1:1 or 1:2) are recommended to provide high quality patient care.
There is a lack of high-quality evidence to support ICU triage protocols tailored for patients with COVID-19. Nevertheless, the protocols must be flexible, adaptable according to the availability of local resources, and effective for inter-hospital patient transfer.
While the Crisis Standards of Care (CSC) guidelines (e.g., Saskatchewan’s Critical Care Resource Allocation Framework, published on September 2020) can be used to triage newly admitted COVID-19 patients requiring critical care, there is contradicting evidence about using the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score for ICU triage of patients with COVID-19.
The literature suggests the use of mathematical modeling to support capacity planning (e.g., very low, low, medium, and high intensity patient surge response)
To relieve pressure from ICUs, other types of units (e.g., Step Down Unit [SDU] or Surge Clinic) can be implemented.
Category
Administration
Healthcare Services
Subject
Health Planning
Facilities
Triage
Population
All adults
Clinical Setting
ICU
Priority Level
Level 1 2-3 days
Cite As
Azizian, A; Valiani, S; Groot, G; Badea, A; Miller, L; Howell-Spooner, B. At what level of surge capacity do quality of care indicators suffer? 2020 Dec 10; Document no.: CC120301 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 17 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Table
Review Code
CC120301 RR Table
Question Submitted
December 3, 2020
Date Completed
December 10, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
2020 ICU patients in Italy Creation of a step down unit (SDU) close to ICU to safely improve
Document Type
Table
Review Code
CC120301 RR Table
Question Submitted
December 3, 2020
Date Completed
December 10, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
Category
Administration
Healthcare Services
Subject
Health Planning
Facilities
Triage
Population
All adults
Clinical Setting
ICU
Priority Level
Level 1 2-3 days
Cite As
Azizian, A; Valiani, S; Groot, G; Badea, A; Miller, L; Howell-Spooner, B. At what level of surge capacity do quality of care indicators suffer? 2020 Dec 10; Document no.: CC120301 RR Table. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 17 p. (CEST table)
Related Documents
Documents

CC120301 RR Table

Download File
Less detail
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
CC120301-01 ESR
Question Submitted
December 3, 2020
Date Completed
December 4, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
Disease Analysis. Modelling ICU capacity under different epidemiological scenarios of the COVID-19
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
CC120301-01 ESR
Question Submitted
December 3, 2020
Date Completed
December 4, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
Category
Administration
Healthcare Services
Subject
Health Planning
Facilities
Triage
Population
All adults
Clinical Setting
ICU
Priority Level
Level 1 2-3 days
Cite As
Miller, L; Howell-Spooner, B. At what level of surge capacity do quality of care indicators suffer? 2020 Dec 4; Document no.: CC120301-01 ESR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 50 p. (CEST evidence search report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
CC120401-01 ESR
Question Submitted
December 4, 2020
Date Completed
December 8, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
way to allocate resources to COVID-19 patients in ICU RESOURCES USED:  CDC database  Google
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
CC120401-01 ESR
Question Submitted
December 4, 2020
Date Completed
December 8, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
Category
Administration
Healthcare Services
Subject
Health Planning
Facilities
Triage
Population
All
All adults
Clinical Setting
ICU
Priority Level
Level 3 Two weeks (14 days)
Cite As
Miller, L; Howell-Spooner, B. Does data exist on the performance of triage or resource allocation frameworks for COVID-19 and other pandemics? 2020 Dec 8; Document no.: CC120401-01 ESR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 20 p. (CEST evidence search report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
CC120401 RR
Question Submitted
December 4, 2020
Date Completed
December 17, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
recommendations on prioritizing patients when ICU capacity was overwhelmed27, including prioritizing according
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
CC120401 RR
Question Submitted
December 4, 2020
Date Completed
December 17, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
Key Findings
· There is little literature on the performance of triage frameworks. However, critiques of frameworks can help to inform the development of future protocols. · It is ethically problematic to include age as a triage factor rather than the more nuanced factors of frailty and chronic comorbidities. · The public should be included when creating triage protocols to create transparency and trust in the health system. · Healthcare providers should be familiar with the ethical decisions that have been made in establishing the protocols. However, using a triage team to make decisions about resource allocation would alleviate moral burden from clinicians. · Regular review of current guidelines, such as the use of SOFA scores, is recommended as knowledge about COVID-19 changes. Rapid Review Report: CC120401 RR (Version 1: December 17, 2020 11:45) 2 · Patients should be regularly reassessed to allow for timely redistribution of critical resources.
Category
Administration
Healthcare Services
Subject
Health Planning
Facilities
Triage
Population
All
All adults
Clinical Setting
ICU
Priority Level
Level 3 Two weeks (14 days)
Cite As
Fick, F; Valiani, S; Miller, L; Howell-Spooner, B. Does data exist on the performance of triage or resource allocation frameworks for COVID-19 and other pandemics? 2020 Dec 17; Document no.: CC120401 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 91 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Table
Review Code
INF031801v017 RR Table
Question Submitted
March 18, 2021
Date Completed
November 26, 2021
Status
5. Updated review
Research Team
Infectious Disease
recovery, although 13/91 (14%) of vaccinated patients required ICU admission. Of note, 4/75 (5%) partially
Document Type
Table
Review Code
INF031801v017 RR Table
Question Submitted
March 18, 2021
Date Completed
November 26, 2021
Status
5. Updated review
Research Team
Infectious Disease
Category
Epidemiology
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Vaccines
Immunity
Infection Prevention and Control
Clinical Presentation
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Community
ICU
Medicine Unit
Primary care
Public Health
Priority Level
Level 3 Two weeks (14 days)
Cite As
Jagwani, M; Lee, S; Shumilak, G; Reeder, B; Groot, G; Howell-Spooner, B; Miller, L. How effective are COVID-19 vaccines? 2021 Nov 26; Document no.: INF031801v017 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2021. (CEST Table)
Similar Reviews
EOC011901 RR
EOC031001 RR
Review History
INF031801v16 RR: November 12, 2021
INF031801v15 RR: October 28, 2021
INF031801v014 RR: October 16, 2021
INF031801v013 RR: September 24, 2021
INF031801v012 RR: September 10, 2021
INF031801v010 RR: August 25, 2021
INF031801v9 RR: August 23, 2021
INF031801v8 RR: August 9, 2021
INF031801v7 RR: July 20, 2021
INF031801v6 RR: July 2, 2021
INF031801v5 RR: June 22, 2021
INF031801v4 RR: June 3, 2021
INF031801v3 RR: May 24, 2021
INF031801v2 RR: May 14, 2021
INF031801 RR: March 31, 2021
Related Documents
Documents

INF031801v017 RR Table

Download File
Less detail
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
INF031801v017 ESR
Question Submitted
March 18, 2021
Date Completed
November 12, 2021
Status
5. Updated review
Research Team
Infectious Disease
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
INF031801v017 ESR
Question Submitted
March 18, 2021
Date Completed
November 12, 2021
Status
5. Updated review
Research Team
Infectious Disease
Category
Epidemiology
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Vaccines
Infection Prevention and Control
Clinical Presentation
Immunity
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Community
ICU
Medicine Unit
Primary care
Public Health
Priority Level
Level 3 Two weeks (14 days)
Cite As
Miller, L., Howell-Spooner, B.. How effective are COVID-19 vaccines? 2021 Nov 12. Document no.: INF031801v017 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2021. 70 p. (CEST rapid review report).
Review History
INF031801v16 RR: November 12, 2021
INF031801v15 RR: October 28, 2021
INF031801v014 RR: October 16, 2021
INF031801v013 RR: September 24, 2021
INF031801v012 RR: September 10, 2021
INF031801v010 RR: August 25, 2021
INF031801v9 RR: August 23, 2021
INF031801v8 RR: August 9, 2021
INF031801v7 RR: July 20, 2021
INF031801v6 RR: July 2, 2021
INF031801v5 RR: June 22, 2021
INF031801v4 RR: June 3, 2021
INF031801v3 RR: May 24, 2021
INF031801v2 RR: May 14, 2021
INF031801 RR: March 31, 2021
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
INF031801v017 RR
Question Submitted
March 18, 2021
Date Completed
November 26, 2021
Status
5. Updated review
Research Team
Infectious Disease
, for the prevention of 11,000 COVID-19 cases, 560 hospitalizations, 138 ICU admissions, and six deaths related
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
INF031801v017 RR
Question Submitted
March 18, 2021
Date Completed
November 26, 2021
Status
5. Updated review
Research Team
Infectious Disease
Updated Key Findings
November 16, 2021
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended that any individuals who develop myocarditis/pericarditis after a dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine should defer receiving a subsequent dose until additional safety data are available.
On 9th November, 2021, the CDC allows mix and match of booster shots in USA.
National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) recommended boosters for other high-risk groups, including people 70 years of age and older and front-line health care workers who had a short period of time between their first two shots.
NACI also recommended boosters for people who received two doses of the Astra Zeneca vaccine, as the mRNA vaccines appear to offer better protection.
On 4th November, 2021, the United Kingdom became the first country to approve Pfizer’s competitorOK competitor Merck's COVID-19 pill, which is already under review at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) after showing strong initial results. Other antivirals are under consideration including an agent from Pfizer (Paxlovid). While promising, caution should be taken with interpreting data from oral antivirals as currently, no published data exist and much conclusions are drawn off grey literature .
India’s Covaxin covid 19 vaccine by Bharat Biotech reported a vaccine effectiveness of 77.8% from a clinical trial. , 2021, a CDC reported vaccine efficacy of 90.9% with primary data from one phase II/III clinical trial in preventing symptomatic, laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in children aged 5–11 years with or without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Key Findings
November 2, 2021
October 21st, 2021 Pfizer Inc. and BioNTech announced results from a Phase 3 randomized, controlled trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of a 30-µg booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 with a relative vaccine efficacy of 95.6%.
On 21st October, 2021, the advisory panel for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said people who received Moderna and Johnson & Johnson (J&J) COVID-19 vaccines should receive a booster dose, and should continue with the original vaccine they recieved.
NACI’s latest guidelines suggest provinces should offer boosters to Canadians who received two doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine or one dose of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) vaccine advisory group on 26th October 2021 approved the emergency use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5 to 11 at a reduced dosage from the stanard dosing available for those over 12.
Therapeutic Goods Administration (Australia) has provisionally approved a third dose of the Pfizer (Comirnaty) vaccine for individuals 18 years or older. Pfizer (Comirnaty) is recommended as a single booster dose, irrespective of the primary COVID-19 vaccine used.
On 29th October, 2021, NACI issued new guidance "strongly" recommending booster shots for seniors 80 and older.
A survey at University of Oxford, UK, found that social media played a part in children aged 9 to 18 being more undecided than their older counterparts.
A report by the CDC found that the effectiveness of 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine against COVID-19 hospitalization was 93% during the period of B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant dominance among children and adolescents aged 12–18 years.
Category
Epidemiology
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Vaccines
Immunity
Clinical Presentation
Infection Prevention and Control
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Community
ICU
Medicine Unit
Primary care
Public Health
Priority Level
Level 3 Two weeks (14 days)
Cite As
Jagwani, M; Lee, S; Shumilak, G; Reeder, B; Groot, G; Hernandez, L; Howell-Spooner, B; Miller, L. How effective are COVID-19 vaccines? 2021 Nov 26. Document no.: INF031801v017 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2021. 96 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Review History
INF031801v16 RR: November 12, 2021
INF031801v15 RR: October 28, 2021
INF031801v014 RR: October 16, 2021
INF031801v013 RR: September 24, 2021
INF031801v012 RR: September 10, 2021
INF031801v010 RR: August 25, 2021
INF031801v9 RR: August 23, 2021
INF031801v8 RR: August 9, 2021
INF031801v7 RR: July 20, 2021
INF031801v6 RR: July 2, 2021
INF031801v5 RR: June 22, 2021
INF031801v4 RR: June 3, 2021
INF031801v3 RR: May 24, 2021
INF031801v2 RR: May 14, 2021
INF031801 RR: March 31, 2021
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
INF031801v018 ESR
Question Submitted
March 18, 2021
Date Completed
November 26, 2021
Status
5. Updated review
Research Team
Infectious Disease
delivery, pre-term birth, low birth weight, preeclampsia, ICU admission, and need for mechanical
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
INF031801v018 ESR
Question Submitted
March 18, 2021
Date Completed
November 26, 2021
Status
5. Updated review
Research Team
Infectious Disease
Category
Epidemiology
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Vaccines
Infection Prevention and Control
Clinical Presentation
Immunity
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Community
ICU
Medicine Unit
Primary care
Public Health
Priority Level
Level 3 Two weeks (14 days)
Cite As
Miller, L. & Howell-Spooner, B.. How effective are COVID-19 vaccines? 2021 Nov 26, Document no.: INF031801v018 ESR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2021. 53 p. (CEST evidence search report).
Review History
INF031801v16 RR: November 12, 2021
INF031801v15 RR: October 28, 2021
INF031801v014 RR: October 16, 2021
INF031801v013 RR: September 24, 2021
INF031801v012 RR: September 10, 2021
INF031801v010 RR: August 25, 2021
INF031801v9 RR: August 23, 2021
INF031801v8 RR: August 9, 2021
INF031801v7 RR: July 20, 2021
INF031801v6 RR: July 2, 2021
INF031801v5 RR: June 22, 2021
INF031801v4 RR: June 3, 2021
INF031801v3 RR: May 24, 2021
INF031801v2 RR: May 14, 2021
INF031801 RR: March 31, 2021
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
LTC042402-01 ESR
Question Submitted
April 24, 2020
Date Completed
April 28, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Long Term Care
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
LTC042402-01 ESR
Question Submitted
April 24, 2020
Date Completed
April 28, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Long Term Care
Category
Administration
Healthcare Services
Subject
Facilities
Long Term Care
Palliative Care
Infection Prevention and Control
Family
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Cardiac unit
Emergency
ICU
Long Term Care
Medicine Unit
NICU
Oncology
Priority Level
Level 4 completed within 1 week
Cite As
Howell-Spooner, B; Dalidowicz, M; Boden, C. How is "compassionate visit" defined and operationalized in the context of an infectious outbreak or pandemic? 2020 Apr 28; Document no.: LTC042402-01 ESR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 7 p. (CEST evidence search report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail

34 records – page 1 of 4.