Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18460504›Full record

GuidelineChest2008

Definitive care for the critically ill during a disaster: a framework for optimizing critical care surge capacity: from a Task Force for Mass Critical Care summit meeting, January 26-27, 2007, Chicago, IL.

Lewis Rubinson, John L Hick, Dan G Hanfling, Asha V Devereaux, Jeffrey R Dichter, Michael D Christian, Daniel Talmor, Justine Medina, J Randall Curtis, James A Geiling and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Chest, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
16.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Preparing intensive care for the next pandemic influenza.Critical care (London, England) · 2019
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Expanding the use of noninvasive ventilation during an epidemic.Disaster medicine and public health preparedness · 2014
    Article
  19. Wind disasters: A comprehensive review of current management strategies.International journal of critical illness and injury science · 2013
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Lewis RubinsonUniversity of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, Campus Box 359762, 325 Ninth Ave, Seattle, WA 98104, USA. rubinson@u.washington.edu
John L Hick
Dan G Hanfling
Asha V Devereaux
Jeffrey R Dichter
Michael D Christian
Daniel Talmor
Justine Medina
J Randall Curtis
James A Geiling
Task Force for Mass Critical Care
Harborview Medical Center · USAmerican Association of Critical-Care Nurses · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USCoronado Unified School District · USHennepin County Medical Center · USInova Fairfax Hospital · USPresbyterian Hospital · USWhite River Junction VA Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPlausible disasters may yield hundreds or thousands of critically ill victims. However, most countries, including those with widely available critical care services, lack sufficient specialized staff, medical equipment, and ICU space to provide timely, usual critical care for a large influx of additional patients. Shifting critical care disaster preparedness efforts to augment limited, essential critical care (emergency mass critical care [EMCC]), rather than to marginally increase unrestricted, individual-focused critical care may provide many additional people with access to life-sustaining interventions. In 2007, in response to the increasing concern over a severe influenza pandemic, the Task Force on Mass Critical Care (hereafter called the Task Force) convened to suggest the essential critical care therapeutics and interventions for EMCC. TASK FORCE SUGGESTIONS: EMCC should include the following: (1) mechanical ventilation, (2) IV fluid resuscitation, (3) vasopressor administration, (4) medication administration for specific disease states (eg, antimicrobials and antidotes), (5) sedation and analgesia, and (6) select practices to reduce adverse consequences of critical illness and critical care delivery. Also, all hospitals with ICUs should prepare to deliver EMCC for a daily critical care census at three times their usual ICU capacity for up to 10 days. DISCUSSION: By using the Task Force suggestions for EMCC, communities may better prepare to deliver augmented critical care in response to disasters. In light of current mass critical care data limitations, the Task Force suggestions were developed to guide preparedness but are not intended as strict policy mandates. Additional research is required to evaluate EMCC and revise the strategy as warranted.

Indexed as

Mass Casualty IncidentsBenchmarkingCritical CareDisaster PlanningEmergency Medical ServicesHumansUnited States

Identifiers

PMID18460504
PMCPMC7094361
OpenAlexW2133684642

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.