ReviewCritical care (London, England)2026
When supply chains fail: rethinking resilience in intensive care.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intensive care units (ICUs) are designed to support critically ill patients through life-threatening organ dysfunction, relying on highly optimized processes and specialized resources. Yet they are increasingly exposed to systemic shocks of geopolitical, environmental, and technological origin. These act not only on infrastructure and workforce but, more insidiously, through the supply chains on which bedside care depends, rendering ICU autonomy largely illusory: the production of active pharmaceutical ingredients is highly concentrated geographically, while some critical products depend on a single manufacturing site worldwide; consequently, a disruption at a single node can propagate rapidly to the bedside. We trace this cascade, from shock to the depletion of just-in-time buffers and the distorting effect of phantom demand, to the rationing, substitution, and improvisation that increase workload, variability, and clinical risk. This fragility is not incidental but the product of decades of efficiency-driven reform that has systematically reduced organizational slack: the inventory, redundant capacity, and workforce flexibility that enable adaptation under stress. The relationship between efficiency and resilience should be understood as a structural tension rather than a fixed trade-off. Targeted organisational strategies can strengthen ICU resilience, including regionalized ICU networks governed by formal agreements, diversification and strategic stockpiling of high-risk medications, and pre-emptive protocols for drug and fluid conservation. Scalable digital infrastructure and in-situ simulation can further support these strategies. Resilience should therefore be understood as a design principle, not an emergent property of crisis response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.