Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Sep 21;2(9):100376.
doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100376. Epub 2021 Jul 28.

Performance of crisis standards of care guidelines in a cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients in the United States

Julia L Jezmir  1   2 , Maheetha Bharadwaj  2 , Alexander Chaitoff  1   2 , Bradford Diephuis  1   2 , Conor P Crowley  3 , Sandeep P Kishore  1   2   4 , Eric Goralnick  2   5 , Louis T Merriam  3 , Aimee Milliken  2   6 , Chanu Rhee  7   8 , Nicholas Sadovnikoff  2   9   10 , Sejal B Shah  2   11 , Shruti Gupta  2   12 , David E Leaf  2   12 , William B Feldman  2   3   13 , Edy Y Kim  2   3 ; STOP-COVID Investigators
Collaborators, Affiliations

Performance of crisis standards of care guidelines in a cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients in the United States

Julia L Jezmir et al. Cell Rep Med. .

Abstract

Many US states published crisis standards of care (CSC) guidelines for allocating scarce critical care resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the performance of these guidelines in maximizing their population benefit has not been well tested. In 2,272 adults with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation drawn from the Study of the Treatment and Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19 (STOP-COVID) multicenter cohort, we test the following three approaches to CSC algorithms: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores grouped into ranges, SOFA score ranges plus comorbidities, and a hypothetical approach using raw SOFA scores not grouped into ranges. We find that area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves for all three algorithms demonstrate only modest discrimination for 28-day mortality. Adding comorbidity scoring modestly improves algorithm performance over SOFA scores alone. The algorithm incorporating comorbidities has modestly worse predictive performance for Black compared to white patients. CSC algorithms should be empirically examined to refine approaches to the allocation of scarce resources during pandemics and to avoid potential exacerbation of racial inequities.

Keywords: ARDS; COVID-19; acute respiratory distress syndrome; crisis standards of care; critical care; intensive care; medical ethics; triage.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this work. For unrelated work, the authors have the following disclosures: S.P.K. served as a consultant for Resolve to Save Lives and has previously led a partnership on multiple chronic conditions at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai with Teva Pharmaceuticals. W.B.F. serves as a consultant for Alosa Health and Aetion. He also received an honorarium for a presentation to Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts. E.Y.K. is a co-investigator in NCT04389671 (Windtree Therapeutics) testing lucinactant (surfactant-like treatment) in COVID-19 patients and received unrelated research funding from Bayer AG, N.I.H., the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, and the American Thoracic Society.

Figures

None
Graphical abstract
Figure 1
Figure 1
Association of priority score or category with 28-day mortality (A–C) The number of patients who survived or died at 28 days after ICU admission and intubation are shown for each priority point value (or category) for each algorithm. (A) New York (SOFA score groups only). (B) Colorado (SOFA score groups and comorbidities). (C) Hypothetical algorithm of raw (ungrouped) SOFA score. (D and E) AUROC curves for discrimination of 28-day mortality by priority scores are shown for the following algorithms: New York (SOFA score groups) (D), Colorado (SOFA score groups and comorbidities) (D), and raw SOFA scores. (E) Colorado SOFA score component, Colorado comorbidity scoring component, or full Colorado algorithm (SOFA and comorbidities).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Gupta S., Hayek S.S., Wang W., Chan L., Mathews K.S., Melamed M.L., Brenner S.K., Leonberg-Yoo A., Schenck E.J., Radbel J., STOP-COVID Investigators Factors associated with death in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 in the US. JAMA Intern. Med. 2020;180:1436–1447. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Piscitello G.M., Kapania E.M., Miller W.D., Rojas J.C., Siegler M., Parker W.F. Variation in ventilator allocation guidelines by US state during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: a systematic review. JAMA Netw. Open. 2020;3:e2012606. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hantel A., Marron J.M., Casey M., Kurtz S., Magnavita E., Abel G.A. US State Government Crisis Standards of Care Guidelines: Implications for Patients With Cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7:199–205. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Romney D., Fox H., Carlson S., Bachmann D., O’Mathuna D., Kman N. Allocation of Scarce Resources in a Pandemic: A Systematic Review of US State Crisis Standards of Care Documents. Disaster Med. Public Health Prep. 2020;14:677–683. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hertelendy A.J., Ciottone G.R., Mitchell C.L., Gutberg J., Burkle F.M. Crisis standards of care in a pandemic: navigating the ethical, clinical, psychological and policy-making maelstrom. Int. J. Qual. Health Care. 2021;33:mzaa094. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms