key: cord-0787210-qnm4zkme
authors: Luc, Jessica G.Y.; Vervoort, Dominique; Han, Jason J.; Sade, Robert M.
title: Part of the Cure or Spreader of the Disease?
date: 2020-05-07
journal: Ann Thorac Surg
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.03.103
sha: bf39a9e0eae4109aec83efb8afceb9c4543d9c67
doc_id: 787210
cord_uid: qnm4zkme

nan

and for want of a horse the rider was lost; being overtaken and slain by the enemy, all for want of care about a horse-shoe nail.

-Benjamin Franklin, The Way to Wealth (1758) [1] The World Health Organization has designated coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19) as a pandemic [2] . As the death toll rises each day, we are inundated with new information on the transmissibility, mortality, and aerosol stability of the infective virus SARS-CoV-2 [3, 4] . One fact is very clear -whilst providing optimal treatment for patients, careful execution of infection control measures is necessary among health care providers to prevent nosocomial transmission.

Personal protective equipment (PPE) recommendations have been made explicit [2, 3] , and include fluid-resistant gowns, gloves, eye protection, face shield, hair covers, and fit-tested N95 respirators or powered-air-purifying respirators. However, given the unexpected and unanticipated pandemic and consequent limitation of resources in most health care settings, PPE is being increasingly rationed, forcing many health care workers to reuse or forego the use of PPE entirely [3] . The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has even recently resorted to recommending the use of scarfs or bandanas instead of necessary masks and N95 respirators [3, 5] . In turn, many hospitals are relying on community donations, including selfmade masks and makeshift face shields, all of which puts health care workers at major risk of infection.

These circumstances present physicians with an ethical dilemma. According to the American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics, physicians have a professional obligation to act in the best interests of patients and to do no harm, even in the face of greater 3 than usual risks to their own safety, health, or life [6] . This leads to a difficult question: should we provide care without adequate protection? During the Black Plague of the Middle Ages, many of the already few health care professionals at the time left their practices and moved with their families to rural retreats -along with many others -in order to avoid becoming infected in crowded cities while treating patients [7] . SARS-1 (2002-2004) did not reach the global scale of SARS-CoV-2, but nevertheless stimulated consideration of important ethical issues in the provision of care. At that time, shortages of PPE and a lack of sufficient dedicated infectious disease specialty care led to a disproportionate surge of health care worker infections early on during the SARS outbreak in East Asia [8] . In 2015 Ebola's high case-fatality rate put West African low-income countries with fragile health systems and limited health care supplies at extremely high risk, costing the lives of hundreds of health care workers [9] .

When PPE is not available, refusal to provide medical treatment deprives patients of needed care, resulting in harm to individuals and to communities. The consequences of providing care without adequate PPE, however, are also grave -health care workers potentially become ill, infect their colleagues, patients, and families, and are removed from the workforce. This not only decreases the human resources available to care for a population in crisis, but also transforms health care workers into vectors for the disease they are working to eradicate. Without PPE, providers cannot perform their ethically-required duties towards their patients. Those who seek to avoid doing harm by caring for patients under these circumstances are at risk of perpetuating an arguably greater harm. Moreover, a substantial loss of workforce as a result of a lack of PPE, especially those more vulnerable to a complicated CoVID-19 disease progression, leads to a loss of skilled workers, experienced teachers, and specialists after the pandemic ends. Reports from China and Italy illustrates the loss of many health care workers across all disciplines and the cross-training of, for example, surgical specialists to cover emergency departments and intensive care units [10, 11] .

Going forward, all reasonable efforts should be made to organize patients into CoVID-19-dedicated units and, when necessary, to transfer patients to facilities with adequate resources. The existing supply of PPE should be conserved as much as possible, which implies canceling elective surgeries, limiting participation of non-essential medical personnel in direct patient care, re-using PPE, and allocating PPE only for higher risk exposures. To help ensure adequate supplies of PPE for those on the front lines, community donations, existing manufacturers, newly converted factories, and in-house innovations can be engaged.

Based on the summary report from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 4% of all CoVID-19 infections were health care personnel, of which 15% had severe or critical illnesses [12] . Examining the integrated surveillance data from Italy and Spain earlier in the country's outbreak, 20% of infections were seen in health care workers. In the mass shortage of PPE, studies comparing non-medical grade masks with medical masks demonstrated significantly higher rates of infection amongst health care workers using nonmedical-grade masks due to poor filtration and moisture retention [13] . Furthermore, in a study comparing medical-grade surgical masks with N95 respirators, the use of medical-grade surgical masks was associated with significantly higher rates of CoVID-19 infection [14] . Thus, while some protection is better than none, the shortage of PPE and the risks to health care workers spread as quickly as SARS-CoV-2 itself. We can learn from the experiences of our colleagues across the planet. The pandemic is global and its lessons on the importance of protecting the health care workforce are global as well.

On the basis of the preceding discussion, we propose four options for physicians who are caring for patients when PPE is unavailable. Exposing oneself and one's family, colleagues, and patients to harm, and thereby exacerbating the scope of the pandemic can be a substantial risk. Moreover, the physician may face a higher risk of contracting or succumbing to the virus due to advanced age, comorbidities, or immunosuppressed status. Caring for others requires caring for oneself first.

Option 2: Given limited resources, physicians can continue to care for patients as best they can -whether in-person or remotely by way of tele-rounds -while observing personal hygiene (e.g., frequent hand washing, six-foot separation from others, and coughing and sneezing in one's elbow), accurate use of whatever PPE is available, and post-exposure decontamination (change of scrubs, showering, and disinfecting all personal and exposed medical devices and equipment). Physicians who exhibit symptoms and test positive for CoVID-19 should follow official and institutional policies.

Option 3: The same as option 2, but minimizing the possibility of transmitting the virus to one's family or friends by self-imposing strict social isolation and living at the hospital or elsewhere rather than at home, at least until the pandemic has begun to recede and testing for SARS-CoV-2 is negative.

Option 4: The same as option 3, but continuing to work despite showing symptoms or testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, given that most of the health care workforce is expected to become infected without PPE. This scenario recognizes direct patient 6 care as our paramount obligation, even with the direct risk to self and propagation of the infection to other patients and their families -in other words, potentially causing direct harm to self and others for the benefit of infected patients.

Regardless of which of the above options is chosen, the consequences of physicians as potential helpers or as vectors of the virus must be considered. Conserving the health care workforce by limiting their exposure to the infective agent, as presented in Options 2 and 3, can help keep our health care providers reasonably safe to allow for continued patient care. The first option -absenting oneself from providing care -is not preferred; it is reminiscent of 14 th century physicians absconding to safety outside plague-infested cities. The fourth optionproviding care whilst sick -is far from ideal, yet is anecdotally seen in hospitals across North America. Options 2 and 3 seem most acceptable when some PPE are simply not available.

The safety of our patients, health care providers, and communities should be our highest priority. The unprotected physician could be the next patients, along with their families, colleagues, and the patients they care for. As individual physicians and collectively as a profession, we must be role models and fierce advocates for breaking the chain of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and protecting the health care workforce in order to help preserve the entire health care enterprise.

The practice of medicine has often been described in terms of military metaphor, using phrases such as "fighting disease," "silver bullets," "the therapeutic armamentarium," and "the body's defenses." That tradition can be applied to our current situation to good effect. The world is at war with CoVID-19, and the frontline army is composed primarily of health care workers.

We need weapons and armor appropriate to the battle to be effective in curing infected patients and limiting the spread of CoVID-19 -we need to be properly equipped if we hope to win this war with as few casualties as possible.

Benjamin Franklin's The Way to Wealth: 52 Brilliant Ideas Interpretation

COVID-19 HANDBOOK from CHINESE EXPERIENCE 英文版

Protecting Health Care Workers Against COVID-19-and Being Prepared for Future Pandemics

Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1

Where Are the N95 Masks? -The Atlantic n.d

Physicians, AIDS, and Occupational Risk: Historic Traditions and Ethical Obligations

The SARS epidemic in Hong Kong: What lessons have we learned?

Health-care worker mortality and the legacy of the Ebola epidemic

Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China

Facing Covid-19 in Italy -Ethics, Logistics, and Therapeutics on the Epidemic's Front Line

Please protect all health care workers: Make PPE a priority n

A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers

Association between 2019-nCoV transmission and N95 respirator use