As of March 23, 2020 there have been over 354,000 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in over 180 countries, the World Health Organization characterized COVID-19 as a pandemic, and the United States (US) announced a national state of emergency.1, 2, 3 In parts of China and Italy the demand for intensive care (IC) beds was higher than the number of available beds.4, 5 We sought to build an accessible interactive model that could facilitate hospital capacity planning in the presence of significant uncertainty about the proportion of the population that is COVID-19+ and the rate at which COVID-19 is spreading in the population. Our approach was to design a tool with parameters that hospital leaders could adjust to reflect their local data and easily modify to conduct sensitivity analyses. We developed a model to facilitate hospital planning with estimates of the number of Intensive Care (IC) beds, Acute Care (AC) beds, and ventilators necessary to accommodate patients who require hospitalization for COVID-19 and how these compare to the available resources. Inputs to the model include estimates of the characteristics of the patient population and hospital capacity. We deployed this model as an interactive online tool.6 The model is implemented in R 3.5, RStudio, RShiny 1.4.0 and Python 3.7. The parameters used may be modified as data become available, for use at other institutions, and to generate sensitivity analyses. We illustrate the use of the model by estimating the demand generated by COVID-19+ arrivals for a hypothetical acute care medical center. The model calculated that the number of patients requiring an IC bed would equal the number of IC beds on Day 23, the number of patients requiring a ventilator would equal the number of ventilators available on Day 27, and the number of patients requiring an AC bed and coverage by the Medicine Service would equal the capacity of the Medicine service on Day 21. In response to the COVID-19 epidemic, hospitals must understand their current and future capacity to care for patients with severe illness. While there is significant uncertainty around the parameters used to develop this model, the analysis is based on transparent logic and starts from observed data to provide a robust basis of projections for hospital managers. The model demonstrates the need and provides an approach to address critical questions about staffing patterns for IC and AC, and equipment capacity such as ventilators.

Objective To develop and scale algorithm‐enabled patient prioritization to improve population‐level management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) in a pediatric clinic with fixed resources, using telemedicine and remote monitoring of patients via continuous glucose monitor (CGM) data review. Research design and methods We adapted consensus glucose targets for T1D patients using CGM to identify interpretable clinical criteria to prioritize patients for weekly provider review. The criteria were constructed to manage the number of patients reviewed weekly and identify patients who most needed provider contact. We developed an interactive dashboard to display CGM data relevant for the patients prioritized for review. Results The introduction of the new criteria and interactive dashboard was associated with a 60% reduction in the mean time spent by diabetes team members who remotely and asynchronously reviewed patient data and contacted patients, from 3.2 ± 0.20 to 1.3 ± 0.24 min per patient per week. Given fixed resources for review, this corresponded to an estimated 147% increase in weekly clinic capacity. Patients who qualified for and received remote review (n = 58) have associated 8.8 percentage points (pp) (95% CI = 0.6–16.9 pp) greater time‐in‐range (70–180 mg/dl) glucoses compared to 25 control patients who did not qualify at 12 months after T1D onset. Conclusions An algorithm‐enabled prioritization of T1D patients with CGM for asynchronous remote review reduced provider time spent per patient and was associated with improved time‐in‐range.

Background The World Health Organization and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend that both infected and susceptible people wear face masks to protect against COVID-19. Methods We develop a dynamic disease model to assess the effectiveness of face masks in reducing the spread of COVID-19, during an initial outbreak and a later resurgence, as a function of mask effectiveness, coverage, intervention timing, and time horizon. We instantiate the model for the COVID-19 outbreak in New York, with sensitivity analyses on key natural history parameters. Results During the initial epidemic outbreak, with no social distancing, only 100% coverage of masks with high effectiveness can reduce the effective reproductive number [Formula: see text] below 1. During a resurgence, with lowered transmission rates due to social distancing measures, masks with medium effectiveness at 80% coverage can reduce [Formula: see text] below 1 but cannot do so if individuals relax social distancing efforts. Full mask coverage could significantly improve outcomes during a resurgence: with social distancing, masks with at least medium effectiveness could reduce [Formula: see text] below 1 and avert almost all infections, even with intervention fatigue. For coverage levels below 100%, prioritizing masks that reduce the risk of an infected individual from spreading the infection rather than the risk of a susceptible individual from getting infected yields the greatest benefit. Limitations Data regarding COVID-19 transmission are uncertain, and empirical evidence on mask effectiveness is limited. Our analyses assume homogeneous mixing, providing an upper bound on mask effectiveness. Conclusions Even moderately effective face masks can play a role in reducing the spread of COVID-19, particularly with full coverage, but should be combined with social distancing measures to reduce [Formula: see text] below 1. [Box: see text]

Objective: To develop and scale algorithm-enabled patient prioritization to improve population-level management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) in a pediatric clinic with fixed resources, using telemedicine and remote monitoring of patients via continuous glucose monitor (CGM) data review. Research Design and Methods: We adapted consensus glucose targets for T1D patients using CGM to identify interpretable clinical criteria to prioritize patients for weekly provider review. The criteria were constructed to manage the number of patients reviewed weekly and identify patients who most needed provider contact. We developed an interactive dashboard to display CGM data relevant for the patients prioritized for review. Results: The introduction of the new criteria and interactive dashboard was associated with a 60% reduction in the mean time spent by diabetes team members who remotely and asynchronously reviewed patient data and contacted patients, from 3.2 +/- 0.20 to 1.3 +/- 0.24 minutes per patient per week. Given fixed resources for review, this corresponded to an estimated 147% increase in weekly clinic capacity. Patients who qualified for and received remote review (n=58) have associated 8.8 percentage points (pp) (95% CI = 0.6-16.9pp) greater time-in-range (70-180 mg/dL) glucoses compared to 25 control patients who did not qualify at twelve months after T1D onset. Conclusions: An algorithm-enabled prioritization of T1D patients with CGM for asynchronous remote review reduced provider time spent per patient and was associated with improved time-in-range.

Background:We sought to build an accessible interactive model that could facilitate hospital capacity planning in the presence of significant uncertainty about the proportion of the population that is positive forcoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the rate at which COVID-19 is spreading in the population. Our goal was to facilitate the implementation of data-driven recommendations for capacity management with a transparent mathematical simulation designed to answer the specific, local questions hospital leadership considered critical.Methods:The model facilitates hospital planning with estimates of the number of Intensive Care (IC) beds, Acute Care (AC) beds, and ventilators necessary to accommodate patients who require hospitalization for COVID-19 and how these compare to the available resources. Inputs to the model include estimates of the characteristics of the patient population and hospital capacity. We deployed this model as an interactive online tool with modifiable parameters.Results:The use of the model is illustrated by estimating the demand generated by COVID-19+ arrivals for a hypothetical acute care medical center. The model calculated that the number of patients requiring an IC bed would equal the number of IC beds on Day 23, the number of patients requiring a ventilator would equal the number of ventilators available on Day 27, and the number of patients requiring an AC bed and coverage by the Medicine Service would equal the capacity of the Medicine service on Day 21. The model was used to inform COVID-19 planning and decision-making, including Intensive Care Unit (ICU) staffing and ventilator procurement.Conclusion:In response to the COVID-19 epidemic, hospitals must understand their current and future capacity to care for patients with severe illness. While there is significant uncertainty around the parameters used to develop this model, the analysis is based on transparent logic and starts from observed data to provide a robust basis of projections for hospital managers. The model demonstrates the need and provides an approach to address critical questions about staffing patterns for IC and AC, and equipment capacity such as ventilators.Contributions to the literature:· Generation and implementation of data-driven recommendations for hospital capacity management early in the COVID-19 pandemic· The conceptualization, development, and deployment of an interactive simulation model in two weeks· Data-driven capacity management in the presence of significant uncertainty about the expected volume of patients, their clinical needs, and the availability of the workforceTrial Registration: Not applicable