Abstract
Background Several states have released Crisis Standards of Care (CSC) guidelines for the allocation of scarce critical care resources. Most guidelines rely on Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores to maximize lives saved, but states have adopted different stances on whether to maximize long-term outcomes (life-years saved) by accounting for patient comorbidities.
Methods We compared 4 representative state guidelines with varying approaches to comorbidities and analyzed how CSC prioritization correlates with clinical outcomes. We included 27 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs at Brigham and Women’s Hospital from March 12 to April 3, 2020. We compared prioritization algorithms from New York, which assigns priority based on SOFA alone; Maryland, which uses SOFA plus severe comorbidities; Pennsylvania, which uses SOFA plus major and severe comorbidities; and Colorado, which uses SOFA plus a modified Charlson comorbidity index.
Results In pairwise comparisons across all possible pairs, we found that state guidelines frequently resulted in tie-breakers based on age or lottery: New York 100% of the time (100% resolved by lottery), Pennsylvania 86% of the time (18% by lottery), Maryland 93% of the time (35% by lottery), and Colorado: 32% of the time (10% by lottery). The prioritization algorithm with the strongest correlation with 14-day outcomes was Colorado (rs = −0.483. p = 0.011) followed by Maryland (rs = −0. 394, p =0.042), Pennsylvania (rs = −0.382, p = 0.049), and New York (rs = 0). An alternative model using raw SOFA scores alone was moderately correlated with outcomes (rs = −0.448, p = 0.019).
Conclusions State guidelines for scarce resource allocation frequently resulted in identical priority scores, requiring tie-breakers based on age or lottery. These findings suggest that state CSC guidelines should be further assessed empirically to understand whether they meet their goals.
Competing Interest Statement
Dr. Feldman receives funding from the National Institutes of Health (5T32HL007633-34). Outside the scope of the work, Dr. Feldman serves as a consultant for Aetion and Alosa. He also received an honorarium for a presentation to Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Massachusetts. Dr. Kishore serves as a consultant for Resolve to Save Lives for hypertension control and has led a partnership on multiple chronic conditions supported by the Arnhold Institute for Global Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and Teva Pharmaceuticals.
Funding Statement
No additional external funding was received.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data are available upon request.
