AbstractBackgroundNon-pharmacological interventions were introduced based on modelling studies which suggested that the English National Health Service (NHS) would be overwhelmed by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we describe the pattern of bed occupancy across England during the first wave of the pandemic, January 31st to June 5th 2020.MethodsBed availability and occupancy data was extracted from daily reports submitted by all English secondary care providers, between 27-Mar and 5-June. Two thresholds for ‘safe occupancy’ were utilized (85% as per Royal College of Emergency Medicine and 92% as per NHS Improvement).FindingsAt peak availability, there were 2711 additional beds compatible with mechanical ventilation across England, reflecting a 53% increase in capacity, and occupancy never exceeded 62%. A consequence of the repurposing of beds meant that at the trough, there were 8·7% (8,508) fewer general and acute (G&A) beds across England, but occupancy never exceeded 72%. The closest to (surge) capacity that any trust in England reached was 99·8% for general and acute beds. For beds compatible with mechanical ventilation there were 326 trust-days (3·7%) spent above 85% of surge capacity, and 154 trust-days (1·8%) spent above 92%. 23 trusts spent a cumulative 81 days at 100% saturation of their surge ventilator bed capacity (median number of days per trust = 1 [range: 1 to 17]). However, only 3 STPs (aggregates of geographically co-located trusts) reached 100% saturation of their mechanical ventilation beds.InterpretationThroughout the first wave of the pandemic, an adequate supply of all bed-types existed at a national level. Due to an unequal distribution of bed utilization, many trusts spent a significant period operating above ‘safe-occupancy’ thresholds, despite substantial capacity in geographically co-located trusts; a key operational issue to address in preparing for a potential second wave.FundingThis study received no funding.Research In ContextEvidence Before This StudyWe identified information sources describing COVID-19 related bed and mechanical ventilator demand modelling, as well as bed occupancy during the first wave of the pandemic by performing regular searches of MedRxiv, PubMed and Google, using the terms ‘COVID-19’, ‘mechanical ventilators’, ‘bed occupancy’, ‘England’, ‘UK’, ‘demand’, and ‘non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs)’, until June 20th, 2020. Two UK-specific studies were found that modelled the demand for mechanical ventilators, one of which incorporated sensitivity analysis based on the introduction of NPIs and found that their effects might prevent the healthcare system being overwhelmed. Separately, several news reports were found pertaining to a single hospital that reached ventilator capacity in England during the first wave of the pandemic, however, no single authoritative source was identified detailing impact across all hospital sites in England.Added Value of This StudyThis national study of hospital-level bed occupancy in England provides unique and timely insight into bed-specific resource utilization during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, nationally, and by specific (geographically defined) health footprints. We found evidence of an unequal distribution of resource utilization across England. Although occupancy of beds compatible with mechanical ventilation never exceeded 62% at the national level, 52 (30%) hospitals across England reached 100% saturation at some point during the first wave of the pandemic. Close examination of the geospatial data revealed that in the vast majority of circumstances there was relief capacity in geographically co-located hospitals. Over the first wave it was theoretically possible to markedly reduce (by 95.1%) the number of hospitals at 100% saturation of their mechanical ventilator bed capacity by redistributing patients to nearby hospitals.Implications Of All The Available EvidenceNow-casting using routinely collected administrative data presents a robust approach to rapidly evaluate the effectiveness of national policies introduced to prevent a healthcare system being overwhelmed in the context of a pandemic illness. Early investment in operational field hospital and an independent sector network may yield more overtly positive results in the winter, when G&A occupancy-levels regularly exceed 92% in England, however, during the first wave of the pandemic they were under-utilized. Moreover, in the context of the non-pharmacological interventions utilized during the first wave of COVID-19, demand for beds and mechanical ventilators was much lower than initially predicted, but despite this many trust spent a significant period of time operating above ‘safe-occupancy’ thresholds. This finding demonstrates that it is vital that future demand (prediction) models reflect the nuances of local variation within a healthcare system. Failure to incorporate such geographical variation can misrepresent the likelihood of surpassing availability thresholds by averaging out over regions with relatively lower demand, and presents a key operational issue for policymakers to address in preparing for a potential second wave.
Multiple Mechanical Ventilation: historical review and cost analysis
