Special Reports

The Critical Care Professional Societies Address the Critical Care Crisis in the United States

Access and quality of health care for cardiopulmonary disease in the United States ranks poorly compared with economically similar nations. No recent comprehensive assessment of the cardiopulmonary workforce is available. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate current published evidence about the workforce caring for persons with cardiopulmonary disease.

This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Structured searches of medical databases were conducted to find studies published from 2006 through 2016. Because of the paucity of quantitative data retrieved, a qualitative synthesis was conducted. Thematic analyses were performed on 15 identified articles through a process of open and axial coding.

There is published evidence of current and projected workforce shortages in all clinical settings where care of persons with cardiopulmonary disease occurs. Advanced practice providers complete much of their cardiopulmonary training on the job. The aging population and the advent of new medical interventions are projected to increase growth in health-care demand. Some physicians limit hiring of advanced practice providers because of a deficiency in formal cardiopulmonary training.

There is a gap in care between the needs of persons with cardiopulmonary disease and cardiopulmonary providers. Strategies resolving this problem may include one or more approaches that reduce the administrative burden associated with current care and assure the availability of suitably trained providers.

We describe the national organization and distribution of intensive care services within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), the largest single integrated health-care system in the United States.

Data come primarily from the 2004 Survey of Intensive Care Units in VHA, an electronically distributed survey of all ICUs in the VHA. Medical directors and nurse managers from all 213 ICUs in the VHA responded to the survey. In addition, we extracted data on the number of ICU admissions and unique veterans served from national VHA databases.

The VHA has a geographically dispersed, multilevel system of care with variation in geographic access for eligible veterans (varying from 3.1 to 3.5 ICU beds per 1,000 patient discharges) and variation in service provision (from 10 to 19 level 1 ICUs across four regions). Level 1 ICUs are the highest tertiary-level ICUs, with the full range of subspecialty care. The proportion of beds associated with VHA-developed ICU levels of care ranges from 55% level 1 beds in the Northeast to 73% in the South, while level 4 beds represent 4% of all ICU beds in the South and 10% in the Midwest.

Overall, the VHA system has a fair amount of regional variation, but level 1 ICUs are available in all geographic regions, and there are regional clusters of all levels. Adopting a four-level system for rating ICUs may assist in monitoring and assessing the quality of care provided in the smallest, most rural facilities.

Demand for critical care services is increasing. Unless the supply of intensivists increases, critically ill patients will not have access to intensivists. Recent critical care society recommendations include increased graduate medical education support and expansion of the J-1 visa waiver program for foreign medical graduates. This article proposes additional recommendations, based on strengthening the relationship between emergency medicine and critical care medicine.

Critical care is a continuum that includes out-of-hospital, emergency department (ED), and ICU care teams. Both emergency medicine and critical care medicine require expertise in treating life-threatening acute illness, with many critically ill patients often presenting first to the ED. Increased patient volumes and acuity have resulted in longer ED lengths of stay and more critical care delivery in the ED. However, the majority of critical care medicine fellowships do not accept emergency medicine residents, and those who do successfully complete a fellowship do not have access to a US certification examination in critical care medicine. Despite these barriers, interest in critical care medicine training among emergency physicians is increasing. Dual emergency medicine– and critical care medicine–trained physicians will not only help alleviate the intensivist shortage but also strengthen critical care delivery in the ED and facilitate coordination at the ED-ICU interface. We therefore propose that all accreditation bodies work cooperatively to create a route to critical care medicine certification for emergency physicians who complete a critical care fellowship.