Hospital preparedness during epidemics using simulation: the case of COVID-19

  1. Daniel Garcia-Vicuña
  2. Laida Esparza
  3. Fermin Mallor

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

This paper presents a discrete event simulation model to support decision-making for the short-term planning of hospital resource needs, especially Intensive Care Unit (ICU) beds, to cope with outbreaks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Given its purpose as a short-term forecasting tool, the simulation model requires an accurate representation of the current system state and high fidelity in mimicking the system dynamics from that state. The two main components of the simulation model are the stochastic modeling of patient admission and patient flow processes. The patient arrival process is modelled using a Gompertz growth model, which enables the representation of the exponential growth caused by the initial spread of the virus, followed by a period of maximum arrival rate and then a decreasing phase until the wave subsides. We conducted an empirical study concluding that the Gompertz model provides a better fit to pandemic-related data (positive cases and hospitalization numbers) and has superior prediction capacity than other sigmoid models based on Richards, Logistic, and Stannard functions. Patient flow modelling considers different pathways and dynamic length of stay estimation in several healthcare stages using patient-level data. We report on the application of the simulation model in two Autonomous Regions of Spain (Navarre and La Rioja) during the two COVID-19 waves experienced in 2020. The simulation model was employed on a daily basis to inform the regional logistic health care planning team, who programmed the ward and ICU beds based on the resulting predictions.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1007/s10100-021-00779-w
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.08.12.20173328: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.08.12.20173328 on medRxiv