[mike_d]

According to the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the United States has more than 200,000 available ventilators. However we have less than 50,000 staff trained in mechanical ventilation that can support a maximum of 125,000 patients. Furthermore, we only have 90,000 ICU beds to put patients in.

Yes the media is telling you there is a shortage, they don't understand that the problem isn't a lack of machines.

[jjeaff]

50k staff and that can only support 125k patients?

So you are saying a person trained on the use of a ventilator can only support a little over 2 patients on a ventilator? Are they sitting between the beds and pedaling the machine?

These are $30k machines. I would think, especially in a crisis situation, a single medical professional could probably handle a few dozen people on ventilators if they had too.

[mike_d]

> So you are saying a person trained on the use of a ventilator can only support a little over 2 patients on a ventilator?

As I mentioned in the comment you replied to, the numbers are from the SCCM. You aren't going to find a more authoritative source for accurate information.

> I would think, especially in a crisis situation, a single medical professional could probably handle a few dozen people on ventilators if they had too

If you don't believe the SCCM, California law and the California Respiratory Care Board set the requirement as "a ratio of 1:4 or fewer each shift."

Short of a Cardiopulmonary Bypass Machine (basically a mechanical heart), invasive ventilation is one of the most intensive "intensive care" treatments, requiring constant monitoring and adjustment.

[jjeaff]

Im sure 1 to 4 is best case and best practice. In an emergency, I guarantee someone can and will handle more.

Additionally, the 1 to 4 ratio doesn't match with the 50k number.

[adinb]

Not if they’re intubated; they’re very time consuming for the nursing/care staff.