The issue is the people who need to be hospitalized in the worst cases go on to require ventilation to force air into their lungs and those machines have a limited supply. On top of that people on ventilation require pretty close observation so you need about 3:1 patient to nurse ratio. Those are the numbers that are hardest to increase rapidly, nurses and ventilator equipment.
I heard a radio program about the life of a UK (I think) surgeon who worked in war zones and crisis regions like Syria, and one thing he found in a hospital was an intensive care unit staffed mostly by Skype cameras to a hospital in Washington, so the very few nurses on site could be directed to the patients most in need, and the remote nurses could watch the vital signs of many patients without having to spend time walking around.
If that was long enough ago to become part of a biography, it must be even more possible these days to get cameras and connectivity to remote hospitals anywhere on Earth with spare capacity of nurses.
That would allow you to move capacity around. Not sure if intubated patients could be monitored remotely though I'm just not sure if they only need vitals monitoring or if they require a present person doing something there.
That is a neat thing though I didn't know about. Wonder if hospital networks could handle the feeds properly, getting the equipment setup would take a bit but it should all be doable with consumer grade stuff.
