Search

Context A novel remote volunteer program was implemented in response to the initial COVID-19 surge in New York City, allowing out-of-state palliative care specialists to serve patients and families in need. No study has detailed the perceptions of these consultants. Objectives To understand the experiences of remote volunteer palliative care consultants during the initial COVID-19 surge. Methods This qualitative study utilized a thematic analysis approach. During January and February 2021, we conducted one-on-one semi-structured interviews with 15 board-certified palliative care physicians who participated in the program. Codes and emerging themes were identified through iterative discussion and comparison. Results Five overarching themes (with sub-themes in parentheses) were identified: 1) motivations for participating in the program, 2) logistical evaluation of the program (integration, telehealth model, dyad structure and debriefing sessions), 3) barriers to delivery (language and cultural differences, culture of high-intensity care, legal and administrative differences), 4) emotional burden (moral distress, burnout), and 5) ideas for improvements. Notably, participants observed institutional and cultural differences that posed challenges to delivery of care. Many expressed feelings of distress related to the uncertainty and scarcity caused by the pandemic, although volunteering may have been protective against burnout. Conclusion This study provides an in-depth look at the experiences of remote volunteer palliative care consultants during the initial COVID-19 surge from the unique perspectives of the consultants themselves. Participants expressed overall positive and meaningful experiences and felt that the model was appropriate given the circumstances. Additionally, participants provided recommendations that could guide future implementations of similar programs.

Family members of critically ill patients with COVID-19 have described increased symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Little is known about how these symptoms may change over time.We studied changes in PTSD symptoms in family members of critically ill patients with COVID-19 over 12-months.This prospective, multi-site observational cohort study recruited participants at 12 hospitals in 5 states. Calls were made to participants at 3-4 months, 6-months, and 12-months post-patient admission to the ICU.There were 955 eligible family members, of whom 330 (53.3% of those reached) consented to participate. Complete longitudinal data was acquired for 115 individuals (34.8% of consented). PTSD symptoms were measured by the Impact of Events Scale-6 (IES-6), with a score of ≥10 identifying significant symptoms. At 3-months, the mean IES-6 score was 11.9±6.1 with 63.6% having significant symptoms, decreasing to 32.9% at one year (mean IES-6 score 7.6±5.0). Three clusters of symptom evolution emerged over time: persistent symptoms (34.8%, n=40), recovered symptoms (33.0%, n=38) and non-development of symptoms (32.2%, n=37). While participants identifying as Hispanic demonstrated initially higher adjusted IES-6 scores (2.57 points higher [95% CI: 1.1, 4.1, p =0.001]), they also demonstrated a more dramatic improvement in adjusted scores over time (4.7 greater decrease at 12 months [95% CI: 3.2-6.3, p.001]).One year later, some family members of patients with COVID-19 continue to experience significant symptoms of PTSD. Further studies are needed to better understand how various differences contribute to increased risk for these symptoms.

IMPORTANCE: The psychological symptoms associated with having a family member admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the COVID-19 pandemic are not well defined. OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of symptoms of stress-related disorders, primarily posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), in family members of patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 approximately 90 days after admission. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective, multisite, mixed-methods observational cohort study assessed 330 family members of patients admitted to the ICU (except in New York City, which had a random sample of 25% of all admitted patients per month) between February 1 and July 31, 2020, at 8 academic-affiliated and 4 community-based hospitals in 5 US states. EXPOSURE: Having a family member in the ICU with COVID-19. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Symptoms of PTSD at 3 months, as defined by a score of 10 or higher on the Impact of Events Scale 6 (IES-6). RESULTS: A total of 330 participants (mean [SD] age, 51.2 [15.1] years; 228 [69.1%] women; 150 [52.8%] White; 92 [29.8%] Hispanic) were surveyed at the 3-month time point. Most individuals were the patients’ child (129 [40.6%]) or spouse or partner (81 [25.5%]). The mean (SD) IES-6 score at 3 months was 11.9 (6.1), with 201 of 316 respondents (63.6%) having scores of 10 or higher, indicating significant symptoms of PTSD. Female participants had an adjusted mean IES-6 score of 2.6 points higher (95% CI, 1.4-3.8; P

Context Little is known about the real-time decision-making process of patients with capacity to choose withdrawal of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Objectives To assess how withdrawal of temporary MCS occurs when patients possess the capacity to make this decision themselves. Methods This retrospective case series included adults supported by CentriMag Acute Circulatory Support or Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation from February 2, 2007 to May 27, 2020 at a tertiary academic medical center who possessed capacity to participate in end-of-life discussions. Authors performed chart review to determine times between "initiation of temporary MCS," "determination of ‘bridge to nowhere,'" "patient expressing desire to withdraw," "agreement to withdraw," "withdrawal," and "death," as well as reasons for withdrawal and the role of ethics, psychiatry, and palliative care. Results A total of 796 individuals were included. MCS was withdrawn in 178 (22.4%) of cases. Six of these 178 patients (3.4%) possessed the capacity to decide to withdraw MCS. Time between "patient expressing desire to withdraw" and "agreement to withdraw" ranged from 0 to 3 days; time between "agreement to withdraw" and "withdrawal" ranged from 0 to 6 days. Common reasons for withdrawal include perceived decline in quality of life or low probability of recovery. Ethics and psychiatry were consulted in 3 of 6 cases and palliative care in 5 of 6 cases. Conclusion While it is rare for patients on MCS to request withdrawal, such cases provide insight into reasons for withdrawal and the important roles of multidisciplinary teams in helping patients and families through end-of-life decision-making.

To determine the proportion of pregnant women who selected names for their babies to be born and were willing to disclose them for use in hospital systems, thereby potentially reducing infant identification errors.Survey of pregnant women admitted to postpartum or antepartum units at a large academic hospital. Descriptive analyses were conducted to determine the proportion who had chosen names prior to delivery. Chi-square tests and calculated odds ratios assessed the association with demographic and pregnancy factors.Of postpartum participants, 79.0% had names for their newborns at birth. This proportion was significantly lower in self-identified non-Hispanic, white, and married women. Of antepartum participants, 65.7% had selected a name at the time of survey.Most participants had names chosen for use at birth. This finding was consistent across demographic and pregnancy characteristics, supporting the feasibility of using given names for newborns in hospital systems at birth.