Search

Objectives To examine the circumstances and needs of older adults who were “kinless,” defined as having no living spouse or children, when they developed dementia. Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of information from the Adult Changes in Thought study. Among 848 participants diagnosed with dementia between 1994 and 2016, we identified 64 who had no living spouse or child at dementia onset. We then conducted a qualitative analysis of administrative documents pertaining to these participants: handwritten comments recorded after each study visit, and medical history documents containing clinical chart notes from participants’ medical records. Results In this community-dwelling cohort of older adults diagnosed with dementia, 8.4% were kinless at dementia onset. Participants in this sample had an average age of 87 years old, half lived alone, and one third lived with unrelated persons. Through inductive content analysis, we identified 4 themes that describe their circumstances and needs: (1) life trajectories, (2) caregiving resources, (3) care needs and gaps, and (4) turning points in caregiving arrangements. Discussion Our qualitative analysis reveals that the life trajectories that led members of the analytic cohort to be kinless at dementia onset were quite varied. This research highlights the importance of nonfamily caregivers and participants’ own roles as caregivers. Our findings suggest that clinicians and health systems may need to work with other parties to directly provide dementia caregiving support rather than rely on family, and address factors such as neighborhood affordability that particularly affect older adults who have limited family support.

The effectiveness of a third mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose (booster dose) against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant is uncertain, especially in older, high-risk populations.To determine mRNA booster vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and death in the Omicron era by booster type, primary vaccine type, time since primary vaccination, age, and comorbidity burden.Retrospective matched cohort study designed to emulate a target trial of booster vaccination versus no booster, conducted from 1 December 2021 to 31 March 2022.U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs health care system.Persons who had received 2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses at least 5 months earlier.Booster monovalent mRNA vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech's BNT162b2 or Moderna's mRNA-1273) versus no booster.Booster VE.Each group included 490 838 well-matched persons, who were predominantly male (88%), had a mean age of 63.0 years (SD, 14.0), and were followed for up to 121 days (mean, 79.8 days). Booster VE more than 10 days after a booster dose was 42.3% (95% CI, 40.6% to 43.9%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection, 53.3% (CI, 48.1% to 58.0%) against SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalization, and 79.1% (CI, 71.2% to 84.9%) against SARS-CoV-2-related death. Booster VE was similar for different booster types (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273), age groups, and primary vaccination regimens but was significantly higher with longer time since primary vaccination and higher comorbidity burden.Predominantly male population.Booster mRNA vaccination was highly effective in preventing death and moderately effective in preventing infection and hospitalization for up to 4 months after administration in the Omicron era. Increased uptake of booster vaccination, which is currently suboptimal, should be pursued to limit the morbidity and mortality of SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially in persons with high comorbidity burden.U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Documentation of patients' goals of care is integral to promoting goal-concordant care. In 2017, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) launched a system-wide initiative to standardize documentation of patients' preferences for life-sustaining treatments (LST) and related goals-of-care conversations (GoCC) that included using a note template in its national electronic medical record system. We describe implementation of the LST note based on documentation in the medical records of patients with advanced kidney disease, a group that has traditionally experienced highly intensive patterns of care.We performed a qualitative analysis of documentation in the VA electronic medical record for a national random sample of 500 adults with advanced kidney disease for whom at least one LST note was completed between July 2018 and March 2019 to identify prominent themes pertaining to the content and context of LST notes.During the observation period, a total of 723 (mean 1.5, range 1-6) LST notes were completed for this cohort. Two themes emerged from the analysis: (1) Reactive approach: LST notes were largely completed in response to medical crises, in which they focused on short-term goals and preferences rather than patients' broader health and goals, or certain clinical encounters designated by the initiative as "triggering events" for LST note completion; (2) Practitioner-driven: Documentation suggested that practitioners would attempt to engage patients/surrogates in GoCC to lay out treatment options in order to move care forward, but patients/surrogates sometimes appeared reluctant to engage in GoCC and had difficulty communicating in ways that practitioners could understand.Standardized documentation of patients' treatment preferences and related GoCC was used to inform in-the-moment decision-making during acute illness and certain junctures in care. There is opportunity to expand standardized documentation practices and related GoCC to address patients'/surrogates' broader health concerns and goals and to enhance their engagement in these processes.

In a target trial emulation study that included nearly 6 million predominately male patients receiving care in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs health care system, those receiving messenger RNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 were matched 1:1 to unvaccinated controls according to demographic, clinical, and geographic characteristics and followed for SARS-CoV-2 infection or SARS-CoV-2–related death to determine vaccine efficacy., Visual Abstract. COVID-19 Vaccination Effectiveness Against Infection or Death. In a target trial emulation study that included nearly 6 million predominately male patients receiving care in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs health care system, those receiving messenger RNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 were matched 1:1 to unvaccinated controls according to demographic, clinical, and geographic characteristics and followed for SARS-CoV-2 infection or SARS-CoV-2–related death to determine vaccine efficacy. Visual Abstract. COVID-19 Vaccination Effectiveness Against Infection or Death. In a target trial emulation study that included nearly 6 million predominately male patients receiving care in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs health care system, those receiving messenger RNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 were matched 1:1 to unvaccinated controls according to demographic, clinical, and geographic characteristics and followed for SARS-CoV-2 infection or SARS-CoV-2–related death to determine vaccine efficacy., Background: Little is known about real-world COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in racially and ethnically diverse, elderly populations with high comorbidity burden. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccines. Design: Target trial emulation study comparing newly vaccinated persons with matched unvaccinated controls. Setting: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs health care system. Participants: Among persons receiving care in the Veterans Affairs health care system (n = 5 766 638), those who received at least 1 dose of the Moderna or Pfizer–BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine from 11 December 2020 to 25 March 2021 (n = 2 099 871) were matched to unvaccinated controls in a 1:1 ratio according to demographic, clinical, and geographic characteristics. Intervention: Follow-up for SARS-CoV-2 infection or SARS-CoV-2–related death, defined as death within 30 days of infection, began after the vaccination date or an identical index date for the matched unvaccinated controls and continued until up to 30 June 2021. Measurements: Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection or SARS-CoV-2–related death. Results: Vaccinated and unvaccinated groups were well matched; both were predominantly male (92.9% vs. 93.4%), had advanced age (mean, 68.7 years in both groups), had diverse racial and ethnic distribution (for example, Black: 17.3% vs. 17.0%, Hispanic: 6.5% vs. 6.1%), and had substantial comorbidity burden. Vaccine effectiveness 7 or more days after the second vaccine dose was 69% (95% CI, 67% to 70%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 86% (CI, 82% to 89%) against SARS-CoV-2–related death and was similar when follow-up was extended to 31 March versus 30 June. Vaccine effectiveness against infection decreased with increasing age and comorbidity burden. Limitation: Predominantly male population and lack of data on SARS-CoV-2 variants. Conclusion: In an elderly, diverse, high-comorbidity population, COVID-19 VE against infection was substantially lower than previously reported, but VE against death was high. Complementary infection mitigation efforts remain important for pandemic control, even with vaccination. Primary Funding Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Context Heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are associated with high morbidity and mortality, especially in combination, yet little is known about the impact of these conditions together on end-of-life care. Objectives Compare end-of-life care and advance care planning (ACP) documentation among patients with both HF and CKD to those with either condition. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of deceased patients (2010-2017) with HF and CKD (n = 1673), HF without CKD (n = 2671), and CKD without HF (n = 1706), excluding patients with cancer or dementia. We compared hospitalizations and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in the last 30 days of life, hospital deaths, and ACP documentation >30 days before death. Results 39% of patients with HF and CKD were hospitalized and 33% were admitted to the ICU in the last 30 days vs. 30% and 28%, respectively, for HF, and 26% and 23% for CKD. Compared to patients with both conditions, those with only 1 were less likely to be admitted to the hospital [HF: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.72, 95%CI 0.63-0.83; CKD: aOR 0.63, 95%CI 0.53-0.75] and ICU (HF: aOR 0.83, 95%CI 0.71-0.94; CKD: aOR 0.68, 95%CI 0.56-0.80) and less likely to have ACP documentation (aOR 0.53, 95%CI 0.47-0.61 and aOR 0.70, 95%CI 0.60-0.81). Conclusions Decedents with both HF and CKD had more ACP documentation and received more intensive end-of-life care than those with only 1 condition. These findings suggest that patients with co-existing HF and CKD may benefit from interventions to ensure care received aligns with their goals.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: People receiving maintenance dialysis must often rely on family members and other close persons to make critical treatment decisions toward the end of life. Contemporary data on family members’ understanding of the end-of-life wishes of members of this population are lacking. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Among 172 family members of people undergoing maintenance dialysis, we ascertained their level of involvement in the patient’s care and prior discussions about care preferences. We also compared patient and family member responses to questions about end-of-life care using percentage agreement and the κ-statistic. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age of the 172 enrolled family members was 55 (±17) years, 136 (79%) were women, and 43 (25%) were Black individuals. Sixty-seven (39%) family members were spouses or partners of enrolled patients. A total of 137 (80%) family members had spoken with the patient about whom they would want to make medical decisions, 108 (63%) had spoken with the patient about their treatment preferences, 47 (27%) had spoken with the patient about stopping dialysis, and 56 (33%) had spoken with the patient about hospice. Agreement between patient and family member responses was highest for the question about whether the patient would want cardiopulmonary resuscitation (percentage agreement 83%, κ=0.31), and was substantially lower for questions about a range of other aspects of end-of-life care, including preference for mechanical ventilation (62%, 0.21), values around life prolongation versus comfort (45%, 0.13), preferred place of death (58%, 0.07), preferred decisional role (54%, 0.15), and prognostic expectations (38%, 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Most surveyed family members reported they had spoken with the patient about their end-of-life preferences but not about stopping dialysis or hospice. Although family members had a fair understanding of patients’ cardiopulmonary resuscitation preferences, most lacked a detailed understanding of their perspectives on other aspects of end-of-life care.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and its long-term outcomes may be jointly caused by a wide range of clinical, social, and economic characteristics. Studies aiming to identify mechanisms for SARS-CoV-2 morbidity and mortality must measure and account for these characteristics to arrive at unbiased, accurate conclusions. We sought to inform the design, measurement, and analysis of longitudinal studies of long-term outcomes among people infected with SARS-CoV-2. We fielded a survey to an interprofessional group of clinicians and scientists to identify factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent outcomes. Using an iterative process, we refined the resulting list of factors into a consensus causal diagram relating infection and 12-month mortality. Finally, we operationalized concepts from the causal diagram into minimally sufficient adjustment sets using common medical record data elements. Total 31 investigators identified 49 potential risk factors for and 72 potential consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Risk factors for infection with SARS-CoV-2 were grouped into five domains: demographics, physical health, mental health, personal social, and economic factors, and external social and economic factors. Consequences of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were grouped into clinical consequences, social consequences, and economic consequences. Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection were developed into a consensus directed acyclic graph for mortality that included two minimally sufficient adjustment sets. We present a collectively developed and iteratively refined list of data elements for observational research in SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease. By accounting for these elements, studies aimed at identifying causal pathways for long-term outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection can be made more informative.

There is increasing recognition of the long-term health effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection (sometimes called long COVID). However, little is yet known about the clinical diagnosis and management of long COVID within health systems.To describe dominant themes pertaining to the clinical diagnosis and management of long COVID in the electronic health records (EHRs) of patients with a diagnostic code for this condition (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision [ICD-10] code U09.9).This qualitative analysis used data from EHRs of a national random sample of 200 patients receiving care in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with documentation of a positive result on a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2 between February 27, 2020, and December 31, 2021, and an ICD-10 diagnostic code for long COVID between October 1, 2021, when the code was implemented, and March 1, 2022. Data were analyzed from February 5 to May 31, 2022.A text word search and qualitative analysis of patients' VA-wide EHRs was performed to identify dominant themes pertaining to the clinical diagnosis and management of long COVID.In this qualitative analysis of documentation in the VA-wide EHR, the mean (SD) age of the 200 sampled patients at the time of their first positive PCR test result for SARS-CoV-2 in VA records was 60 (14.5) years. The sample included 173 (86.5%) men; 45 individuals (22.5%) were identified as Black and 136 individuals (68.0%) were identified as White. In qualitative analysis of documentation pertaining to long COVID in patients' EHRs 2 dominant themes were identified: (1) clinical uncertainty, in that it was often unclear whether particular symptoms could be attributed to long COVID, given the medical complexity and functional limitations of many patients and absence of specific markers for this condition, which could lead to ongoing monitoring, diagnostic testing, and specialist referral; and (2) care fragmentation, describing how post-COVID-19 care processes were often siloed from and poorly coordinated with other aspects of care and could be burdensome to patients.This qualitative study of documentation in the VA EHR highlights the complexity of diagnosing long COVID in clinical settings and the challenges of caring for patients who have or are suspected of having this condition.

To investigate whether associations between diabetic retinopathy (DR) and dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD) remain significant after controlling for several measures of diabetes severity.Retrospective cohort study.ACT is a prospective cohort study of adults ≥ 65 years, randomly selected and recruited from the membership rolls of Kaiser Permanente Washington, who are dementia free at enrollment and followed biennially until incident dementia. ACT participants were included in this study if they had at enrollment or developed type 2 diabetes mellitus during follow-up, and data were collected through September, 2018 (3,516 person-years of follow-up). Diabetes was defined by ≥2 diabetes medication fills in one year. Diagnosis of DR was based on International Classification of Diseases Ninth and Tenth Revision codes. Estimates of microalbuminuria, long-term glycemia, and renal function from longitudinal laboratory records were used as indicators of diabetes severity. AD and dementia were diagnosed using research criteria at expert consensus meetings.A total of 536 participants (median baseline age 75 [interquartile range 71-80], 54% women) met inclusion criteria. Significant associations between DR5 years duration with dementia (hazard ratio 1.81 [95% confidence interval 1.23-2.65]) and AD (1.80 [1.15-2.82]) were not altered by adjustment for estimates of microalbuminuria, long-term glycemia, and renal function (dementia: 1.69 [1.14-2.50]; AD: 1.73 [1.10-2.74]).Among people with type 2 diabetes, DR itself appears to be an important biomarker of dementia risk in addition to glycemia and renal complications.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Whether patients with cirrhosis have increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the extent to which infection and cirrhosis increase the risk of adverse patient outcomes remain unclear. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We identified 88,747 patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 between 3/1/20-5/14/20 in the Veterans Affairs (VA) national healthcare system, including 75,315 with no cirrhosis-SARS-CoV-2 negative (C0-S0), 9826 with no cirrhosis-SARS-CoV-2 positive (C0-S1); 3301 with cirrhosis-SARS-CoV-2 negative (C1-S0); and 305 with cirrhosis-SARS-CoV-2 positive (C1-S1). Patients were followed through 6/22/20. Hospitalization, mechanical ventilation and death were modeled in time-to-event analyses using Cox proportional hazards regression. Patients with cirrhosis were less likely to test positive than patients without cirrhosis (8.5% vs. 11.5%, adjusted odds ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.69-0.99). Thirty-day mortality and ventilation rates increased progressively from C0-S0 (2.3% and 1.6%), to C1-S0 (5.2% and 3.6%), to C0-S1 (10.6% and 6.5%), to C1-S1(17.1% and 13.0%). Among patients with cirrhosis, those who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were 4.1 times more likely to undergo mechanical ventilation (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 4.12, 95% CI 2.79-6.10) and 3.5 times more likely to die (aHR 3.54, 95% CI 2.55-4.90) than those who tested negative. Among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, those with cirrhosis were more likely to be hospitalized (aHR 1.37, 95% CI 1.12-1.66), undergo ventilation (aHR 1.61, 95% CI 1.05-2.46) or die (aHR 1.65, 95% CI 1.18-2.30) than patients without cirrhosis. Among patients with cirrhosis and SARS-CoV-2 infection, the most important predictors of mortality were advanced age, cirrhosis decompensation and high MELD score. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a 3.5-fold increase in mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Cirrhosis was associated with a 1.7-fold increase in mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Background We aimed to describe trends in adverse outcomes among patients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between February and September 2020 within a national healthcare system. Methods We identified enrollees in the national United States Veterans Affairs healthcare system who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 28 February 2020 and 30 September 2020 (n = 55 952), with follow-up extending to 19 November 2020. We determined trends over time in incidence of the following outcomes that occurred within 30 days of testing positive: hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and death. Results Between February and July 2020, there were marked downward trends in the 30-day incidence of hospitalization (44.2% to 15.8%), ICU admission (20.3% to 5.3%), mechanical ventilation (12.7% to 2.2%), and death (12.5% to 4.4%), which subsequently plateaued between July and September 2020. These trends persisted after adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics, comorbid conditions, documented symptoms, and laboratory tests, including among subgroups of patients hospitalized, admitted to the ICU, or treated with mechanical ventilation. From February to September, there were decreases in the use of hydroxychloroquine (56.5% to 0%), azithromycin (48.3% to 16.6%), vasopressors (20.6% to 8.7%), and dialysis (11.6% to 3.8%) and increases in the use of dexamethasone (3.4% to 53.1%), other corticosteroids (4.9% to 29.0%), and remdesivir (1.7% to 45.4%) among hospitalized patients. Conclusions The risk of adverse outcomes in SARS-CoV-2–positive patients decreased markedly between February and July, with subsequent stabilization from July to September. These trends were not explained by changes in measured baseline patient characteristics and may reflect changing treatment practices or viral pathogenicity.

Objectives To determine the association between covid-19 vaccination types and doses with adverse outcomes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection during the periods of delta (B.1.617.2) and omicron (B.1.1.529) variant predominance. Design Retrospective cohort. Setting US Veterans Affairs healthcare system. Participants Adults (≥18 years) who are affiliated to Veterans Affairs with a first documented SARS-CoV-2 infection during the periods of delta (1 July-30 November 2021) or omicron (1 January-30 June 2022) variant predominance. The combined cohorts had a mean age of 59.4 (standard deviation 16.3) and 87% were male. Interventions Covid-19 vaccination with mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna)) and adenovirus vector vaccine (Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson)). Main outcome measures Stay in hospital, intensive care unit admission, use of ventilation, and mortality measured 30 days after a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2. Results In the delta period, 95 336 patients had infections with 47.6% having at least one vaccine dose, compared with 184 653 patients in the omicron period, with 72.6% vaccinated. After adjustment for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, in the delta period, two doses of the mRNA vaccines were associated with lower odds of hospital admission (adjusted odds ratio 0.41 (95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.43)), intensive care unit admission (0.33 (0.31 to 0.36)), ventilation (0.27 (0.24 to 0.30)), and death (0.21 (0.19 to 0.23)), compared with no vaccination. In the omicron period, receipt of two mRNA doses were associated with lower odds of hospital admission (0.60 (0.57 to 0.63)), intensive care unit admission (0.57 (0.53 to 0.62)), ventilation (0.59 (0.51 to 0.67)), and death (0.43 (0.39 to 0.48)). Additionally, a third mRNA dose was associated with lower odds of all outcomes compared with two doses: hospital admission (0.65 (0.63 to 0.69)), intensive care unit admission (0.65 (0.59 to 0.70)), ventilation (0.70 (0.61 to 0.80)), and death (0.51 (0.46 to 0.57)). The Ad26.COV2.S vaccination was associated with better outcomes relative to no vaccination, but higher odds of hospital stay and intensive care unit admission than with two mRNA doses. BNT162b2 was generally associated with worse outcomes than mRNA-1273 (adjusted odds ratios between 0.97 and 1.42). Conclusions In veterans with recent healthcare use and high occurrence of multimorbidity, vaccination was robustly associated with lower odds of 30 day morbidity and mortality compared with no vaccination among patients infected with covid-19. The vaccination type and number of doses had a significant association with outcomes.

ImportancePatients receiving maintenance dialysis experience intensive patterns of end-of-life care that might not be consistent with their values.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of patients’ health care values with engagement in advance care planning and end-of-life care.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsSurvey study of patients who received maintenance dialysis between 2015 and 2018 at dialysis centers in the greater metropolitan areas of Seattle, Washington, and Nashville, Tennessee, with longitudinal follow-up of decedents. Logistic regression models were used to estimate probabilities. Data analysis was conducted between May and October 2022.ExposuresA survey question about the value that the participant would place on longevity-focused vs comfort-focused care if they were to become seriously ill.Main Outcomes and MeasuresSelf-reported engagement in advance care planning and care received near the end of life through 2020 using linked kidney registry data and Medicare claims.ResultsOf 933 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.6 [14.0] years; 525 male patients [56.3%]; 254 [27.2%] identified as Black) who responded to the question about values and could be linked to registry data (65.2% response rate [933 of 1431 eligible patients]), 452 (48.4%) indicated that they would value comfort-focused care, 179 (19.2%) that they would value longevity-focused care, and 302 (32.4%) that they were unsure about the intensity of care they would value. Many had not completed an advance directive (estimated probability, 47.5% [95% CI, 42.9%-52.1%] of those who would value comfort-focused care vs 28.1% [95% CI, 24.0%-32.3%] of those who would value longevity-focused care or were unsure; P P P P P P = .64), discontinued dialysis (estimated probability, 38.3% [95% CI, 32.0%-44.8%] comfort focused vs 30.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-37.8%] longevity focused or unsure; P = .09), and enrolled in hospice (estimated probability, 32.2% [95% CI, 25.7%-38.7%] comfort focused vs 23.3% [95% CI, 16.4%-30.5%] longevity focused or unsure; P = .07) were not statistically different.Conclusions and RelevanceThis survey study found that there appeared to be a disconnect between patients’ expressed values, which were largely comfort focused, and their engagement in advance care planning and end-of-life care, which reflected a focus on longevity. These findings suggest important opportunities to improve the quality of care for patients receiving dialysis.

Some persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 experience symptoms or impairments many months after acute infection.To determine the rates, clinical setting, and factors associated with documented receipt of COVID-19-related care 3 or more months after acute infection.This retrospective cohort study used data from the US Department of Veterans Affairs health care system. Participants included persons with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test between February 1, 2020, and April 30, 2021, who were still alive 3 months after infection and did not have evidence of reinfection. Data analysis was performed from February 2020 to December 2021.Positive SARS-CoV-2 test.Rates and factors associated with documentation of COVID-19-related International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision codes (U07.1, Z86.16, U09.9, and J12.82) 3 or more months after acute infection (hereafter, long-COVID care), with follow-up extending to December 31, 2021.Among 198 601 SARS-CoV-2-positive persons included in the study, the mean (SD) age was 60.4 (17.7) years, 176 942 individuals (89.1%) were male, 133 924 (67.4%) were White, 44 733 (22.5%) were Black, and 19 735 (9.9%) were Hispanic. During a mean (SD) follow-up of 13.5 (3.6) months, long-COVID care was documented in a wide variety of clinics, most commonly primary care and general internal medicine (18 634 of 56 310 encounters [33.1%]), pulmonary (7360 of 56 310 encounters [13.1%]), and geriatrics (5454 of 56 310 encounters [9.7%]). Long-COVID care was documented in 26 745 cohort members (13.5%), with great variability across geographical regions (range, 10.8%-18.1%) and medical centers (range, 3.0%-41.0%). Factors significantly associated with documented long-COVID care included older age, Black or American Indian/Alaska Native race, Hispanic ethnicity, geographical region, high Charlson Comorbidity Index score, having documented symptoms at the time of acute infection (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.71; 95% CI, 1.65-1.78) and requiring hospitalization (AOR, 2.60; 95% CI, 2.51-2.69) or mechanical ventilation (AOR, 2.46; 95% CI, 2.26-2.69). Patients who were fully vaccinated at the time of infection were less likely to receive long-COVID care (AOR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.90).Long-COVID care was documented in a variety of clinical settings, with great variability across regions and medical centers and was documented more commonly in older persons, those with higher comorbidity burden, those with more severe acute COVID-19 presentation and those who were unvaccinated at the time of infection. These findings provide support and guidance for health care systems to develop systematic approaches to the evaluation and management of patients who may be experiencing long COVID.

Background Identifying risk factors for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection could help health systems improve testing and screening strategies. The aim of this study was to identify demographic factors, comorbid conditions, and symptoms independently associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Methods This was an observational cross-sectional study at the Veterans Health Administration, including persons tested for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) between 28 February and 14 May 2020. Associations between demographic characteristics, diagnosed comorbid conditions, and documented symptoms with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 were measured. Results Of 88 747 persons tested, 10 131 (11.4%) were SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive. Positivity was associated with older age (≥80 vs Conclusions The majority of positive SARS-CoV-2 tests were attributed to geographic location, demographic characteristics, and obesity, with a minor contribution of chronic comorbid conditions.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Because of the limited capacity of its own dialysis facilities, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Veterans Health Administration routinely outsources dialysis care to community providers. Prior to 2011—when the VA implemented a process of standardizing payments and establishing national contracts for community-based dialysis care—payments to community providers were largely unregulated. This study examined the association of changes in the Department of Veterans Affairs payment policy for community dialysis with temporal trends in VA spending and veterans’ access to dialysis care and mortality. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: An interrupted time series design and VA, Medicare, and US Renal Data System data were used to identify veterans who received VA–financed dialysis in community-based dialysis facilities before (2006–2008), during (2009–2010), and after the enactment of VA policies to standardize dialysis payments (2011–2016). We used multivariable, differential trend/intercept shift regression models to examine trends in average reimbursement for community-based dialysis, access to quality care (veterans’ distance to community dialysis, number of community dialysis providers, and dialysis facility quality indicators), and 1-year mortality over this time period. RESULTS: Before payment reform, the unadjusted average per-treatment reimbursement for non–VA dialysis care varied widely ($47–$1575). After payment reform, there was a 44% reduction ($44–$250) in the adjusted price per dialysis session (P

Rationale & Objective It is relatively unusual for US patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) to forgo initiation of maintenance dialysis. Our objective was to describe practice approaches of US nephrologists who have provided conservative care for members of this population. Study Design Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Setting & Participants A national sample of 21 nephrologists experienced in caring for patients with advanced CKD who decided not to start dialysis. Analytical Approach Grounded theory methods to identify dominant themes reflecting nephrologists’ experiences with and approaches to conservative care for patients with advanced CKD. Results Nephrologists who participated in this study were primarily from academic practices (n = 14) and urban areas (n = 15). Two prominent themes emerged from qualitative analysis reflecting nephrologists’ experiences with and approaches to conservative care: (1) person-centered practices, which described a holistic approach to care that included basing treatment decisions on what mattered most to individual patients, framing dialysis as an explicit choice, being mindful of sources of bias in medical decision making, and being flexible to the changing needs, values, and preferences of patients; and (2) improvising a care infrastructure, which described the challenges of managing patients conservatively within health systems that are not optimally configured to support their needs. Participating nephrologists described cobbling together resources, assuming a range of different health care roles, preparing patients to navigate health systems in which initiation of dialysis served as a powerful default, and championing the principles of conservative care among their colleagues. Limitations The themes identified likely are not generalizable to most US nephrologists. Conclusions Insights from a select group of US nephrologists who are early adopters of conservative care signal the need for a stronger cultural and health system commitment to building care models capable of supporting patients who choose to forgo dialysis.

ImportanceCOVID-19 vaccination rates remain suboptimal in the US. Identifying factors associated with vaccination can highlight existing gaps and guide targeted interventions to improve vaccination access and uptake.ObjectiveTo describe incidence and patient characteristics associated with primary, first booster, and second booster COVID-19 vaccination in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study assessed US veterans receiving care in VHA medical centers and outpatient clinics as of December 1, 2020. All VHA enrollees with an inpatient, outpatient, or telehealth encounter in VHA as well as a primary care physician appointment in the preceding 24 months were included.ExposuresDemographic characteristics, place of residence, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and underlying medical conditions.Main Outcomes and MeasuresCumulative incidence of primary, first booster, and second booster COVID-19 vaccination through June 2022. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify factors independently associated with COVID-19 vaccination.ResultsAmong 5 632 413 veterans included in the study, 5 094 392 (90.4%) were male, the median (IQR) age was 66 (51-74) years, 1 032 334 (18.3%) were Black, 448 714 (8.0%) were Hispanic, and 4 202 173 (74.6%) were White. Through June 2022, cumulative incidences were 69.0% for primary vaccination, 42.9% for first booster, and 9.3% for second booster. Cumulative incidence for primary vaccination increased with increasing age, from 46.9% (95% CI, 46.8%-47.0%) among veterans aged 18 to 49 years to 82.9% (95% CI, 82.8%-83.0%) among veterans aged 80 to 84 years. More Black veterans completed primary vaccination (71.7%; 95% CI, 71.6%-71.8%) compared with White veterans (68.9%; 95% CI, 68.9%-69.0%), and more urban-dwelling veterans completed primary vaccination (70.9%; 95% CI, 70.9%-71.0%) compared with highly rural-dwelling veterans (63.8%; 95% CI, 63.4%-64.1%). Factors independently associated with higher likelihood of both primary and booster vaccination included older age, female sex, Asian or Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, urban residence, and lack of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study of US veterans, COVID-19 vaccination coverage through June 2022 was suboptimal. Primary vaccination can be improved among younger, rural-dwelling veterans. Greater uptake of booster vaccination among all veterans is needed.

Background We examined whether key sociodemographic and clinical risk factors for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and mortality changed over time in a population-based cohort study. Methods and findings In a cohort of 9,127,673 persons enrolled in the United States Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system, we evaluated the independent associations of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics with SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 216,046), SARS-CoV-2–related mortality (n = 10,230), and case fatality at monthly intervals between February 1, 2020 and March 31, 2021. VA enrollees had a mean age of 61 years (SD 17.7) and were predominantly male (90.9%) and White (64.5%), with 14.6% of Black race and 6.3% of Hispanic ethnicity. Black (versus White) race was strongly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 5.10, [95% CI 4.65 to 5.59], p-value, George Ioannou and co-workers study the distribution of SARS-CoV-2 infections and outcomes among the United States population., Author summary Why was this study done? As the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to evolve, some risk factors for infection with COVID-19 and death due to COVID-19 that were described early in the pandemic may be changing. Recognizing such changes is important in informing population-based approaches to prevent infection and reduce mortality. What did the researchers do and find? We investigated how the associations of key sociodemographic and clinical factors with COVID-19 infection, mortality, or case fatality changed between February 2020 and March 2021 among a cohort of approximately 9.1 million persons enrolled in the national US Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system, including 216,046 who tested positive and 10,230 who died of COVID-19 during the study period. Black (versus White) race was strongly associated with a 5-fold higher risk of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, a 4-fold higher risk of mortality, and a 2.5-fold higher risk of case fatality in February to March 2020, but these associations attenuated over time and were no longer statistically significant by November 2020 for infection and mortality and were reversed for case fatality. American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN versus White) race was associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection early in the pandemic, but this association declined over time and reversed by March 2021. Urban (versus rural) residence was associated with 2-fold higher risk of infection, a 2.5-fold higher risk of mortality, and 2.2-fold higher risk of case fatality in February to April 2020, but these associations attenuated over time and reversed by September 2020. Throughout the observation period, high comorbidity burden, younger age, Hispanic ethnicity, and obesity were consistently associated with infection, while high comorbidity burden, older age, Hispanic ethnicity, and male sex were consistently associated with mortality. What do these findings mean? Early in the pandemic, there were strongly positive associations of Black and AI/AN (versus White) race and urban (versus rural) residence with SARS-CoV-2 infection, mortality, and case fatality, but these were ameliorated or even reversed by March 2021. Our results apply directly to VA enrollees who are predominantly male and have access to universal healthcare; they need to be confirmed in other populations.

IMPORTANCE: Using the same level of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) to define chronic kidney disease (CKD) regardless of patient age may classify many elderly people with a normal physiological age-related eGFR decline as having a disease. OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes associated with CKD as defined by a fixed vs an age-adapted eGFR threshold. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This population-based cohort study was conducted in Alberta, Canada and used linked administrative and laboratory data from adults with incident CKD from April 1, 2009, to March 31, 2017, defined by a sustained reduction in eGFR for longer than 3 months below a fixed or an age-adapted eGFR threshold. Non-CKD controls were defined as being 65 years or older with a sustained eGFR of 60 to 89 mL/min/1.73 m(2) for longer than 3 months and normal/mild albuminuria. The follow-up ended on March 31, 2019. The data were analyzed from February to April 2020. EXPOSURES: A fixed eGFR threshold of 60 vs thresholds of 75, 60, and 45 mL/min/1.73 m(2) for age younger than 40, 40 to 64, and 65 years or older, respectively. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Competing risks of kidney failure (kidney replacement initiation or sustained eGFR 3 months) and death without kidney failure. RESULTS: The fixed and age-adapted CKD cohorts included 127 132 (69 546 women [54.7%], 57 586 men [45.3%]) and 81 209 adults (44 582 women [54.9%], 36 627 men [45.1%]), respectively (537 vs 343 new cases per 100 000 person-years). The fixed-threshold cohort had lower risks of kidney failure (1.7% vs 3.0% at 5 years) and death (21.9% vs 25.4%) than the age-adapted cohort. A total of 53 906 adults were included in both cohorts. Of the individuals included in the fixed-threshold cohort only (n = 72 703), 54 342 (75%) were 65 years or older and had baseline eGFR of 45 to 59 mL/min/1.73 m(2) with normal/mild albuminuria. The 5-year risks of kidney failure and death among these elderly people were similar to those of non-CKD controls, with a risk of kidney failure of 0.12% or less in both groups across all age categories and a risk of death at 69, 122, 279, and 935 times higher than the risk of kidney failure for 65 to 69, 70 to 74, 75 to 79, and 80 years or older, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This cohort study of adults with CKD suggests that the current criteria for CKD that use the same eGFR threshold for all ages may result in overestimation of the CKD burden in an aging population, overdiagnosis, and unnecessary interventions in many elderly people who have age-related loss of eGFR.

BACKGROUND: Despite having high comorbidity rates and shortened life expectancy, patients with ESKD may harbor unrealistically optimistic expectations about their prognoses. Whether this affects resuscitation orders is unknown. METHODS: To determine whether do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders differ among patients with ESKD compared with other critically ill patients, including those with diseases of other major organs, we investigated DNR orders on admission to intensive care units (ICUs) among 106,873 patients in the United States. RESULTS: Major organ disease uniformly associated with increased risk of hospital mortality, particularly for cirrhosis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.67; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.30 to 3.08), and ESKD (aOR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.31 to 1.65). Compared with critically ill patients without major organ disease, patients with stroke, cancer, heart failure, dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cirrhosis were statistically more likely to have a DNR order on ICU admission; those with ESKD were not. Findings were similar when comparing patients with a single organ disease with those without organ disease. The disconnect between prognosis and DNR use was most notable among Black patients, for whom ESKD (compared with no major organ disease) was associated with a 62% (aOR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.04) higher odds of hospital mortality, but no appreciable difference in DNR utilization (aOR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.62). CONCLUSIONS: Unlike patients with diseases of other major organs, critically ill patients with ESKD were not more likely to have a DNR order than patients without ESKD. Whether this reflects a greater lack of advance care planning in the nephrology community, as well as a missed opportunity to minimize potentially needless patient suffering, requires further study.

Understanding ethical concerns that arise in the care of patients with advanced kidney disease may help identify opportunities to support medical decision-making. To describe the clinical contexts and types of ethical concerns that arise in the care of patients with advanced kidney disease. Retrospective cohort study. A total of 28,568 Veterans with advanced kidney disease between 2000 and 2009 followed through death or 2011. Clinical scenarios that prompted clinicians to consider an ethics consultation as documented in the medical record. Dialysis initiation, dialysis discontinuation, receipt of an intensive procedure during the final month of life, and hospice enrollment. Patients had a mean age of 67.1 years, and the majority were male (98.5%) and white (59.0%). Clinicians considered an ethics consultation for 794 patients (2.5%) over a median follow-up period of 2.7 years. Ethical concerns involved code status (37.8%), dialysis (54.5%), other invasive treatments (40.6%), and noninvasive treatments (61.1%) and were related to conflicts between patients, their surrogates, and/or clinicians about treatment preferences (79.3%), who had authority to make healthcare decisions (65.9%), and meeting the care needs of patients versus obligations to others (10.6%). Among the 20,583 patients who died during follow-up, those for whom clinicians had considered an ethics consultation were less likely to have been treated with dialysis (47.6% versus 62.0%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.63, 95% CI 0.53–0.74), more likely to have discontinued dialysis (32.5% versus 20.9%, aOR 2.07, CI 1.61–2.66), and less likely to have received an intensive procedure in the last month of life (8.9% versus 18.9%, aOR 0.41, CI 0.32–0.54) compared with patients without documentation of clinicians having considered consultation. Clinicians considered an ethics consultation for patients with advanced kidney disease in situations of conflicting preferences regarding dialysis and other intensive treatments, especially when these treatments were not pursued.

This Core Curriculum article models a person-centered approach to care for older adults with kidney disease. We provide background information on the principles of person-centered care and outline ways in which this approach contrasts with the more disease-based approaches that dominate current medical education and practice. Using hypothetical cases, we discuss 3 clinical scenarios that arise commonly when caring for older adults with kidney disease: (1) a moderate reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate, (2) new-onset nephrotic-range proteinuria, and (3) the prospect of starting dialysis. For each scenario, we summarize relevant available evidence and model what a person-centered approach might look like. In discussing each scenario, we highlight: (1) the considerable heterogeneity in clinical presentation, circumstances, priorities, and values that exist among older adults with kidney disease; (2) the importance of interpreting available evidence and clinical practice guidelines in the context of what is relevant to each patient; (3) methods for grounding discussions about care and treatment options in the realities of each patient's situation and what is most meaningful to them; and (4) the importance of setting aside one's own biases and practice style to ensure that patients' own values and goals guide their care.

In this essay, we describe the evolution of attitudes toward dialysis discontinuation in historical context, beginning with the birth of outpatient dialysis in the 1960s and continuing through the present. From the start, attitudes toward dialysis discontinuation have reflected the clinical context in which dialysis is initiated. In the 1960s and 1970s, dialysis was only available to select patients and concerns about distributive justice weighed heavily. Because there was strong enthusiasm for new technology and dialysis was regarded as a precious resource not to be wasted, stopping treatment had negative moral connotations and was generally viewed as something to be discouraged. More recently, dialysis has become the default treatment for advanced kidney disease in the United States, leading to concerns about overtreatment and whether patients’ values, goals, and preferences are sufficiently integrated into treatment decisions. Despite the developments in palliative nephrology over the past 20 years, dialysis discontinuation remains a conundrum for patients, families, and professionals. While contemporary clinical practice guidelines support a person-centered approach toward stopping dialysis treatments, this often occurs in a crisis when all treatment options have been exhausted. Relatively little is known about the impact of dialysis discontinuation on the experiences of patients and families and there is a paucity of high-quality person-centered evidence to guide practice in this area. Clinicians need better insights into decision-making, symptom burden, and other palliative outcomes that patients might expect when they discontinue dialysis treatments to better support decision-making in this area.

Background Lower extremity amputation is common among patients with ESRD, and often portends a poor prognosis. However, little is known about end-of-life care among patients with ESRD who undergo amputation. Methods We conducted a mortality follow-back study of Medicare beneficiaries with ESRD who died in 2002 through 2014 to analyze patterns of lower extremity amputation in the last year of life compared with a parallel cohort of beneficiaries without ESRD. We also examined the relationship between amputation and end-of-life care among the patients with ESRD. Results Overall, 8% of 754,777 beneficiaries with ESRD underwent at least one lower extremity amputation in their last year of life compared with 1% of 958,412 beneficiaries without ESRD. Adjusted analyses of patients with ESRD showed that those who had undergone lower extremity amputation were substantially more likely than those who had not to have been admitted to—and to have had prolonged stays in—acute and subacute care settings during their final year of life. Amputation was also associated with a greater likelihood of dying in the hospital, dialysis discontinuation before death, and less time receiving hospice services. Conclusions Nearly one in ten patients with ESRD undergoes lower extremity amputation in their last year of life. These patients have prolonged stays in acute and subacute health care settings and appear to have limited access to hospice services. These findings likely signal unmet palliative care needs among seriously ill patients with ESRD who undergo amputation as well as opportunities to improve their care.

ImportanceFor many patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), the Medicare Hospice Benefit precludes concurrent receipt of hospice and dialysis services, forcing patients to choose between continuing dialysis or enrolling in hospice. Whether the more liberal hospice eligibility criteria of the Veterans Health Administration’s (VA) are associated with improved access to concurrent dialysis and hospice care for patients with ESKD is not known.ObjectiveTo examine the frequency of concurrent hospice and dialysis care among US veterans by hospice payer and examine the payer for concurrent dialysis.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis was a retrospective cross-sectional study of all 70 577 VA enrollees in the US Renal Data System registry who initiated maintenance dialysis and died in 2007 to 2016. Data were analyzed from April 2021 to August 2022.ExposuresHospice payer, either Medicare, VA inpatient hospice, or VA-financed community-based hospice (“VA community care”). Primary hospice diagnosis–ESKD vs non-ESKD.Main Outcomes and MeasuresConcurrent receipt of hospice and dialysis services (“concurrent care”).ResultsThere were 18 420 (26%) eligible veterans with ESKD who received hospice services (mean [SD] age, 75.4 [10.0] years; 17 457 [94.8%] men; 2997 [16.3%] Black, 15 162 [82.3%] White, and 261 (1.4%) individuals of other races). Most of the sample (n = 16 465; 89%) received hospice services under Medicare and 5231 (28%) continued to receive dialysis after hospice initiation. The adjusted proportion of veterans receiving concurrent care was higher for those enrolled in VA inpatient hospice or VA community care hospice than it was for those enrolled in Medicare hospice (55% and 42% vs 25%, respectively; both P Conclusions and RelevanceIn this retrospective cross-sectional study of US veterans with ESKD, a substantially higher proportion of veterans in VA-financed hospice received 1 or more dialysis treatments after hospice initiation than those enrolled in Medicare-financed hospice. Regardless of hospice payer, the VA financed most concurrent dialysis treatments. Hospice users who received concurrent dialysis care had substantially longer hospice lengths of stay than those who did not. These findings suggest that Medicare hospice policy may substantially restrict access to concurrent hospice and dialysis care among veterans with ESKD.

BackgroundOlder age and comorbid burden are both associated with adverse outcomes in SARS-CoV-2, but it is not known whether the association between comorbid burden and adverse outcomes differs in older and younger adults.ObjectiveTo compare the relationship between comorbid burden and adverse outcomes in adults with SARS-CoV-2 of different ages (18–64, 65–79 and ≥ 80 years).Design, setting, and participantsObservational longitudinal cohort study of 170,528 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System between 2/28/20 and 12/31/2020 who were followed through 01/31/2021.MeasurementsCharlson Comorbidity Index (CCI); Incidence of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and death within 30 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test.ResultsThe cumulative 30-day incidence of death was 0.8% in cohort members p LimitationsThe CCI is calculated based on diagnostic codes, which may not provide an accurate assessment of comorbid burden.ConclusionsAge differences in the distribution and prognostic significance of overall comorbid burden could inform clinical management, vaccination prioritization and population health during the pandemic and argue for more work to understand the role of age and comorbidity in shaping the care of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2.

ObjectivesWe aimed to describe trends in the incidence of adverse outcomes among patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between February and September 2020 within a national healthcare system.SettingUS Veterans Affairs national healthcare system.ParticipantsEnrollees in the VA healthcare system who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 2/28/2020 and 9/30/2020 (n=55,952).OutcomesDeath, hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mechanical ventilation within 30 days of testing positive.The incidence of these outcomes was examined among patients infected each month and trends were evaluated using an interrupted time-series analysis.ResultsBetween February and July 2020, during the first wave of the US pandemic, there were marked downward trends in the 30-day incidence of hospitalization (44.2% to 15.8%), ICU admission (20.3% to 5.3%), mechanical ventilation (12.7% to 2.2%), and death (12.5% to 4.4%), with subsequent stabilization between July and September 2020. These trends persisted after adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics, comorbid conditions, and documented symptoms and after additional adjustment for laboratory test results among hospitalized patients, including among subgroups admitted to the ICU and treated with mechanical ventilation. Among hospitalized patients, use of hydroxychloroquine (56.5% to 0%), azithromycin (48.3% to 16.6%) vasopressors (20.6% to 8.7%), and dialysis (11.6% to 3.8%) decreased while use of dexamethasone (3.4% to 53.1%), other corticosteroids (4.9% to 29.0%) and remdesivir (1.7% to 45.4%) increased from February to September.ConclusionsAmong patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in a large national US healthcare system, risk for a range of adverse outcomes decreased markedly between February and July, with subsequent stabilization from July to September. These trends were not explained by changes in measured baseline patient characteristics.

Key Points Question How can the risk of SARS-CoV-2–related death be estimated in the general population to be used for vaccination prioritization? Findings In this prognostic study of more than 7.6 million individuals enrolled in the Veterans Affairs health care system, a logistic regression model (COVIDVax) was developed to estimate risk of SARS-CoV-2–related death using the following 10 characteristics: sex, age, race, ethnicity, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, and the Care Assessment Need score. The model was estimated to save more lives than prioritizing vaccination based on age or on the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccination allocation. Meaning These findings suggest that prioritizing vaccination based on the model developed in this study could prevent a substantial number of SARS-CoV-2–related deaths during vaccine rollout., This prognostic study develops a model that estimates the risk of SARS-CoV-2–related mortality among all enrollees of the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system., Importance A strategy that prioritizes individuals for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination according to their risk of SARS-CoV-2–related mortality would help minimize deaths during vaccine rollout. Objective To develop a model that estimates the risk of SARS-CoV-2–related mortality among all enrollees of the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system. Design, Setting, and Participants This prognostic study used data from 7 635 064 individuals enrolled in the VA health care system as of May 21, 2020, to develop and internally validate a logistic regression model (COVIDVax) that predicted SARS-CoV-2–related death (n = 2422) during the observation period (May 21 to November 2, 2020) using baseline characteristics known to be associated with SARS-CoV-2–related mortality, extracted from the VA electronic health records (EHRs). The cohort was split into a training period (May 21 to September 30) and testing period (October 1 to November 2). Main Outcomes and Measures SARS-CoV-2–related death, defined as death within 30 days of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. VA EHR data streams were imported on a data integration platform to demonstrate that the model could be executed in real-time to produce dashboards with risk scores for all current VA enrollees. Results Of 7 635 064 individuals, the mean (SD) age was 66.2 (13.8) years, and most were men (7 051 912 [92.4%]) and White individuals (4 887 338 [64.0%]), with 1 116 435 (14.6%) Black individuals and 399 634 (5.2%) Hispanic individuals. From a starting pool of 16 potential predictors, 10 were included in the final COVIDVax model, as follows: sex, age, race, ethnicity, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, and Care Assessment Need score. The model exhibited excellent discrimination with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 85.3% (95% CI, 84.6%-86.1%), superior to the AUROC of using age alone to stratify risk (72.6%; 95% CI, 71.6%-73.6%). Assuming vaccination is 90% effective at preventing SARS-CoV-2–related death, using this model to prioritize vaccination was estimated to prevent 63.5% of deaths that would occur by the time 50% of VA enrollees are vaccinated, significantly higher than the estimate for prioritizing vaccination based on age (45.6%) or the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention phases of vaccine allocation (41.1%). Conclusions and Relevance In this prognostic study of all VA enrollees, prioritizing vaccination based on the COVIDVax model was estimated to prevent a large proportion of deaths expected to occur during vaccine rollout before sufficient herd immunity is achieved.

Since 2014, when Congress passed the Veterans Access Choice and Accountability (Choice) Act (replaced in 2018 with the more comprehensive Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks [MISSION] Act), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has been paying for US veterans to receive increasing amounts of care in the private sector (non-VA care or VA community care). However, little is known about the implications of these legislative changes for the VA system.To describe the implications for the VA system of recent increases in VA-financed non-VA care.This qualitative study was a thematic analysis of documentation in the electronic health records (EHRs) of a random sample of US veterans with advanced kidney disease between June 6, 2019, and February 5, 2021.Mentions of community care in participant EHRs.Dominant themes pertaining to VA-financed non-VA care.Among 1000 study participants, the mean (SD) age was 73.8 (11.4) years, and 957 participants (95.7%) were male. Three interrelated themes pertaining to VA-financed non-VA care emerged from qualitative analysis of documentation in cohort member EHRs: (1) VA as mothership, which describes extensive care coordination by VA staff members and clinicians to facilitate care outside the VA and the tendency of veterans and their non-VA clinicians to rely on the VA to fill gaps in this care; (2) hidden work of veterans, which describes the efforts of veterans and their family members to navigate the referral process, and to serve as intermediaries between VA and non-VA clinicians; and (3) strain on the VA system, which describes a challenging referral process and the ways in which cross-system care has stretched the traditional roles of VA staff and clinicians and interfered with VA care processes.The findings of this qualitative study describing VA-financed non-VA care for veterans with advanced kidney disease spotlight the substantial challenges of cross-system use and the strain placed on the VA system, VA staff and clinicians, and veterans and their families in recent years. These difficult-to-measure consequences of cross-system care should be considered when budgeting, evaluating, and planning the provision of VA-financed non-VA care in the private sector.

This cohort study examines which patient and facility factors in the US Department of Veterans Affairs health care system are associated with dialysis approaches and outcomes., Key Points Question To what extent do dialysis use and mortality vary among older adults with incident kidney failure, and are these variations associated with patient or facility factors? Findings In this cohort study of 8695 older adults with incident kidney failure, dialysis use varied widely across Veterans Affairs facilities with minimal variation in mortality. Most of the variation was associated with patient characteristics, and no correlation was found between the facility-level rate of dialysis use and mortality. Meaning Results of this study suggest that there is marked variation in dialysis use practices for older adults across Veterans Affairs facilities., Importance Current guidelines lack consensus regarding the treatment of patients who may not benefit from dialysis; this lack of consensus may be associated with the substantial variation in dialysis use and outcomes across health care facilities. Objective To assess the degree to which variation in dialysis use and mortality was associated with patient rather than facility characteristics and to distinguish which features identified the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities with high rates of dialysis use. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study analyzed data of veterans with stage 3 or 4 chronic kidney disease that progressed to kidney failure between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2014. These patients received care from VA facilities across the US. Data sources included laboratory and administrative records from the VA, Medicare, and United States Renal Data System. Data analysis was conducted from August 1, 2019, to September 1, 2020. Exposures The primary exposure was the VA facility in which patients received most of their care before the onset of incident kidney failure defined as the first occurrence of either a sustained estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 or the initiation of maintenance dialysis. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcomes were dialysis use and mortality within 2 years of incident kidney failure. Median rate ratio was used to quantify facility-level variation, and variance partition coefficient was used to quantify the sources of unexplained variation. Results The cohort included 8695 older veterans with a mean (SD) age of 78.8 (7.5) years who were predominantly male (8573 [99%]) and White (6102 [70%]) individuals treated at 108 VA facilities. The observed frequency of dialysis use across facilities ranged from 25.0% to 81.4%, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) rate of 51.7% (48.4%-60.0%). The observed frequency of mortality across facilities ranged from 27.2% to 60.0%, with a median (IQR) rate of 45.2% (41.2%-48.6%). The median rate ratio (adjusted for multiple patient and facility characteristics) was 1.40 for dialysis use and 1.08 for mortality. The unexplained variation in both outcomes mainly derived from patient characteristics rather than facility characteristics. No correlation was found between dialysis use and mortality at the facility level (correlation coefficient = 0.03). Conclusions and Relevance This study found sizable variation in dialysis use for older adults that was poorly correlated with facility-level mortality rates and was not accounted for by differences in measured patient and facility characteristics. These findings suggest opportunities to improve the degree to which dialysis use practices align with the values, goals, and preferences of older adults with kidney failure.

Key Points Question What types of clinical care are involved in the kidney transplant evaluation process in real-world clinical settings? Findings In this qualitative study of the electronic health records of 211 US veterans with advanced kidney disease who were referred for kidney transplant evaluation, 4 dominant themes were identified describing clinical care during the evaluation process: far-reaching and inflexible medical evaluation, psychosocial valuation, surveillance over compliance, and disempowerment and lack of transparency. Meaning In this study, clinician documentation in the medical record indicated that, to be considered for a kidney transplant, patients were required to participate in a rigid, demanding, and opaque evaluation process over which they and their local clinicians had little control., Importance To be considered for a kidney transplant, patients with advanced kidney disease must participate in a formal evaluation and selection process. Little is known about how this process proceeds in real-world clinical settings. Objective To characterize the transplant evaluation process among a representative national sample of US veterans with advanced kidney disease who were referred to a kidney transplant center. Design, Setting, and Participants This qualitative study was a thematic analysis of clinician notes in the electronic health records of US veterans referred for kidney transplant evaluation. In a random sample of 4000 patients with advanced kidney disease between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2014, cared for in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system, there were 211 patients who were referred to a transplant center during the follow-up period. This group was included in the qualitative analysis and was followed up until their date of death or the end of the follow-up period on October 8, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures Dominant themes pertaining to the kidney transplant evaluation and selection process identified through thematic analysis. Results Among 211 study patients, the mean (SD) age was 57.9 (9.5) years, and 202 patients (95.7%) were male. The following 4 dominant themes regarding the transplant evaluation process emerged: (1) far-reaching and inflexible medical evaluation, in which patients were expected to complete an extensive evaluation that could have substantial physical and emotional consequences, made little accommodation for their personal values and needs, and impacted other aspects of their care; (2) psychosocial valuation, in which the psychosocial component of the transplant assessment could be subjective and intrusive and could place substantial demands on patients’ family members; (3) surveillance over compliance, in which the patients’ ability and willingness to follow medical recommendations was an important criterion for transplant candidacy and their adherence to a wide range of recommendations and treatments was closely monitored; and (4) disempowerment and lack of transparency, in which patients and their local clinicians were often unsure about what to expect during the evaluation process or about the rationale for selection decisions. For the evaluation process to proceed, local clinicians had to follow transplant center requirements even when they believed the requirements did not align with best practices or the patients’ needs. Conclusions and Relevance In this qualitative study of US veterans with advanced kidney disease evaluated for transplant, clinician documentation in the medical record indicated that, to be considered for a kidney transplant, patients were required to participate in a rigid, demanding, and opaque evaluation and selection process over which they and their local clinicians had little control. These findings highlight the need for a more evidence-based, individualized, and collaborative approach to kidney transplant evaluation., This qualitative study describes the real-world experience for patients with advanced kidney disease referred for the kidney transplant evaluation and selection process.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to examine the associations of BMI with testing positive for severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and risk of adverse outcomes in a cohort of Veterans Affairs enrollees. METHOD: Adjusted relative risks/hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for the associations between BMI category (underweight, normal weight, overweight, class 1 obesity, class 2 obesity, and class 3 obesity) and testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 or experiencing hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and death among those testing positive. RESULTS: Higher BMI categories were associated with higher risk of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test compared with the normal weight category (class 3 obesity adjusted relative risk: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.28-1.42). Among 25,952 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, class 3 obesity was associated with higher risk of mechanical ventilation (adjusted HR [aHR]: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.35-2.32) and mortality (aHR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.12-1.78) compared with normal weight individuals. These associations were present primarily in patients younger than 65 and were attenuated or absent in older age groups (interaction P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Veterans Affairs enrollees with higher BMI were more likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were more likely to be mechanically ventilated or die if infected with SARS-CoV-2. Higher BMI contributed relatively more to the risk of death in those younger than 65 years of age as compared with other age categories.

Key Points Question How have US clinicians planned for and responded to resource limitation during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic? Findings This qualitative study included interviews with 61 clinicians across the United States. While institutions planned for an explicit and systematic approach to resource allocation in crisis settings, this approach did not address many challenges encountered by frontline clinicians, leaving them to struggle with what constituted acceptable standards of care and to make difficult allocation decisions. Meaning The findings of this study suggest that expanding the scope of institutional planning to address a broader spectrum of resource limitation may help to support clinicians, promote equity, and optimize care during the pandemic., This qualitative study describes the perspectives and experiences of clinicians involved in institutional planning for resource limitation and/or patient care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic., Importance Little is known about how US clinicians have responded to resource limitation during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Objective To describe the perspectives and experiences of clinicians involved in institutional planning for resource limitation and/or patient care during the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants This qualitative study used inductive thematic analysis of semistructured interviews conducted in April and May 2020 with a national group of clinicians (eg, intensivists, nephrologists, nurses) involved in institutional planning and/or clinical care during the COVID-19 pandemic across the United States. Main Outcomes and Measures Emergent themes describing clinicians’ experience providing care in settings of resource limitation. Results The 61 participants (mean [SD] age, 46 [11] years; 38 [63%] women) included in this study were practicing in 15 US states and were more heavily sampled from areas with the highest rates of COVID-19 infection at the time of interviews (ie, Seattle, New York City, New Orleans). Most participants were White individuals (39 [65%]), were attending physicians (45 [75%]), and were practicing in large academic centers (≥300 beds, 51 [85%]; academic centers, 46 [77%]). Three overlapping and interrelated themes emerged from qualitative analysis, as follows: (1) planning for crisis capacity, (2) adapting to resource limitation, and (3) multiple unprecedented barriers to care delivery. Clinician leaders worked within their institutions to plan a systematic approach for fair allocation of limited resources in crisis settings so that frontline clinicians would not have to make rationing decisions at the bedside. However, even before a declaration of crisis capacity, clinicians encountered varied and sometimes unanticipated forms of resource limitation that could compromise care, require that they make difficult allocation decisions, and contribute to moral distress. Furthermore, unprecedented challenges to caring for patients during the pandemic, including the need to limit in-person interactions, the rapid pace of change, and the dearth of scientific evidence, added to the challenges of caring for patients and communicating with families. Conclusions and Relevance The findings of this qualitative study highlighted the complexity of providing high-quality care for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Expanding the scope of institutional planning to address resource limitation challenges that can arise long before declarations of crisis capacity may help to support frontline clinicians, promote equity, and optimize care as the pandemic evolves.