Advanced care planning during the COVID-19 pandemic: ceiling of care decisions and their implications for observational data

Cardio pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the frail and those with multiple health conditions: Outcomes before and during the COVID pandemic

Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19)-era resuscitation guidelines advised personal protective equipment before chest compressions and proactive advanced care planning. We investigated the impact of COVID-19 on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) outcomes according to scoring of frailty and of multiple health conditions. A retrospective single-centre analysis of clinical and electronic records for all adult cardiac arrest calls on wards between June 2020 and June 2021 was performed. Data were compared with a cohort pre-COVID (March 2017-March 2018). In total, 62 patients received CPR in 2020-21 compared with 113 in 2017-18. Similar rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and a statistically insignificant survival increase from 23.8% to 32.2% (p=0.210). There were linear relationships between Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) or Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and diminished survival in the pooled data (both p<0.001). Both increasing frailty (measured by CFS) and comorbidity (measured by CCI) were associated with reduced survival from CPR. However, survival and ROSC during COVID-19 were no worse than before the pandemic.

Advance Care Planning in Patients with Suspected or Proven COVID: Are We Meeting Our Own Standards?

OBJECTIVE

Given the importance of advance care planning (ACP) in the context of a pandemic, we aimed to assess current adherence to local policy recommending ACP in all hospitalised adult patients with suspected or proven COVID-19 at Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

A tertiary referral and teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

A select sample of adult patients admitted to Liverpool Hospital in 2019-2021 with suspected or proven COVID-19.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of patients with documented ACP and format of ACP.

RESULTS

Amongst 209 patients with proven or suspected COVID-19 hospitalised between March 2019 through to September 2021, median frailty score was 3, the median Charlson Comorbidity Score was 4, median age of the patients was 71 years, and median length of hospital stay was 5 days (range 0-98 days). Almost all patients were tested for COVID-19 (n = 207, 99%) of which 15% (31) were positive. Fewer than a quarter of the patients had documented ACPs (50, 24%) and 17 patients had existing formal advance care directives. Patients who had ACP were older, more likely to be frail and more likely to have higher rates of comorbidity compared to those without ACP. ACP was more commonly discussed with family members (41/50) than patients (25/50) and others (5/50).

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the local ACP policy mandating such discussions was low. This reinforces the need for prioritising ACP discussions, especially for unwell patients such as those with COVID, likely involving further input to improve awareness and rates of formal documentation.

Comparison of different prognostic scores in estimating short- and long-term mortality in COVID-19 patients above 60 years old in a university hospital in Belgium

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Multiple scoring systems were used for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients. The objective was to determine among 6 scores which performed the best in predicting short-and long-term mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients ≥ 60 years.

METHODS

An observational, retrospective cohort study conducted between 21/10/2020 and 20/01/2021. 6 scores were calculated (Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), 4C Mortality Score (4CMS), NEWS score (NEWS), quick-SOFA score (qSOFA), and Quick COVID-19 Severity Index (qCSI)). We included unvaccinated hospitalized patients with COVID-19 ≥ 60 years old in Brugmann hospital, detected by PCR and/or suggestive CT thorax images. Old and nosocomial infections, and patients admitted immediately at the intensive care unit were excluded.

RESULTS

199 patients were included, mean age was 76.2 years (60-99). 47.2% were female. 56 patients (28%) died within 1 year after the first day of hospitalization. The 4CMS predicted the best intrahospital, 30 days and 6 months mortality, with area under the ROC curve (AUROC) 0.695 (0.58-0.81), 0.76 (0.65-0.86) and 0.72 (0.63-0.82) respectively. The CCI came right after with respectively AUROC of 0.69 (0.59-0.79), 0.74 (0.65-0.83) and 0.71 (0.64-0.8). To predict mortality at 12 months after hospitalization, the CCI had the highest AUROC with 0.77 (0.69-0.85), before the 4CMS with 0.69 (0.60-0.79).

DISCUSSION

Among 6 scores, the 4CMS was the best to predict intrahospital, 30-day and 6-month mortality. To predict mortality at 12 months, CCI had the best performance before 4CMS. This reflects the importance of considering comorbidities for short- and long-term mortality after COVID 19.

REGISTRATION

This study was approved by the ethical committee of Brugmann University Hospital (reference CE 2020/228).

Code status orders in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic created complex challenges regarding the timing and appropriateness of do-not-attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) and/or Do Not Intubate (DNI) code status orders. This paper sought to determine differences in utilization of DNACPR and/or DNI orders during different time periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, including prevalence, predictors, timing, and outcomes associated with having a documented DNACPR and/or DNI order in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Methods

A cohort study of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at two hospitals located in the Midwest. DNACPR code status orders including, DNI orders, demographics, labs, COVID-19 treatments, clinical interventions during hospitalization, and outcome measures including mortality, discharge disposition, and hospice utilization were collected. Patients were divided into two time periods (early and late) by timing of hospitalization during the first wave of the pandemic (March-October 2020).

Results

Among 1375 hospitalized patients with COVID-19, 19% (n = 258) of all patients had a documented DNACPR and/or DNI order. In multivariable analysis, age (older) p =< 0.01, OR 1.12 and hospitalization early in the pandemic p = 0.01, OR 2.08, were associated with having a DNACPR order. Median day from DNACPR order to death varied between cohorts p => 0.01 (early cohort 5 days versus late cohort 2 days). In-hospital mortality did not differ between cohorts among patients with DNACPR orders, p = 0.80.

Conclusions

There was a higher prevalence of DNACPR and/or DNI orders and these orders were written earlier in the hospital course for patients hospitalized early in the pandemic versus later despite similarities in clinical characteristics and medical interventions. Changes in clinical care between cohorts may be due to fear of resource shortages and changes in knowledge about COVID-19.

Japanese Local Governments' Dissemination Activities for Advance Care Planning: A Descriptive Analysis of a Nationwide Survey during the COVID-19 Pandemic

This study aims to compare the awareness-raising activities between municipalities with and without focused anti-infection measures during the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Descriptive analysis was conducted using a nationwide self-administered questionnaire survey on municipalities' activities for residents and for healthcare providers and care workers (HCPs) in October 2022 in Japan. This study included 433 municipalities that had conducted awareness-raising activities before 2019 Fiscal Year. Workshops for residents were conducted in 85.2% of the municipalities, and they were more likely to be conducted in areas with focused anti-infection measures than those without measures (86.8% vs. 75.4%). Additionally, 85.9% of the municipalities were impacted by the pandemic; 50.1% canceled workshops, while 26.0% switched to a web-based style. Activities for HCPs were conducted in 55.2-63.7% of the municipalities, and they were more likely to be conducted in areas with focused anti-infection measures. A total of 50.6-62.1% of the municipalities changed their workshops for HCPs to a web-based style. Comparisons between areas with and without focused anti-infection measures indicated that the percentages of those impacted for all activities were not significantly different. In conclusion, awareness-raising activities in municipalities were conducted with new methods during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using information technology is essential to further promote such activities for residents.

Characteristics and Outcomes by Ceiling of Care of Subjects Hospitalized with COVID-19 During Four Waves of the Pandemic in a Metropolitan Area: A Multicenter Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

The profiles of patients with COVID-19 have been widely studied, but little is known about differences in baseline characteristics and in outcomes between subjects with a ceiling of care assigned at hospital admission and subjects without a ceiling of care. The aim of this study is to compare, by ceiling of care, clinical features and outcomes of hospitalized subjects during four waves of COVID-19 in a metropolitan area in Catalonia.

METHODS

Observational study conducted during the first (March-April 2020), second (October-November 2020), third (January-February 2021), and fourth wave (July-August 2021) of COVID-19 in five centers of Catalonia. All subjects were adults (> 18 years old) hospitalized with a proven SARS-CoV-2 infection and with therapeutic ceiling of care assessed by the attending physician at hospital admission.

RESULTS

A total of 5813 subjects were analyzed. Subjects with a ceiling of care were mainly older (difference in median age of 20 years), with more comorbidities (Charlson index 3 points higher) and with fewer clinical signs at baseline than patients without a ceiling of care. Some features of their clinical profiles changed among waves. There were differences in treatments received during hospital admission across waves, but not between subjects with and without a ceiling of care. Subjects with a ceiling of care had a death incidence more than four times the death incidence of subjects a without a ceiling of care (risk ratio (RR) ranging from 3.5 in the first wave to almost 6 in the third and fourth). Incidence of severe pneumonia and complications for subjects with a ceiling of care was around 1.5 times the incidence in subjects without a ceiling of care.

DISCUSSION

Analysis of hospitalized subjects with SARS-CoV-2 infection should be stratified according to therapeutic ceiling of care to avoid bias and outcome misestimation.

Impact of frailty on clinical outcomes in patients with and without COVID-19 pneumonitis admitted to intensive care units in Australia and New Zealand: a retrospective registry data analysis

BACKGROUND

It is unclear if the impact of frailty on mortality differs between patients with viral pneumonitis due to COVID-19 or other causes. We aimed to determine if a difference exists between patients with and without COVID-19 pneumonitis.

METHODS

This multicentre, retrospective, cohort study using the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database included patients aged ≥ 16 years admitted to 153 ICUs between 01/012020 and 12/31/2021 with admission diagnostic codes for viral pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome, and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). The primary outcome was hospital mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 4620 patients were studied, and 3077 (66.6%) had COVID-19. The patients with COVID-19 were younger (median [IQR] 57.0 [44.7-68.3] vs. 66.1 [52.0-76.2]; p < 0.001) and less frail (median [IQR] CFS 3 [2-4] vs. 4 [3-5]; p < 0.001) than non-COVID-19 patients. The overall hospital mortality was similar between the patients with and without COVID-19 (14.7% vs. 14.9%; p = 0.82). Frailty alone as a predictor of mortality showed only moderate discrimination in differentiating survivors from those who died but was similar between patients with and without COVID-19 (AUROC 0.68 vs. 0.66; p = 0.42). Increasing frailty scores were associated with hospital mortality, after adjusting for Australian and New Zealand Risk of Death score and sex. However, the effect of frailty was similar in patients with and without COVID-19 (OR = 1.29; 95% CI: 1.19-1.41 vs. OR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.11-1.37).

CONCLUSION

The presence of frailty was an independent risk factor for mortality. However, the impact of frailty on outcomes was similar in COVID-19 patients compared to other causes of viral pneumonitis.

Treatment limitations and clinical outcomes in critically ill frail patients with and without COVID-19 pneumonitis

BACKGROUND

The presence of treatment limitations in patients with frailty at intensive care unit (ICU) admission is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the presence and predictors of treatment limitations in patients with and without COVID-19 pneumonitis in those admitted to Australian and New Zealand ICUs.

METHODS

This registry-based multicenter, retrospective cohort study included all frail adults (≥16 years) with documented clinical frailty scale (CFS) scores, admitted to ICUs with admission diagnostic codes for viral pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) over 2 years between January 01, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Frail patients (CFS ≥5) coded as having viral pneumonitis or ARDS due to COVID-19 were compared to those with other causes of viral pneumonitis or ARDS for documented treatment limitations.

RESULTS

884 frail patients were included in the final analysis from 129 public and private ICUs. 369 patients (41.7%) had confirmed COVID-19. There were more male patients in COVID-19 (55.3% vs 47.0%; p = 0.015). There were no differences in age or APACHE-III scores between the two groups. Overall, 36.0% (318/884) had treatment limitations, but similar between the two groups (35.8% [132/369] vs 36.1% [186/515]; p = 0.92). After adjusting for confounders, increasing frailty (OR = 1.72; 95%-CI 1.39-2.14), age (OR = 1.05; 95%-CI 1.04-1.06), and presence of chronic respiratory condition (OR = 1.58; 95%-CI 1.10-2.27) increased the likelihood of instituting treatment limitations. However, the presence of COVID-19 by itself did not influence treatment limitations (odds ratio [OR] = 1.39; 95%-CI 0.98-1.96).

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of treatment limitations was similar in patients with frailty with or without COVID-19 pneumonitis at ICU admission.

How is COVID-19 changing the ways doctors make end-of-life decisions?

BACKGROUND

This research explores how the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the ways doctors make end-of-life decisions, particularly around Do Not Attempt Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR), treatment escalation and doctors' views on the legalisation of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.

METHODS

The research was conducted between May and August 2021, during which COVID-19 hospital cases were relatively low and pressures on NHS resources were near normal levels. Data were collected via online survey sent to doctors of all levels and specialties, who have worked in the NHS during the pandemic.

RESULTS

231 participants completed the survey. The research found that over half of participants reported making more patients DNACPR than prepandemic, and this was due, at least in part, to an increased focus on factors including patient age, Clinical Frailty Scores and resource limitations. In addition, a sizeable minority of participants reported that they now had a higher threshold for escalating patients to ITU and a lower threshold for palliating patients, with many attributing these changes to formative experiences gained during the pandemic. Finally, our study found that there has not been a statistically significant change in the views of clinicians on the legalisation of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide since the start of the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic appears to have altered several aspects of end-of-life decision making, and many of these changes have remained even as COVID-19 hospital cases have declined.

“I wanna live and not think about the future” what place for advance care planning for people living with severe multiple sclerosis and their families? A qualitative study

Background

Little is known about how people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and their families comprehend advance care planning (ACP) and its relevance in their lives.

Aim

To explore under what situations, with whom, how, and why do people with MS and their families engage in ACP.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study comprising interviews with people living with MS and their families followed by an ethical discussion group with five health professionals representing specialties working with people affected by MS and their families. Twenty-seven people with MS and 17 family members were interviewed between June 2019 and March 2020. Interviews and the ethical discussion group were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using the framework approach.

Results

Participants’ narratives focused on three major themes: (i) planning for an uncertain future; (ii) perceived obstacles to engaging in ACP that included uncertainty concerning MS disease progression, negative previous experiences of ACP discussions and prioritising symptom management over future planning; (iii) Preferences for engagement in ACP included a trusting relationship with a health professional and that information then be shared across services. Health professionals’ accounts from the ethical discussion group departed from viewing ACP as a formal document to that of an ongoing process of seeking preferences and values. They voiced similar concerns to people with MS about uncertainty and when to initiate ACP-related discussions. Some shared concerns of their lack of confidence when having these discussions.

Conclusion

These findings support the need for a whole system strategic approach where information about the potential benefits of ACP in all its forms can be shared with people with MS. Moreover, they highlight the need for health professionals to be skilled and trained in engaging in ACP discussions and where information is contemporaneously and seamlessly shared across services.

Hospital at home for acute medical illness: The 21st century acute medical unit for a changing population

Recent trends across Europe show a year-on-year increase in the number of patients with acute medical illnesses presenting to hospitals, yet there are no plans for a substantial expansion in acute hospital infrastructure or staffing to address demand. Strategies to meet increasing demand need to consider the fact that there is limited capacity in acute hospitals and focus on new care models in both hospital and community settings. Increasing the efficiency of acute hospital provision by reducing the length of stay entails supporting acute ambulatory care, where patients receive daily acute care interventions but do not stay overnight in the hospitals. This approach may entail daily transfer between home and an acute setting for ongoing treatment, which is unsuitable for some patients living with frailty. Acute hospital at home (HaH) is a care model which, thanks to advances in point of care diagnostic capability, can provide a credible model of acute medical assessment and treatment without the need for hospital transfer. Investment and training to support scaling up of HaH are key strategic aims for integrated healthcare systems.

Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) indicated frailty is associated with increased in-hospital and 30-day mortality in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The concept of frailty provides an age-independent, easy-to-use tool for risk stratification. We aimed to summarize the evidence on the efficacy of frailty tools in risk assessment in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

The protocol was registered (CRD42021241544). Studies reporting on frailty in COVID-19 patients were eligible. The main outcomes were mortality, length of hospital stay (LOH) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in frail and non-frail COVID-19 patients. Frailty was also compared in survivors and non-survivors. Five databases were searched up to 24th September 2021. The QUIPS tool was used for the risk of bias assessment. Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random effect model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² and χ² tests.

RESULTS

From 3640 records identified, 54 were included in the qualitative and 42 in the quantitative synthesis. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) was used in 46 studies, the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) by 4, the Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) by 3 and three studies used other scores. We found that patients with frailty (CFS 4-9 or HFRS ≥ 5) have a higher risk of mortality (CFS: OR: 3.12; CI 2.56-3.81; HFRS OR: 1.98; CI 1.89-2.07). Patients with frailty (CFS 4-9) were less likely to be admitted to ICU (OR 0.28, CI 0.12-0.64). Quantitative synthesis for LOH was not feasible. Most studies carried a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

As determined by CFS, frailty is strongly associated with mortality; hence, frailty-based patient management should be included in international COVID-19 treatment guidelines. Future studies investigating the role of frailty assessment on deciding ICU admission are strongly warranted.

Parkinson's disease and Covid-19: Is there an impact of ethnicity and the need for palliative care

Under the traditional models of care for People with Parkinson's Disease (PD, PwP), many of their needs remain unmet and a substantial burden of motor and non-motor symptoms they experience may not be tackled sufficiently. An introduction of palliative care (PC) interventions early in the course of PD offers profound benefits: it may improve quality of life of patients, their families and caregivers through the prevention and relief of medical symptoms, while, at the same time, emphasizing their emotional needs and spiritual wellbeing, establishing goals of care, and engaging in the advance care planning (ACP).

The ongoing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic poses an unprecedented set of challenges for PwP and has in many ways (both directly and indirectly) magnified their suffering, thus rapidly raising the demand for PC interventions. Covid-19, as well as the repercussions of prolonged mobility restrictions and limited health-care access might exacerbate the severity of PD motor symptoms and interact negatively with a range of non-motor symptoms, with a detrimental effect on quality of life. Greater motor disability, higher amount of levodopa-induced motor fluctuations with an increased daily off-time, fatigue, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbances, pain and worsening of cognitive complaints might dominate the clinical presentation in PwP during the Covid-19 pandemic, alongside raising psychological and spiritual concerns and anticipatory grief.

Here, we aim to provide a foundation for pragmatic and clinically orientated PC approach to improve quality of life and relieve suffering of PwP in the context of the current, ongoing Covid-19 pandemic.

Contemporary Issues and Practicalities in Completing Advance Care Planning for Patients With Severe COPD Living Alone: A Qualitative Study

Health care professionals working with older people living alone with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to complete advance care planning (ACP) often encounter the double burden of social isolation and acute exacerbations in this planning. The study explored clinicians' perceptions regarding factors influencing the completion of ACP for older people with COPD living alone. Individual interviews were conducted with 18 health care professionals using the video meeting platform in 2020. A semi-structured interview guide included: (a) behavior and lifestyle related to decision-making, (b) desired place to die, and (c) facilitators and barriers to autonomy in patients with severe COPD who live alone. Five main themes were identified: information sharing among team members, patient readiness, desired place of death, economic constraints, and care at the time of and after death. Partly due to the heterogeneity and complexity of clinical courses and treatment responses of COPD, a wide range of social issues of a person's life were related to practicality in the completion of ACP for older people with COPD living alone. Social work knowledge and skills such as in-depth interviewing, outreach finance and welfare support, and holistic perspective play an essential role in completing ACP for COPD patients living alone.

Implementation of advance care planning amid the COVID-19 crisis: A narrative review and synthesis

Advance care planning is considered an important issue in end‐of‐life care for older adults. The ongoing COVID‐19 pandemic has interrupted the healthcare system and end‐of‐life care tremendously. This review aimed to explore available articles on advance care planning amid the pandemic and analyze qualitatively. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched on February 2021 using the relevant keywords. Retrieved articles were screened applying inclusion criteria. Any article describing advance care planning during the COVID‐19 era was included. A qualitative content analysis was conducted. In total, 20 articles incorporating 5542 participants from five countries were included. Among the articles, eight were primary studies and the rest were perspective papers or secondary analysis. From the qualitative content analysis six major themes emerged namely palliative care, lack of coordination among acute care, hospital palliative care, and long‐term care, community‐based advance care planning, real‐time dissemination of scientific information on the regional pandemic situation, online system and legislation. The COVID‐19 pandemic had decreased the uptake of advance care planning. Findings of the review suggested simplification of the procedure regarding advance care planning, implementation of community‐based advance care planning and utilization of online resources to enhance the process. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2021; 21: 779–787.