Dataset Information

End-of-Life Care During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: The 3 Wishes Program.

ABSTRACT: Patient- and family-centered end-of-life care can be difficult to achieve in light of visitation restrictions and infection-prevention measures. We evaluated how the 3 Wishes Program evolved to allow continued provision of compassionate end-of-life care for critically ill patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Design

This is a prospective observational study where data were collected 1 year prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and 1 year after (from March 1, 2019, to March 31, 2021). The number of deceased patients whose care involved the 3 Wishes Program, their characteristics, and wishes were compared between prepandemic and pandemic periods.

Setting

Six adult ICUs of a two-hospital health system in Los Angeles.

Patients

Deceased patients whose care involved the 3 Wishes Program.

Interventions

The 3 Wishes Program is a palliative care intervention in which individualized wishes are implemented for dying patients and their families.

Measurements and main results

During the study period, the end-of-life care for 523 patients involved the 3 Wishes Program; more patients received the 3 Wishes Program as part of their end-of-life care during the pandemic period than during the prepandemic study period (24.8 vs 17.6 patients/mo; p = 0.044). Patients who died during the pandemic compared with prepandemic were less likely to have family at the bedside and more likely to have postmortem wishes fulfilled for their families. Compared with the 736 wishes implemented during the prepandemic period, the 969 wishes completed during the pandemic were more likely to involve keepsakes. Wishes were most commonly implemented by bedside nurses, although the 3 Wishes Program project manager (not involved in the patient's clinical care) was more likely to assist remotely during the pandemic (24.8% vs 12.1%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Bedside innovations, programmatic adaptations, and institutional support made it possible for healthcare workers to continue the 3 Wishes Program and provide compassionate end-of-life care in the ICU during this pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Neville TH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8505331 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThere is widespread consensus on the challenges to meeting the end-of-life wishes of decedents in the US. However, there is broad but not always recognized success in meeting wishes among decedents 65 years and older.ObjectiveTo assess how well end-of-life wishes of decedents 65 years and older are met in the last year of life.Design, setting, and participantsThis quality improvement study involved 3 planned samples of family members or informants identified as the primary contact in the medical record of Kaiser Permanente Southern California decedents. The first sample was 715 decedents, 65 years or older, who died between April 1 and May 31, 2017. The second was a high-cost sample of 332 decedents, 65 years or older, who died between June 1, 2016, and May 31, 2017, and whose costs in the last year of life were in the top 10% of the costs of all decedents. The third was a lower-cost sample with 655 decedents whose costs were not in the top 10%. The survey was fielded between December 19, 2017, and February 8, 2018.Main outcomes and measuresMeeting end-of-life wishes, discussions with next of kin and physicians, types of discordant care, and perceptions of amount of care received.ResultsSurveys were completed by 715 of the 2281 next of kin in the all-decedent sample (mean [SD] decedent age, 80.9 [8.9] years; 361 [50.5%] male) for a 31% response rate; in 332 of the 1339 next of kin in the high-cost sample (mean [SD] decedent age, 75.5 [7.1] years; 194 [48.4%] male) for a 25% response rate; and in 659 of 2058 in the lower-cost sample (mean [SD] decedent age, 81.6 [8.8] years) for a 32% response rate. Respondents noted that high percentages of decedents received treatment that was concordant with their desires: 601 (88.9%) had their wishes met, 39 (5.9%) received a treatment they did not want, and 554 (84.1%) filled out an advance directive. A total of 509 respondents (82.5%) believed the amount of care was the right amount. Those with the highest costs had their wishes met at lower rates than those with lower costs (250 [80.1%] vs 553 [89.6%]).Conclusions and relevanceIn this Kaiser Permanente Southern California cohort, a large proportion of decedents 65 years and older had end-of-life discussions and documentation, had their wishes met, and received the amount of care they thought appropriate.

Project description:ObjectiveIn the present study, we quantified the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the volume of adult and pediatric neurosurgical procedures, inpatient consultations, and clinic visits at an academic medical center.MethodsNeurosurgical procedures, inpatient consultations, and outpatient appointments at Vanderbilt University Medical Center were identified from March 23, 2020 through May 8, 2020 (during COVID-19) and March 25, 2019 through May 10, 2019 (before COVID-19). The neurosurgical volume was compared between the 2 periods.ResultsA 40% reduction in weekly procedural volume was demonstrated during COVID-19 (median before, 75; interquartile range [IQR], 72-80; median during, 45; IQR, 43-47; P < 0.001). A 42% reduction occurred in weekly adult procedures (median before, 62; IQR, 54-70; median during, 36; IQR, 34-39; P < 0.001), and a 31% reduction occurred in weekly pediatric procedures (median before, 13; IQR, 12-14; median during, 9; IQR, 8-10; P = 0.004). Among adult procedures, the most significant decreases were seen for spine (P < 0.001) and endovascular (P < 0.001) procedures and cranioplasty (P < 0.001). A significant change was not found in the adult open vascular (P = 0.291), functional (P = 0.263), cranial tumor (P = 0.143), or hydrocephalus (P = 0.173) procedural volume. Weekly inpatient consultations to neurosurgery decreased by 24% (median before, 99; IQR, 94-114; median during, 75; IQR, 68-84; P = 0.008) for adults. Weekly in-person adult and pediatric outpatient clinic visits witnessed a 91% decrease (median before, 329; IQR, 326-374; median during, 29; IQR, 26-39; P < 0.001). In contrast, weekly telehealth encounters increased from a median of 0 (IQR, 0-0) before to a median of 151 (IQR, 126-156) during COVID-19 (P < 0.001).ConclusionsSignificant reductions occurred in neurosurgical operations, clinic visits, and inpatient consultations during COVID-19. Telehealth was increasingly used for assessments. The long-term effects of the reduced neurosurgical volume and increased telehealth usage on patient outcomes should be explored.

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic necessitated an abrupt transition to exclusive virtual interviewing for maternal-fetal medicine fellowship programs.ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the maternal-fetal medicine fellowship program directors' approaches to exclusive virtual interviews and to obtain program director feedback on the virtual interview experience to guide future interview cycles.Study designA novel cross-sectional online survey was distributed through the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine to program directors after the completion of the interview season, but before the results of the National Resident Matching Program on October 14, 2020. Survey data were collected anonymously and managed using secure Research Electronic Data Capture electronic data capture tools.ResultsOverall 71 of 89 program directors (80%) responded. All respondents completed their 2020 interviews 100% virtually. Nearly half of program directors (33 of 68, 49%) interviewed more candidates in 2020 than in 2019. Of those who interviewed more candidates in 2020, the mean number of additional candidates per fellowship position was 5.8 (standard deviation, ±3.8). Almost all program directors reported no (35 of 71, 49%) or minimal (34 of 71, 48%) negative impact of technical difficulties on their virtual interview processes. Most programs structured their interview to a half day (4 hours) or less for the candidates. Many programs were able to adapt their supplemental interview materials and events for the candidates into a virtual format, including a virtual social event hosted by 31 of 71 programs (44%). The virtual social event was most commonly casual and led by current fellows. Ultimately, all program directors reported that the virtual interview experience was as expected or better than expected. However, most program directors felt less able to provide candidates with a comprehensive and accurate representation of their program on a virtual platform compared with their previous in-person experiences (46 of 71 [65%] reported minimally, moderately, or significantly less than in-person). In addition, most program directors felt their ability to get to know candidates and assess their "fit" with the program was less than previous in-person years (44 of 71 [62%] reported minimally, moderately, or significantly less than in-person). In a hypothetical future year without any public health concerns, there were 23 of 71 respondents (32%) who prefer exclusive in-person interviews, 24 of 71 (34%) who prefer exclusive virtual interviews, and 24 of 71 (34%) who prefer a hybrid of virtual and in-person interviews.ConclusionThe virtual interview experience was better than expected for most program directors. However, most program directors felt less able to present their programs and assess the candidates on a virtual platform compared with previous in-person experiences. Despite this, most program directors are interested in at least a component of virtual interviewing in future years. Future efforts are needed to refine the virtual interview process to optimize the experience for program directors and candidates.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The current ongoing pandemic outbreak of COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) has globally affected 213 countries and territories with more than 2.5 million confirmed cases and thousands of casualties. The unpredictable and uncertain COVID-19 outbreak has the potential of adversely affecting the psychological health on individual and community level. Currently all efforts are focused on the understanding of epidemiology, clinical features, mode of transmission, counteract the spread of the virus, and challenges of global health, while crucially significant mental health has been overlooked in this endeavor. METHOD:This review is to evaluate past outbreaks to understand the extent of adverse effects on psychological health, psychological crisis intervention, and mental health management plans. Published previous and current articles on PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Elsevier about psychological impact of infectious diseases outbreaks and COVID-19 has been considered and reviewed. COMMENTS:COVID-19 is leading to intense psychosocial issues and comprising mental health marking a secondary health concern all around the world. Globally implementing preventive and controlling measures, and cultivating coping and resilience are challenging factors; modified lifestyle (lockdown curfew, self-isolation, social distancing and quarantine); conspiracy theories, misinformation and disinformation about the origin, scale, signs, symptoms, transmission, prevention and treatment; global socioeconomic crisis; travel restrictions; workplace hazard control; postponement and cancellation of religious, sports, cultural and entertainment events; panic buying and hoarding; incidents of racism, xenophobia, discrimination, stigma, psychological pressure of productivity, marginalization and violence; overwhelmed medical centers and health organizations, and general impact on education, politics, socioeconomic, culture, environment and climate - are some of the risk factors to aggravate further problems.