Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Morbidity and death due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experienced by older adults in nursing homes have been well described, but COVID-19's impact on community-living older adults is less studied. Similarly, the previous ambulatory care experience of such patients has rarely been considered in studies of COVID-19 risks and outcomes. METHODS:To investigate the relationship of advanced age (65+), on risk factors associated with COVID-19 outcomes in community-living elders, we identified an electronic health records cohort of older patients aged 65+ with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 with and without an ambulatory care visit in the past 24 months (n = 47,219) in the New York City (NYC) academic medical institutions and the NYC public hospital system from January 2020 to February 2021. The main outcomes are COVID-19 hospitalization; severe outcomes/Intensive care unit (ICU), intubation, dialysis, stroke, in-hospital death), and in-hospital death. The exposures include demographic characteristics, and those with ambulatory records, comorbidities, frailty, and laboratory results. RESULTS:The 31,770 patients with an ambulatory history had a median age of 74 years; were 47.4% male, 24.3% non-Hispanic white, 23.3% non-Hispanic black, and 18.4% Hispanic. With increasing age, the odds ratios and attributable fractions of sex, race-ethnicity, comorbidities, and biomarkers decreased except for dementia and frailty (Hospital Frailty Risk Score). Patients without ambulatory care histories, compared to those with, had significantly higher adjusted rates of COVID-19 hospitalization and severe outcomes, with strongest effect in the oldest group. CONCLUSIONS:In this cohort of community-dwelling older adults, we provided evidence of age-specific risk factors for COVID-19 hospitalization and severe outcomes. Future research should explore the impact of frailty and dementia in severe COVID-19 outcomes in community-living older adults, and the role of engagement in ambulatory care in mitigating severe disease.

Outcomes: 1. Understand the historical use of palliative care for patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) 2. Describe the use of palliative care for patients with AKI and COVID-19 during the surge at our institution 3. Describe the associations of palliative care with subsequent health care utilization such as hospice use, ICU time, and mechanical ventilation Original Research Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common morbidity seen in patients with COVID-19 and is associated with high mortality. Palliative care is valuable for these patients yet is historically underused in AKI. Research Objectives: To describe the use of palliative care and subsequent health care utilization by COVID-19 patients with AKI.
Method(s): A retrospective analysis of NYU's electronic health data of COVID-19 hospitalizations between March 2, 2020 and August 25, 2020. AKI was defined by the AKI Network creatinine criteria. Regression models examined characteristics associated with a receiving palliative care and discharge to hospice versus death in the hospital.
Result(s): Patientswith COVID-19 and AKI were more likely than those without AKI to receive palliative care (42% vs 7%, p < 0.001); however, consults came significantly later (10 days from admission vs 5 days, p < 0.001). 66% of patients initiated on renal replacement therapy (RRT) received palliative care versus 37% (p < 0.001) of those with AKI not on RRT, also later in timing (12 days from admission vs 9 days, p = 0.002). Patients with AKI had a significantly longer stay, more ICU admissions, use of mechanical ventilation, discharges to hospice (6% vs 3%), and changes in code status (34% vs 7%, p < 0.001) than those without AKI. Among those who received palliative care, AKI both without RRT (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27-0.95) and with RRT (aOR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04-0.67) was associated with a lower likelihood of discharge to hospice versus hospital death compared to those without AKI.
Conclusion(s): Palliative care was used more for patients with AKI and COVID-19 than historically reported, yet this consultation came later in the hospital course and did not avoid invasive interventions despite high mortality. Implications for Research, Policy, or Practice: These data can lead to further exploration of earlier timing of palliative care consultation in AKI.
Copyright

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:AKI is a common complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and is associated with high mortality. Palliative care, a specialty that supports patients with serious illness, is valuable for these patients but is historically underutilized in AKI. The objectives of this paper are to describe the use of palliative care in patients with AKI and COVID-19 and their subsequent health care utilization. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:We conducted a retrospective analysis of New York University Langone Health electronic health data of COVID-19 hospitalizations between March 2, 2020 and August 25, 2020. Regression models were used to examine characteristics associated with receiving a palliative care consult. RESULTS:=0.002). Despite greater use of palliative care, patients with AKI had a significantly longer length of stay, more intensive care unit admissions, and more use of mechanical ventilation. Those with AKI did have a higher frequency of discharges to inpatient hospice (6% versus 3%) and change in code status (34% versus 7%) than those without AKI. CONCLUSIONS:Palliative care was utilized more frequently for patients with AKI and COVID-19 than historically reported in AKI. Despite high mortality, consultation occurred late in the hospital course and was not associated with reduced initiation of life-sustaining interventions. PODCAST/UNASSIGNED:This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2022_02_24_CJN11030821.mp3.

Importance:Although people receiving maintenance dialysis have limited life expectancy and a high burden of comorbidity, relatively few studies have examined spirituality and religious beliefs among members of this population. Objective:To examine whether there is an association between the importance of religious or spiritual beliefs and care preferences and palliative care needs in people who receive dialysis. Design, Setting, and Participants:A cross-sectional survey study was conducted among adults who were undergoing maintenance dialysis at 31 facilities in Seattle, Washington, and Nashville, Tennessee, between April 22, 2015, and October 2, 2018. The survey included a series of questions assessing patients' knowledge, preferences, values, and expectations related to end-of-life care. Data were analyzed from February 12, 2020, to April 21, 2021. Exposures:The importance of religious or spiritual beliefs was ascertained by asking participants to respond to this statement: "My religious or spiritual beliefs are what really lie behind my whole approach to life." Response options were definitely true, tends to be true, tends not to be true, or definitely not true. Main Outcomes and Measurements:Outcome measures were based on self-reported engagement in advance care planning, resuscitation preferences, values regarding life prolongation, preferred place of death, decision-making preference, thoughts or discussion about hospice or stopping dialysis, prognostic expectations, and palliative care needs. Results:A total of 937 participants were included in the cohort, of whom the mean (SD) age was 62.8 (13.8) years and 524 (55.9%) were men. Overall, 435 (46.4%) participants rated the statement about religious or spiritual beliefs as definitely true, 230 (24.6%) rated it as tends to be true, 137 (14.6%) rated it as tends not to be true, and 135 (14.4%) rated it as definitely not true. Participants for whom these beliefs were more important were more likely to prefer cardiopulmonary resuscitation (estimated probability for definitely true: 69.8% [95% CI, 66.5%-73.2%]; tends to be true: 60.8% [95% CI, 53.4%-68.3%]; tends not to be true: 61.6% [95% CI, 53.6%-69.6%]; and definitely not true: 60.6% [95% CI, 52.5%-68.6%]; P for trend = .003) and mechanical ventilation (estimated probability for definitely true: 42.6% [95% CI, 38.1%-47.0%]; tends to be true: 33.5% [95% CI, 25.9%-41.2%]; tends not to be true: 35.1% [95% CI, 27.2%-42.9%]; and definitely not true: 27.9% [95% CI, 19.6%-36.1%]; P for trend = .002) and to prefer a shared role in decision-making (estimated probability for definitely true: 41.6% [95% CI, 37.7%-45.5%]; tends to be true: 35.4% [95% CI, 29.0%-41.8%]; tends not to be true: 36.0% [95% CI, 26.7%-45.2%]; and definitely not true: 23.8% [95% CI, 17.3%-30.3%]; P for trend = .001) and were less likely to have thought or spoken about stopping dialysis. These participants were no less likely to have engaged in advance care planning, to value relief of pain and discomfort, to prefer to die at home, to have ever thought or spoken about hospice, and to have unmet palliative care needs and had similar prognostic expectations. Conclusions and Relevance:The finding that religious or spiritual beliefs were important to most study participants suggests the value of an integrative approach that addresses these beliefs in caring for people who receive dialysis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:Using case vignettes, we highlight challenges in communication, prognostication, and medical decision-making that have been exacerbated by the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic for patients with kidney disease. We include best practice recommendations to mitigate these issues and conclude with implications for interdisciplinary models of care in crisis settings. RECENT FINDINGS:Certain biomarkers, demographics, and medical comorbidities predict an increased risk for mortality among patients with COVID-19 and kidney disease, but concerns related to physical exposure and conservation of personal protective equipment have exacerbated existing barriers to empathic communication and value clarification for these patients. Variability in patient characteristics and outcomes has made prognostication nuanced and challenging. The pandemic has also highlighted the complexities of dialysis decision-making for older adults at risk for poor outcomes related to COVID-19. SUMMARY:The COVID-19 pandemic underscores the need for nephrologists to be competent in serious illness communication skills that include virtual and remote modalities, to be aware of prognostic tools, and to be willing to engage with interdisciplinary teams of palliative care subspecialists, intensivists, and ethicists to facilitate goal-concordant care during crisis settings.

CONTEXT/BACKGROUND:In spring 2020, New York experienced as surge of patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (COVID-19) disease, as part of a global pandemic. There is limited data on populations of COVID-19 infected patients seen by palliative care services. OBJECTIVE:To describe a palliative care population at one New York hospital system during the initial pandemic surge. METHODS:This repeated cross sectional, observational study collected data on palliative care patients in a large health system seen during the COVID-19 outbreak and compared it to pre-COVID data. RESULTS:Palliative service volume surged from 678 (4% of total admissions) pre-COVID-19 to 1,071 (10% of total admissions) during the COVID-19 outbreak. During the outbreak, 695 (64.9%) of palliative patients tested positive for the virus. Compared with a pre-outbreak group, this COVID-19 positive group had higher rates of male (60.7% vs 48.6%, p < 0.01) and Latino (21.3% vs 13.3%; p < 0.01) patients and less white patients (21.3% vs 13.3%; p < 0.01). Our patient's with COVID-19 also had greater prevalence of obesity and diabetes and lower rates of end-stage organ disease and cancers. The COVID-19 positive group had a higher rate of intensive care unit admissions (58.9% vs 33.9%; p < 0.01) and in-hospital mortality rate (57.4% vs 13.1%; p < 0.01) compared to the pre-outbreak group. There was increased odds of mortality in palliative care patients who were COVID-19 positive (OR = 3.21; 95% CI = 2.43 - 4.24) and those admitted to the ICU (OR = 1.45; 95% CI = 1.11 - 1.9). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:During the initial surge of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York, palliative care services experienced a large surge of patients who tended to be healthier at baseline and more acutely ill at time of admission than pre-COVID palliative patients.

OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:The ideal clinical model to deliver palliative care to patients with advanced kidney disease is currently unknown. Internationally, ambulatory kidney palliative care clinics have emerged with positive outcomes, yet there is limited data from the United States (US). In this exploratory study we report perceptions of a US-based ambulatory kidney palliative care clinic from the perspective of patient and caregiver attendees. The objective of this study was to inform further improvement of our clinical program. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit the patient and caregiver experience. Eleven interviews (8 patients with chronic kidney disease stage IV or V and 3 caregivers) were analyzed using qualitative description design. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:We identified 2 themes: "Communication addressing the emotional and physical aspects of disease" and "Filling gaps in care"; Subthemes include perceived value in symptom management, assistance with coping with disease, engagement in advance care planning, program satisfaction and patient activation. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Qualitative analysis showed that attendees of an ambulatory kidney palliative care clinic found the clinic enhanced the management of their kidney disease and provided services that filled current gaps in their care. Shared experiences highlight the significant challenges of life with kidney disease and the possible benefits of palliative care for this population. Further study to determine the optimal model of care for kidney palliative care is needed. Inclusion of the patient and caregiver perspective will be essential in this development.

Background: Conservative kidney management (CKM) of kidney failure is an important treatment option for many patients. However, its availability in the United States (US) is not well described. We describe CKM resources and provider practice patterns in US Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) clinics.
Method(s): Cross sectional analysis of provider surveys (n=22) from unique clinics in the US from the CKD Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (CKDopps) collected between 2014-2017.
Result(s): Only eight (36%) providers reported involving palliative care in planning for and educating patients about kidney failure. A majority (59%) were extremely comfortable discussing CKM and nearly 100% typically discussed CKM as a treatment option. Nearly all (95%) reported their clinics had the ability to routinely deliver CKM, but only one had a CKM protocol or guideline, and none offered a specific CKM clinic. Most providers said their clinics used the word conservative to describe CKM, with 24% choosing palliative or supportive terminology. Regardless of involvement of PC, most providers estimated that 5% of their patients with or approaching kidney failure were managed with CKM. Patient preference, functional status, frailty, and comorbidities were the most important factors influencing provider decisions in contemplating the suitability of CKM for patients. (Figure 1)
Conclusion(s): Most providers report feeling comfortable discussing CKM, yet almost no clinics report resources or dedicated infrastructure for CKM delivery. Despite reported high frequency of discussing CKM, few patients were described as choosing this treatment pathway. Factors that influence consideration of CKM are consistent with elements that generally influence well-informed geriatric and end-of-life care. Efforts to improve assessment of those elements may allow for more informed recommendations of CKM