Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect ; 13: 100533, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2251582

ABSTRACT

Transportation is a key element of access to healthcare. The COVID-19 pandemic posed unique and unforeseen challenges to patients receiving hemodialysis who rely on three times weekly transportation to receive their life-saving treatments, but there is little data on the problems they faced. This study explores the attitudes, fears, and concerns of hemodialysis patients during the pandemic with a focus on their travel to/from dialysis treatments. A mixed methods travel survey was distributed to hemodialysis patients from three urban centers in Montréal, Canada, during the pandemic (n = 43). The survey included closed questions that were analysed through descriptive statistics as well as open-ended questions that were assessed through thematic analysis. Descriptive statistics show that hemodialysis patients are more fearful of contracting COVID-19 in transit than they are at the treatment center. Patients taking paratransit, public transportation, and taxis are more fearful of COVID-19 while traveling than those who drive, who are driven, or who walk to the clinic. In the open-ended questions, patients reported struggling with confusing COVID-19 protocols in public transport, including conflicting information on whether paratransit taxis allowed one or multiple passengers. Paratransit was the most used travel mode to access treatment (n = 30), with problems identified in the open-ended questions, such as long and unreliable pickup windows, and extended travel times. To limit COVID-19 exposure and stress for paratransit users, agencies should consider sitting one patient per paratransit taxi, clearly communicating COVID-19 protocols online and in the vehicles, and tracking vehicles for more efficient pickups.

3.
Cell Rep Med ; 4(3): 100955, 2023 03 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2235229

ABSTRACT

Cellular immune defects associated with suboptimal responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA vaccination in people receiving hemodialysis (HD) are poorly understood. We longitudinally analyze antibody, B cell, CD4+, and CD8+ T cell vaccine responses in 27 HD patients and 26 low-risk control individuals (CIs). The first two doses elicit weaker B cell and CD8+ T cell responses in HD than in CI, while CD4+ T cell responses are quantitatively similar. In HD, a third dose robustly boosts B cell responses, leads to convergent CD8+ T cell responses, and enhances comparatively more T helper (TH) immunity. Unsupervised clustering of single-cell features reveals phenotypic and functional shifts over time and between cohorts. The third dose attenuates some features of TH cells in HD (tumor necrosis factor alpha [TNFα]/interleukin [IL]-2 skewing), while others (CCR6, CXCR6, programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1], and HLA-DR overexpression) persist. Therefore, a third vaccine dose is critical to achieving robust multifaceted immunity in hemodialysis patients, although some distinct TH characteristics endure.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/prevention & control , CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes
4.
Kidney360 ; 3(6): 1057-1064, 2022 06 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1929089

ABSTRACT

Background: Hemodialysis patients have faced unique challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. They face high risk of death if infected and have unavoidable exposure to others when they come to hospital three times weekly for their life-saving treatments. The objective of this study was to gain a better understanding of the scope and magnitude of the effects of the pandemic on the lived experience of patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 patients who were undergoing dialysis treatments in five hemodialysis centers in Montreal from November 2020 to May 2021. Interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using thematic content analysis. Results: Most participants reported no negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on their hemodialysis care. Several patients had negative feelings related to forced changes in their dialysis schedules, and this was especially pronounced for indigenous patients in a shared living situation. Some patients were concerned about contracting COVID-19, especially during public transportation, whereas others expressed confidence that the physical distancing and screening measures implemented at the hospital would protect them and their loved ones. Some participants reported that masks negatively affected their interactions with health care workers, and for many others, the pandemic was associated with feelings of loneliness. Finally, some respondents reported some positive effects of the pandemic, including use of telemedicine and creating a sense of solidarity. Conclusions: Patients undergoing hemodialysis reported no negative effects on their medical care but faced significant disruptions in their routines and social interactions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, they showed great resilience in their ability to adapt to the new reality of their hemodialysis treatments. We also show that studies focused on understanding the lived experiences of indigenous patients and patients from different ethnic backgrounds are needed in order reduce inequities in care during public health emergencies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Masks , Pandemics , Quebec/epidemiology , Renal Dialysis
5.
CMAJ Open ; 9(4): E1232-E1241, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1591622

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Limited space and resources are potential obstacles to infection prevention and control (IPAC) measures in in-centre hemodialysis units. We aimed to assess IPAC measures implemented in Quebec's hemodialysis units during the spring of 2020, describe the characteristics of these units and document the cumulative infection rates during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: For this cross-sectional survey, we invited leaders from 54 hemodialysis units in Quebec to report information on the physical characteristics of the unit and their perceptions of crowdedness, which IPAC measures were implemented from Mar. 1 to June 30, 2020, and adherence to and feasibility of appropriate IPAC measures. Participating units were contacted again in March 2021 to collect information on the number of COVID-19 cases in order to derive the cumulative infection rate of each unit. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 38 of the 54 units contacted (70% response rate), which provided care to 4485 patients at the time of survey completion. Fourteen units (37%) had implemented appropriate IPAC measures by 3 weeks after Mar. 1, and all 38 units had implemented them by 6 weeks after. One-third of units were perceived as crowded. General measures, masks and screening questionnaires were used in more than 80% of units, and various distancing measures in 55%-71%; reduction in dialysis frequency was rare. Data on cumulative infection rates were obtained from 27 units providing care to 4227 patients. The cumulative infection rate varied from 0% to 50% (median 11.3%, interquartile range 5.2%-20.2%) and was higher than the reported cumulative infection rate in the corresponding region in 23 (85%) of the 27 units. INTERPRETATION: Rates of COVID-19 infection among hemodialysis recipients in Quebec were elevated compared to the general population during the first year of the pandemic, and although hemodialysis units throughout the province implemented appropriate IPAC measures rapidly in the spring of 2020, many units were crowded and could not maintain physical distancing. Future hemodialysis units should be designed to minimize airborne and droplet transmission of infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Infection Control , Renal Dialysis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Quebec/epidemiology , Renal Dialysis/adverse effects , Renal Dialysis/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires
6.
CMAJ ; 193(22): E793-E800, 2021 05 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1249585

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving in-centre hemodialysis are at high risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and death if infected. One dose of the BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is efficacious in the general population, but responses in patients receiving hemodialysis are uncertain. METHODS: We obtained serial plasma from patients receiving hemodialysis and health care worker controls before and after vaccination with 1 dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, as well as convalescent plasma from patients receiving hemodialysis who survived COVID-19. We measured anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels and stratified groups by evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: Our study included 154 patients receiving hemodialysis (135 without and 19 with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection), 40 controls (20 without and 20 with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection) and convalescent plasma from 16 patients. Among those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, anti-RBD IgG was undetectable at 4 weeks in 75 of 131 (57%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 47% to 65%) patients receiving hemodialysis, compared with 1 of 20 (5%, 95% CI 1% to 23%) controls (p < 0.001). No patient with nondetectable levels at 4 weeks developed anti-RBD IgG by 8 weeks. Results were similar in non-immunosuppressed and younger individuals. Three patients receiving hemodialysis developed severe COVID-19 after vaccination. Among those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, median anti-RBD IgG levels at 8 weeks in patients receiving hemodialysis were similar to controls at 3 weeks (p = 0.3) and to convalescent plasma (p = 0.8). INTERPRETATION: A single dose of BNT162b2 vaccine failed to elicit a humoral immune response in most patients receiving hemodialysis without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, even after prolonged observation. In those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, the antibody response was delayed. We advise that patients receiving hemodialysis be prioritized for a second BNT162b2 dose at the recommended 3-week interval.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Renal Dialysis , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/biosynthesis , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/immunology , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/biosynthesis , Immunoglobulin M/biosynthesis , Immunoglobulin M/blood , Kidney Failure, Chronic/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Time Factors , Young Adult
7.
Can J Kidney Health Dis ; 8: 20543581211014745, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1247564

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are monoclonal antibodies used in the treatment of various types of cancers. The downside of using such molecules is the potential risk of developing immune-related adverse events. Factors that trigger these autoimmune side effects are yet to be elucidated. Although any organ can potentially be affected, kidney involvement is usually rare. In this case report, we describe the first known instance of a patient being treated with an inhibitor of programmed death-ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1, a checkpoint inhibitor) who develops acute tubulointerstitial nephritis after contracting the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. PRESENTING CONCERNS OF THE PATIENT: A 62-year-old patient, on immunotherapy treatment for stage 4 squamous cell carcinoma, presents to the emergency department with symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection. Severe acute kidney injury is discovered with electrolyte imbalances requiring urgent dialysis initiation. Further testing reveals that the patient has contracted the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. DIAGNOSIS: A kidney biopsy was performed and was compatible with acute tubulointerstitial nephritis. INTERVENTIONS: The patient was treated with high dose corticosteroid therapy followed by progressive tapering. OUTCOMES: Rapid and sustained normalization of kidney function was achieved after completion of the steroid course. NOVEL FINDINGS: We hypothesize that the viral infection along with checkpoint inhibitor use has created a proinflammatory environment which led to a loss of self-tolerance to renal parenchyma. Viruses may play a more important role in the pathogenesis of autoimmunity in this patient population than was previously thought.

9.
Kidney Med ; 3(1): 83-98.e1, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-969358

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be associated with high rates of acute kidney injury (AKI) and kidney replacement therapy (KRT), potentially overwhelming health care resources. Our objective was to determine the pooled prevalence of AKI and KRT among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and a registry of preprinted studies, published up to October 14, 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible studies reported the prevalence of AKI in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 according to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) definition. DATA EXTRACTION & SYNTHESIS: We extracted data on patient characteristics, the proportion of patients developing AKI and commencing KRT, important clinical outcomes (discharge from hospital, ongoing hospitalization, and death), and risk of bias. OUTCOMES & MEASURES: We calculated the pooled prevalence of AKI and receipt of KRT along with 95% CIs using a random-effects model. We performed subgroup analysis based on admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). RESULTS: Of 2,711 records reviewed, we included 53 published and 1 preprint study in the analysis, which comprised 30,657 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Data for AKI were available for 30,639 patients (n = 54 studies), and receipt of KRT, for 27,525 patients (n = 48 studies). The pooled prevalence of AKI was 28% (95% CI, 22%-34%; I 2 = 99%), and the pooled prevalence of KRT was 9% (95% CI, 7%-11%; I 2 = 97%). The pooled prevalence of AKI among patients admitted to the ICU was 46% (95% CI, 35%-57%; I 2 = 99%), and 19% of all ICU patients with COVID-19 (95% CI, 15%-22%; I 2 = 88%) commenced KRT. LIMITATIONS: There was significant heterogeneity among the included studies, which remained unaccounted for in subgroup analysis. CONCLUSIONS: AKI complicated the course of nearly 1 in 3 patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The risk for AKI was higher in critically ill patients, with a substantial number receiving KRT at rates higher than the general ICU population. Because COVID-19 will be a public health threat for the foreseeable future, these estimates should help guide KRT resource planning.

10.
Am J Kidney Dis ; 76(5): 690-695.e1, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-644927

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Hemodialysis patients are at increased risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission due in part to difficulty maintaining physical distancing. Our hemodialysis unit experienced a COVID-19 outbreak despite following symptom-based screening guidelines. We describe the course of the COVID-19 outbreak and the infection control measures taken for mitigation. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 237 maintenance hemodialysis patients and 93 hemodialysis staff at a single hemodialysis center in Toronto, Canada. EXPOSURE: Universal screening of patients and staff for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal samples from patients and staff using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Descriptive statistics were used for clinical characteristics and the primary outcome. RESULTS: 11 of 237 (4.6%) hemodialysis patients and 11 of 93 (12%) staff members had a positive RT-PCR test result for SARS-CoV-2. Among individuals testing positive, 12 of 22 (55%) were asymptomatic at time of testing and 7 of 22 (32%) were asymptomatic for the duration of follow-up. One patient was hospitalized at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection and 4 additional patients with positive test results were subsequently hospitalized. 2 (18%) patients required admission to the intensive care unit. After 30 days' follow-up, no patients had died or required mechanical ventilation. No hemodialysis staff required hospitalization. Universal droplet and contact precautions were implemented during the outbreak. Hemodialysis staff with SARS-CoV-2 infection were placed on home quarantine regardless of symptom status. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, including asymptomatic individuals, were treated with droplet and contact precautions until confirmation of negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test results. Analysis of the outbreak identified 2 index cases with subsequent nosocomial transmission within the dialysis unit and in shared shuttle buses to the hemodialysis unit. LIMITATIONS: Single-center study. CONCLUSIONS: Universal SARS-CoV-2 testing and universal droplet and contact precautions in the setting of an outbreak appeared to be effective in preventing further transmission.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections , Disease Transmission, Infectious , Hemodialysis Units, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control , Kidney Failure, Chronic , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Renal Dialysis/methods , COVID-19 , Canada , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Disease Transmission, Infectious/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/organization & administration , Kidney Failure, Chronic/epidemiology , Kidney Failure, Chronic/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL