ABSTRACT
Background: This case describes the circumstances of an older woman and her daughter faced with the dilemma of whether or not to receive the COVID-19 vaccine at the end of life. Methods: Ms. V was a 90-year-old woman with past medical history of major neurocognitive disorder, asthma, and hypertension on home hospice after experiencing a rapid decline beginning in November 2020. By January 2021, she had significantly deteriorated with a prognosis of weeks. At this time, the COVID-19 vaccine had become available to high-risk individuals and their household members. Because Ms. V lacked capacity to make her medical decisions, her daughter and healthcare power of attorney, Ms. B, had to determine her wishes. Ms. V's goals were comfort care and to avoid hospitalization. Although she had worked as a nurse, she had declined her annual influenza vaccine in the past. However, Ms. B felt that her mother would have wanted to help her children and caretakers get the vaccine, which would only be possible if she got the vaccine first. Results: Extensive conversations with Ms. V's children, hospice team, and geriatrician were held utilizing the 4-box approach to ethical decision making.1 Ms. B decided that her mother would have wanted to receive the vaccine for the main purpose of also vaccinating her children, who both had advanced heart failure and were at high risk for complications from COVID-19. She received one dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine and died ten days later. Her children and live-in caregiver all received the Pfizer Covid-19. Conclusion: Although Ms. V had previously refused annual influenza vaccinations, her daughter felt that her mother would have gotten the vaccine to provide protection for her children and caregiver. While it was acknowledged that Ms. V would probably gather little immunity benefit from the vaccine due to her poor prognosis, her daughter felt that the benefits of the entire household receiving the vaccine outweighed any potential risks. Her family called this final act of protection her dying wish.
ABSTRACT
Introduction During the COVID-19 pandemic, anesthesiology residents faced increased risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 while performing aerosolizing procedures. We developed an airway simulation on the out-of-operating-room management of COVID-19 patients. Methods A 90-minute simulation focused on caring for a 45-year-old COVID-19 patient provided training in donning and doffing personal protective equipment, intubation, management of postinduction hypotension, management of ICU ventilators, treatment strategies for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), interpersonal communication, and resource management. Presimulation, postsimulation, and 3-months postsimulation questionnaires measured changes in confidence, knowledge, and clinical practice. Statistical analysis was completed using related-samples Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Results Twenty-four residents participated in the simulation. Questionnaire response rates were 100% presimulation and postsimulation and 88% 3-months postsimulation. Confidence scores (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely) improved with donning and doffing personal protective equipment (from 3.0 to 4.1, p < .001), ARDS management (from 3.1 to 4.0, p < .001), and COVID-19 airway management (from 2.8 to 4.0, p < .001). Correct answers on 10 knowledge questions increased significantly between presimulation and postsimulation (from 5.1 to 9.0, p < .001) but not between presimulation and 3-months postsimulation (from 5.1 to 5.8, p = .27). All participants who cared for COVID-19 patients at 3 months agreed or strongly agreed that their current management of COVID-19 patients was directly influenced by the simulation session (M = 4.4). Discussion This simulation is a safe, effective method of providing the experiential training necessary to care for actual COVID-19 patients during an active pandemic.