The psychosocial health, experiences and needs of older adults and care partners during the first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Minimal research has leveraged qualitative data methods to gain a better understanding of the experiences and needs of older adults (OAs) and care partners of OAs with and without Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and AD-related dementias (AD/ADRD) during the first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we: 1) quantitatively evaluated the psychosocial health of community-dwelling OAs; 2) quantitatively evaluated the perceived stress of care partners for OAs; 3) qualitatively characterized the experiences and needs of community-dwelling OAs and their care partners; and 4) explored differences in the experiences of care partners of OAs with and without AD/ADRD during the first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic in the New York metropolitan area. METHODS: In this mixed-methods study, telephone interviews were conducted with 26 OAs and 29 care partners (16 of whom cared for OAs with AD/ADRD) from April to July 2020. Quantitative data included: demographics; clinical characteristics (Katz Index of independence in activities of daily living (Katz ADL) and the Lawton-Brody instrumental activities of daily living scale (Lawton-Brody)); and psychosocial health: stress was assessed via the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), social isolation via the Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS), loneliness via the DeJong Loneliness Scale (DeJong), and depression and anxiety via the Patient Health Questionnaire-Anxiety and Depression (PHQ). Qualitative questions focused on uncovering the experiences and needs of OAs and their care partners. RESULTS: OAs (N = 26) were mostly female (57.7%), and White (76.9%), average age of 81.42 years. While OAs were independent (M = 5.60, Katz ADL) and highly functional (M = 6.92, Lawton-Brody), and expressed low levels of loneliness, stress, depression and anxiety (M = 1.95 on DeJong; M = 12.67 on PSS; M = 1.05 on PHQ depression; and M = 1.09 on PHQ anxiety), open-ended questions elicited themes of fear and worry. Care partners (N = 29) were mostly female (75.9%), White (72.4%), and married (72.4%), and reported moderate stress (M = 16.52 on the PSS), as well as a psychological impact of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Early in the pandemic, OAs reported minimal stress and loneliness; this may have been related to their reports of frequent interaction with family, even if only virtually. By contrast, care partners were moderately stressed and worried, potentially more than usual due to the additional challenges they face when trying to meet their loved ones' needs during a pandemic.

Early DNR in Older Adults Hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 Infection During Initial Pandemic Surge.

The role of early Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) in hospitalized older adults (OAs) with SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. The objective of the study was to identify characteristics and outcomes associated with early DNR in hospitalized OAs with SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a retrospective chart review of older adults (65+) hospitalized with COVID-19 in New York, USA, between March 1, 2020, and April 20, 2020. Patient characteristics and hospital outcomes were collected. Early DNR (within 24 hours of admission) was compared to non-early DNR (late DNR, after 24 hours of admission, or no DNR). Outcomes included hospital morbidity and mortality. Of 4961 patients, early DNR prevalence was 5.7% (n = 283). Compared to non-early DNR, the early DNR group was older (85.0 vs 76.8, P < .001), women (51.2% vs 43.6%, P = .012), with higher comorbidity index (3.88 vs 3.36, P < .001), facility-based (49.1% vs 19.1%, P < .001), with dementia (13.3% vs 4.6%, P < .001), and severely ill on presentation (57.9% vs 32.3%, P < .001). In multivariable analyses, the early DNR group had higher mortality risk (OR: 2.94, 95% CI: 2.10-4.11), less hospital delirium (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.40-.77), lower use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV, OR: 0.37, 95% CI: .21-.67), and shorter length of stay (LOS, 4.8 vs 10.3 days, P < .001), compared to non-early DNR. Regarding early vs late DNR, while there was no difference in mortality (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.85-1.62), the early DNR group experienced less delirium (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: .40-.75), IMV (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.29-.96), and shorter LOS (4.82 vs 10.63 days, OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.30-.41). In conclusion, early DNR prevalence in hospitalized OAs with COVID-19 was low, and compared to non-early DNR is associated with higher mortality but lower morbidity.

Psychotropic Medication Use Is Associated With Greater 1-Year Incidence of Dementia After COVID-19 Hospitalization.

Background: COVID-19 has been associated with an increased risk of incident dementia (post-COVID dementia). Establishing additional risk markers may help identify at-risk individuals and guide clinical decision-making. Methods: We investigated pre-COVID psychotropic medication use (exposure) and 1-year incidence of dementia (outcome) in 1,755 patients (≥65 years) hospitalized with COVID-19. Logistic regression models were used to examine the association, adjusting for demographic and clinical variables. For further confirmation, we applied the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression and a machine learning (Random Forest) algorithm. Results: One-year incidence rate of post-COVID dementia was 12.7% (N = 223). Pre-COVID psychotropic medications (OR = 2.7, 95% CI: 1.8-4.0, P < 0.001) and delirium (OR = 3.0, 95% CI: 1.9-4.6, P < 0.001) were significantly associated with greater 1-year incidence of post-COVID dementia. The association between psychotropic medications and incident dementia remained robust when the analysis was restricted to the 423 patients with at least one documented neurological or psychiatric diagnosis at the time of COVID-19 admission (OR = 3.09, 95% CI: 1.5-6.6, P = 0.002). Across different drug classes, antipsychotics (OR = 2.8, 95% CI: 1.7-4.4, P < 0.001) and mood stabilizers/anticonvulsants (OR = 2.4, 95% CI: 1.39-4.02, P = 0.001) displayed the greatest association with post-COVID dementia. The association of psychotropic medication with dementia was further confirmed with Random Forest and LASSO analysis. Conclusion: Confirming prior studies we observed a high dementia incidence in older patients after COVID-19 hospitalization. Pre-COVID psychotropic medications were associated with higher risk of incident dementia. Psychotropic medications may be risk markers that signify neuropsychiatric symptoms during prodromal dementia, and not mutually exclusive, contribute to post-COVID dementia.

Geriatrics-focused indicators predict mortality more than age in older adults hospitalized with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Age has been implicated as the main risk factor for COVID-19-related mortality. Our objective was to utilize administrative data to build an explanatory model accounting for geriatrics-focused indicators to predict mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of adults age 65 and older (N = 4783) hospitalized with COVID-19 in the greater New York metropolitan area between 3/1/20-4/20/20. Data included patient demographics and clinical presentation. Stepwise logistic regression with Akaike Information Criterion minimization was used. RESULTS: The average age was 77.4 (SD = 8.4), 55.9% were male, 20.3% were African American, and 15.0% were Hispanic. In multivariable analysis, male sex (adjusted odds ration (adjOR) = 1.06, 95% CI:1.03-1.09); Asian race (adjOR = 1.08, CI:1.03-1.13); history of chronic kidney disease (adjOR = 1.05, CI:1.01-1.09) and interstitial lung disease (adjOR = 1.35, CI:1.28-1.42); low or normal body mass index (adjOR:1.03, CI:1.00-1.07); higher comorbidity index (adjOR = 1.01, CI:1.01-1.02); admission from a facility (adjOR = 1.14, CI:1.09-1.20); and mechanical ventilation (adjOR = 1.52, CI:1.43-1.62) were associated with mortality. While age was not an independent predictor of mortality, increasing age (centered at 65) interacted with hypertension (adjOR = 1.02, CI:0.98-1.07, reducing by a factor of 0.96 every 10 years); early Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR, life-sustaining treatment preferences) (adjOR = 1.38, CI:1.22-1.57, reducing by a factor of 0.92 every 10 years); and severe illness on admission (at 65, adjOR = 1.47, CI:1.40-1.54, reducing by a factor of 0.96 every 10 years). CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight that residence prior to admission, early DNR, and acute illness severity are important predictors of mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19. Readily available administrative geriatrics-focused indicators that go beyond age can be utilized when considering prognosis.

Did surgical delay due to COVD-19 affect the short- and longer-term mental health of patients?

At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the US Surgeon General ordered the cessation of all elective surgical procedures. We evaluated the mental health impact of COVID-19 related surgical delay on patients awaiting procedures for benign, pre-malignant and malignant conditions. We sought to understand the short term impact of surgical delay and to identify potential longer term mental health affects after completion of the delayed procedure. All patients over age 18 awaiting surgery for benign, pre-malignant or malignant conditions in the gynecologic oncology, surgical oncology and colorectal services at Northwell Health were eligible. Upon enrollment, participants completed a baseline survey consisting of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire (GAD-7), the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ), and Brief-Illness Patient Questionnaire (B-IPQ). Six weeks after their surgery, participants were sent a second survey consisting of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale in addition to the GAD-7, PSWQ, and B-IPQ. 56 patients underwent their procedure and completed the follow-up survey. Patients with suspected benign conditions had a longer delay in scheduling their surgery than patients with suspected/confirmed cancer or pre-malignant conditions (101.4d vs 66.3d, p<0.05). There was no correlation of length of delay with postoperative worry, anxiety, or depression scores. There was no decrease in level of worry, as delineated by the PSWQ, among gynecologic oncology patients when comparing pre-operative to post-operative data. However, surgical oncology and colorectal patients demonstrated decreased post-operative worry. There was no difference in anxiety by surgical specialty.While the surgical delay was ongoing 79% of patients considered it to be moderately to extremely concerning, with 46% indicating the highest possible level of concern. Post-operatively, 47% of the respondents indicated moderate to extreme concern about the surgical delay, while 37% were not concerned. Initially, the surgical delay was considered to have a moderate to severe impact upon daily life by 65% of patients;which decreased to 53% at the time of post-operative follow-up. Interestingly, these relative decreases in patient concern were not significant when comparing pre-operative to post-operative values as a whole, by diagnosis or by specialty. 20% of participants qualified as depressed based on their response to the CES-D. Of these patients, 70% had a post-operatively confirmed cancer or pre-cancer. The incidence of depression was not affected by the post-operative diagnosis. Many patients experienced distress surrounding surgical delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This extended to their postoperative period. Gynecologic oncology patients did not experience decreased post-operative worry, while surgical oncology and colorectal patients did. There was no significant difference in the incidence of post-operative depression by specialty or post-operative diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Gynecologic Oncology is the property of Academic Press Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Patient Factors and Hospital Outcomes Associated With Atypical Presentation in Hospitalized Older Adults With COVID-19 During the First Surge of the Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Literature indicates an atypical presentation of COVID-19 among older adults (OAs). Our purpose is to identify the frequency of atypical presentation and compare demographic and clinical factors, and short-term outcomes, between typical versus atypical presentations in OAs hospitalized with COVID-19 during the first surge of the pandemic. METHODS: Data from the inpatient electronic health record were extracted for patients aged 65 and older, admitted to our health systems' hospitals with COVID-19 between March 1 and April 20, 2020. Presentation as reported by the OA or his/her representative is documented by the admitting professional and includes both symptoms and signs. Natural language processing was used to code the presence/absence of each symptom or sign. Typical presentation was defined as words indicating fever, cough, or shortness of breath; atypical presentation was defined as words indicating functional decline or altered mental status. RESULTS: Of 4 961 unique OAs, atypical presentation characterized by functional decline or altered mental status was present in 24.9% and 11.3%, respectively. Atypical presentation was associated with older age, female gender, Black race, non-Hispanic ethnicity, higher comorbidity index, and the presence of dementia and diabetes mellitus. Those who presented typically were 1.39 times more likely than those who presented atypically to receive intensive care unit-level care. Hospital outcomes of mortality, length of stay, and 30-day readmission were similar between OAs with typical versus atypical presentations. CONCLUSION: Although atypical presentation in OAs is not associated with the same need for acute intervention as respiratory distress, it must not be dismissed.

In-Hospital 30-Day Survival Among Young Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to characterize young adult patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and identify predictors of survival at 30 days. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study took place at 12 acute care hospitals in the New York City area. Patients aged 18-39 hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 between March 1 and April 27, 2020 were included in the study. Demographic, clinical, and outcome data were extracted from electronic health record reports. RESULTS: A total of 1013 patients were included in the study (median age, 33 years; interquartile range [IQR], 28-36; 52% female). At the study end point, 940 (92.8%) patients were discharged alive, 18 (1.8%) remained hospitalized, 5 (0.5%) were transferred to another acute care facility, and 50 (4.9%) died. The most common comorbidities in hospitalized young adult patients were obesity (51.2%), diabetes mellitus (14.8%), and hypertension (13%). Multivariable analysis revealed that obesity (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-5.73; P = .002) and Charlson comorbidity index score (aHR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.07-1.35; P = .002) were independent predictors of in-hospital 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity was identified as the strongest negative predictor of 30-day in-hospital survival in young adults with COVID-19.

Age Does Not Predict Mortality in Hospitalized COVID-19+ Older Adults: Rethinking Resource Allocation Based on Age

Older adults are disproportionately affected by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. While age has been used to guide resource allocation based on studies implicating age as the main risk factor for COVID-19-related mortality, most did not account for critical factors such as baseline functional and cognitive status, or life-sustaining treatment preferences. The objective of this study was to determine whether age is independently associated with mortality in older adults hospitalized with COVID-19. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults age 65+ with confirmed COVID-19 hospitalized in the greater NY metropolitan area between 3/1/20-4/20/20. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, with age as the primary predictor. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate association between age and in-hospital mortality after controlling for demographics, severity of acute illness, comorbidities, and baseline function, cognition, and life-sustaining treatment preferences. 4,969 patients were included, average age 77.3, 56.0% male, 46.8% White, 20.8% African American, 15.1% Hispanic. Common comorbidities included hypertension (61.1%), and diabetes (36.8%);average number of comorbidities was 3.4 (SD 2.8) and 13.0% had dementia. 20.8% arrived from a facility and 5.7% had early do-not-resuscitate orders. On arrival, the Modified Early Warning System score was 4.2 (SD 1.7) and 79.6% required oxygen therapy. 35.3% of patients expired. In multivariate analysis, age was not independently associated with mortality (p = .173). Functional status, multi-morbidity, life-sustaining treatment preferences, and illness severity, not age, were associated with mortality among older adults hospitalized with COVID-19, suggesting age should not be used as the main indicator to guide resource allocation.

Long-Distance Aeromedical Transport of Patients with COVID-19 in Fixed-Wing Air Ambulance Using a Portable Isolation Unit: Opportunities, Limitations and Mitigation Strategies.

INTRODUCTION: Aeromedical transport of patients with highly-infectious diseases, particularly over long distances with extended transport times, is a logistical, medical and organizational challenge. Following the 2014-2016 Ebola Crisis, sophisticated transport solutions have been developed, mostly utilizing large civilian and military airframes and the patient treated in a large isolation chamber. In the present COVID-19 pandemic, however, many services offer aeromedical transport of patients with highly-infectious diseases in much smaller portable medical isolation units (PMIU), with the medical team on the outside, delivering care through portholes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all transports of patients with proven or suspected COVID-19 disease, transported by Jetcall, Idstein, Germany, between April 1 and August 1, 2020, using a PMIU (EpiShuttle, EpiGuard AS, Oslo, Norway). Demographics and medical data were analyzed using the services' standardized transport protocols. Transport-associated challenges and optimization strategies were identified by interviewing and debriefing all transport teams after each transport. RESULTS: Thirteen patients with COVID-19 have been transported in a PMIU over distances up to 7,400 kilometers (km), with flight times ranging from 02:15 hours to 11:10 hours. We identified the main limitations of PMIU transports as limited access to the patient and reduced manual dexterity when delivering care through the porthole gloves and disconnection of lines and tubes during loading and unloading procedures. Technical solutions such as bluetooth-enabled stethoscopes, cordless ultrasound scanners and communication devices, meticulous preparation of the PMIU and the patient following standardized protocols and scenario-based training of crew members can reduce some of the risks. DISCUSSION: Transporting a patient with COVID-19 or any other highly infectious disease in a PMIU is a feasible option even over long distances, but adding a significant layer of additional risk, thus requiring a careful and individualized risk-benefit analysis for each patient prior to transport.

Presenting Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Outcomes Among 5700 Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in the New York City Area.

Importance: There is limited information describing the presenting characteristics and outcomes of US patients requiring hospitalization for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in a US health care system. Design, Setting, and Participants: Case series of patients with COVID-19 admitted to 12 hospitals in New York City, Long Island, and Westchester County, New York, within the Northwell Health system. The study included all sequentially hospitalized patients between March 1, 2020, and April 4, 2020, inclusive of these dates. Exposures: Confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection by positive result on polymerase chain reaction testing of a nasopharyngeal sample among patients requiring admission. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical outcomes during hospitalization, such as invasive mechanical ventilation, kidney replacement therapy, and death. Demographics, baseline comorbidities, presenting vital signs, and test results were also collected. Results: A total of 5700 patients were included (median age, 63 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 52-75; range, 0-107 years]; 39.7% female). The most common comorbidities were hypertension (3026; 56.6%), obesity (1737; 41.7%), and diabetes (1808; 33.8%). At triage, 30.7% of patients were febrile, 17.3% had a respiratory rate greater than 24 breaths/min, and 27.8% received supplemental oxygen. The rate of respiratory virus co-infection was 2.1%. Outcomes were assessed for 2634 patients who were discharged or had died at the study end point. During hospitalization, 373 patients (14.2%) (median age, 68 years [IQR, 56-78]; 33.5% female) were treated in the intensive care unit care, 320 (12.2%) received invasive mechanical ventilation, 81 (3.2%) were treated with kidney replacement therapy, and 553 (21%) died. As of April 4, 2020, for patients requiring mechanical ventilation (n = 1151, 20.2%), 38 (3.3%) were discharged alive, 282 (24.5%) died, and 831 (72.2%) remained in hospital. The median postdischarge follow-up time was 4.4 days (IQR, 2.2-9.3). A total of 45 patients (2.2%) were readmitted during the study period. The median time to readmission was 3 days (IQR, 1.0-4.5) for readmitted patients. Among the 3066 patients who remained hospitalized at the final study follow-up date (median age, 65 years [IQR, 54-75]), the median follow-up at time of censoring was 4.5 days (IQR, 2.4-8.1). Conclusions and Relevance: This case series provides characteristics and early outcomes of sequentially hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 in the New York City area.