Virtual Geritalk: Does Intensive Virtual Communication Skills Training Improve Use of Serious Illness Communication Skills?

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic presented a unique opportunity to adapt in-person communication skills training to a virtual format. Objective: Examine use of serious illness communication skills by learners after participating in an intensive virtual communication skills training. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting/Subjects: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Clinical Fellows. Measurements: Family Meeting Communication Assessment Tool (FAMCAT) assessed fundamental and advanced communication skills. Results: As compared to a historical benchmark obtained after a prior in-person course, the virtual course showed equivalent or better use of communication skills across fundamental skills and advanced skills. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that a virtual communication skills training is associated with the use of serious illness communication skills in the clinical setting by learners.

Perceptions of Palliative Care Program Viability During the Pandemic: Qualitative Results From a National Survey.

Background: Palliative care programs have played a significant role during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the financial impact of the pandemic and operational challenges for palliative care programs have raised concerns for their future viability. Objectives: To explore palliative care program leaders' perceptions of the future viability of their programs in the context of the pandemic and inform future educational and program development. Methods: Surveys were sent to 1430 specialist palliative care program leaders, identified through the Center to Advance Palliative Care's contact lists, via email in May 2020 and January 2021. Leaders were asked why they were or were not concerned about the viability of their palliative care programs. Qualitative content analysis was applied to determine themes. Results: We received 440 responses. Most programs served hospital settings and were geographically located across all US regions. We identified four themes: 1) The importance of being valued by organizational leadership and peers, 2) The importance of adequate and supported palliative care staff, 3) The pandemic validated and accelerated the need for palliative care, and 4) The pandemic perpetuated organizational financial concerns. Conclusion: Findings provide insights about palliative care program viability from the perspective of program leaders during a global pandemic. Technical assistance to support palliative care teams and their relationships with stakeholders, methods to measure the impact of peer support, efforts to educate administrators about the value of palliative care, and efforts to reduce burnout are needed to sustain palliative care programs into the future.

Characterizing delayed care among US older adults by self-rated health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Previous studies showed that older adults with fair or poor self-rated health (SRH) were more likely to experience delayed care during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aim to understand delayed care patterns by SRH during the COVID-19 pandemic among US older adults. METHODS: Using a nationally representative sample of older adults (≥ 70 years old) from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), we assessed the patterns of delayed care by good, fair, or poor SRH. RESULTS: Nearly one in five of the survey-weighted population of 9,465,117 older adults who experienced delayed care during the pandemic reported fair or poor SRH. The overall distributions of the numbers of types of delayed care (p = 0.16) and the numbers of reasons for delayed care (p = 0.12) did not differ significantly by SRH status. Older adults with good, fair, or poor SRH shared the four most common types of delayed care and three most common reasons for delayed care but differed in ranking. Older adults with poor SRH mostly delayed seeing a specialist (good vs. fair vs. poor SRH: 40.1%, 46.7%, 73%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that utilizing SRH as a simple indicator may help researchers and clinicians understand similarities and differences in care needs for older adults during the pandemic. Targeted interventions that address differences in healthcare needs among older adults by SRH during the evolving pandemic may mitigate the negative impacts of delayed care.

Characteristics Associated With Disparities Among Older Adults in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outcomes in an Academic Health Care System.

BACKGROUND: An improved understanding of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is needed to identify predictors of outcomes among older adults with COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine patient and health system factors predictive of in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and readmission among patients with COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cohort study of patients aged 18 years and older with COVID-19 discharged from 5 New York hospitals within the Mount Sinai Health System (March 1, 2020-June 30, 2020). MEASURES: Patient-level characteristics (age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidities/serious illness, transfer from skilled nursing facility, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 viral load, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, treatments); hospital characteristics. OUTCOMES: All-cause in-hospital mortality; ICU admission; 30-day readmission. RESULTS: Among 7556 subjects, mean age 61.1 (62.0) years; 1556 (20.6%) died, 949 (12.6%) had an ICU admission, and 227 (9.1%) had a 30-day readmission. Increased age [aged 55-64: odds ratio (OR), 3.28; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.41-4.46; aged 65-74: OR, 4.67; 95% CI, 3.43-6.35; aged 75-84: OR, 10.73; 95% CI, 7.77-14.81; aged 85 y and older: OR, 20.57; 95% CI, 14.46-29.25] and comorbidities (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.16, 2.13) were independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality. Yet older adults (aged 55-64 y: OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.40-0.77; aged 65-74: OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.33-0.65; aged 75-84: OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.18-0.40; aged above 85 y: OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.13-0.34) and those with Medicaid (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.99) were less likely to be admitted to the ICU. Race/ethnicity, crowding, population density, and health system census were not associated with study outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Increased age was the single greatest independent risk factor for mortality. Comorbidities and serious illness were independently associated with mortality. Understanding these risk factors can guide medical decision-making for older adults with COVID-19. Older adults and those admitted from a skilled nursing facility were half as likely to be admitted to the ICU. This finding requires further investigation to understand how age and treatment preferences factored into resource allocation.

Access to Palliative Care Consultation for Hospitalized Adults with COVID-19 in an Urban Health System: Were There Disparities at the Peak of the Pandemic?

Background: Palliative care (PC) services expanded rapidly to meet the needs of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, yet little is known about which patients were referred for PC consultation during the pandemic. Objective: Examine factors predictive of PC consultation for COVID-19 patients. Design: Retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 patients discharged from four hospitals (March 1-June 30, 2020). Exposures: Patient demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical factors and hospital-level characteristics. Outcome Measurement: Inpatient PC consultation. Results: Of 4319 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, 581 (14%) received PC consultation. Increasing age, serious illness (cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and dementia), greater illness severity, and admission to the quaternary hospital were associated with receipt of PC consultation. There was no association between PC consultation and race/ethnicity, household crowding, insurance status, or hospital-factors, including inpatient, emergency department, and intensive care unit census. Conclusions: Although site variation existed, the highest acuity patients were most likely to receive PC consultation without racial/ethnic or socioeconomic disparities.

Telemedicine Utilization in the Ambulatory Palliative Care Setting: Are There Disparities?

CONTEXT: Given a shortage of specialty palliative care clinicians and geographic variation in availability, telemedicine has been proposed as one way to improve access to palliative care services for patients with cancer. However, the enduring digital divide raises questions about whether unequal access will exacerbate healthcare disparities. OBJECTIVES: To examine factors associated with utilization of telemedicine as compared to in-person visits by patients with cancer in the ambulatory palliative care setting. METHODS: We collected data on patients seen in Supportive Oncology clinic by palliative care clinicians with an in-person or telemedicine visit from March 1 to December 30, 2020. A logistic regression with generalized estimating equation was fit to assess the association between visit type and patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 491 patients and 1783 visits were identified, including 1061 (60%) in-person visits and 722 (40%) telemedicine visits. Female patients were significantly more likely to utilize telemedicine than male patients (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.11-1.90). Spanish-speaking patients (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.17-0.61), those without insurance (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.52), and those without an activated patient portal (Inactivated: OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26-0.82; Pending Activation: OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.18-0.48) were less likely to utilize telemedicine. CONCLUSION: Our study reveals disparities in telemedicine utilization in the ambulatory palliative care setting for patients with cancer who are male, Spanish-speaking, uninsured, or do not have an activated patient portal. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, we can better meet the palliative care needs of patients with cancer through telemedicine only if equity is kept at the forefront of our discussions.

Virtual Geritalk: Improving Serious Illness Communication of Clinicians Who Care for Older Adults.

CONTEXT: High quality communication is essential to older adults' medical decision-making, quality of life, and adjustment to serious illness. Studies have demonstrated that Geritalk, a two day (16 hours total) in-person communication skills training improves self-assessed preparedness, skill acquisition, and sustained practice of communication skills. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Geritalk was adapted to a virtual format (four days, 10 hours total). OBJECTIVES: Our study evaluated the change in participants' self-assessed preparedness for serious illness communication before and after the virtual course and satisfaction with the course, and compared these findings to responses from a prior in-person Geritalk course. METHODS: Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine fellows at three urban academic medical centers completed surveys, which employed five-point Likert scales, before and after the virtual course to assess satisfaction with the course and preparedness for serious illness communication. RESULTS: Of the 20 virtual Geritalk participants, 17 (85%) completed the pre-course assessment, and 14 (70%) completed the post-course assessment. Overall, satisfaction with the course was high (mean 4.9 on a 5-point scale). Compared to in-person Geritalk participants, virtual course participants reported comparable and significant (P < 0.01) improvements in mean self-reported preparedness across all surveyed communication skills. CONCLUSION: We show that a virtual communication skills training is feasible and effective. Our findings suggest that the innovative virtual Geritalk course has the potential to increase access to communication skills training, improve serious illness communication skills, and in improve the quality of care received by older adults with serious illness.