Disposition Decisions in Cases of Medical Complexity and Health Inequity.

The question of optimal disposition for children with complex medical and social circumstances has long challenged the well-intentioned clinician. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic created unique difficulties for patients, families, and health care providers, in addition to highlighting long-standing racial and socioeconomic inequities in health care. In pediatric hospitals, necessary public health measures such as visitor restrictions shifted many shared decision-making processes such as discharge planning from complicated to impossible. Here, we present the case of a medically complex adult (with a long-standing pediatric condition) whose surrogate decision-maker objected to discharge to a long-term care facility because of restrictions and risks associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. We offer the commentary of experts in clinical ethics, intensive care, inpatient subacute care, and palliative care. Our discussion includes analysis of the ethical considerations involved in the case, concrete guidance on steps toward an ethically permissible discharge, and suggestions for how a health equity lens can improve communication and decision-making for families who are victims of systemic racism and economic discrimination.

Suicide Risk in Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created high levels of psychological distress and may have increased suicide risk. METHODS: We used the 4-item Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ) to assess suicide risk among all patients 12 to 24 years of age at a children's hospital. We compared demographics, encounter type (telehealth or face-to-face [F2F]), and screening results from April to June 2020 (T2) to those from April to June 2019 (T1). RESULTS: Fewer patients were seen at T2 than T1 (17 986 vs 24 863). A greater proportion of visits at T2 were by telehealth (0% vs 43%). The rate of positive suicide screens was higher in T2 than in T1 (12.2% vs 11.1%, adjusted odds ration [aOR], 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.35). The odds of a positive screen were greater for older patients (aOR of 1.12 for age in years; 95% CI, 1.10-1.14), female patients (aOR, 2.23; 95% CI, 2.00-2.48), patients with public versus private insurance (aOR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.72-2.07), and lower for Black versus White patients (aOR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.95). Rates of positive screens were highest among inpatients (20.0%), intermediate for emergency department patients (14.4%), and lowest in outpatient clinics (9.9%) (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of positive suicide risk screens among adolescents rose in the pandemic's early months with differences related to sociodemographics and visit type. Changes in health care delivery highlight the complexities of assessing and responding to mental health needs of adolescents. Additional research might determine the effects of screening methods and patient populations on screening results.

Exploration and Ethical Analysis of Open-label Pediatric Vaccine Trials in a Pandemic.

Young children will ultimately need to be vaccinated to stop the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Initial studies of vaccine were performed in adults. Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard. In the COVID-19 pandemic, many questions need to be answered about the ethics and feasibility of these trials. Given the harms of the COVID-19 pandemic and the now-known efficacy of the vaccines in adults and teens, the question of whether clinical equipoise exists for a placebo-controlled trial of vaccines in younger children remains. Parents may be reluctant to enroll children in these trials because they want their child to receive the vaccine or because they are worried about vaccines or clinical trials in general. One option for gathering data on tolerability and efficacy in children would be to use a nonrandomized trial to enroll parents willing to vaccinate their children and those who are hesitant. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of such an open-label trial that could provide guidance for future pandemics. (Clin Ther.

COVID-19 Trial Enrollment for Those Who Cannot Consent: Ethical Challenges Posed by a Pandemic.

The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has triggered an intense global research effort to inform the life-saving work of frontline clinicians who need reliable information as soon as possible. Yet research done in pressured circumstances can lead to ethical dilemmas, especially for vulnerable research subjects. We present the case of a child with neurocognitive impairment who is diagnosed with COVID-19 infection after presenting with fever and a seizure. The child lives in a group home and is in the custody of the state; her parents lost parental rights many years ago. Some members of the health care team want to enroll her in a randomized clinical trial evaluating an experimental treatment of COVID-19. For minor patients to enroll in this clinical trial, the institutional review board requires assent of patients and consent of guardians. An ethics consult is called to help identify relevant concerns in enrollment. In the accompanying case discussion, we address historical perspectives on research involving people with disabilities; proper management of research participation for people with disabilities including consent by proxy, therapeutic misconception, and other threats to the ethical validity of clinical trials; and the potentially conflicting obligations of researchers and clinicians.

Benefits and Risks of Visitor Restrictions for Hospitalized Children During the COVID Pandemic

To control the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the virus responsible for coronavirus disease 2019, many hospitals have strict visitor restriction policies. These policies often prohibit both parents from visiting at the same time or having grandparents or other family members visit at all. We discuss cases in which such policies created ethical dilemmas and possibly called for compassionate exceptions from the general rules.

Should Pediatric Patients Be Prioritized When Rationing Life-Saving Treatments During COVID-19 Pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 can lead to respiratory failure. Some patients require extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. During the current pandemic, health care resources in some cities have been overwhelmed, and doctors have faced complex decisions about resource allocation. We present a case in which a pediatric hospital caring for both children and adults seeks to establish guidelines for the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation if there are not enough resources to treat every patient. Experts in critical care, end-of-life care, bioethics, and health policy discuss if age should guide rationing decisions.

Our Next Pandemic Ethics Challenge? Allocating "Normal" Health Care Services.

The pandemic creates unprecedented challenges to society and to health care systems around the world. Like all crises, these provide a unique opportunity to rethink the fundamental limiting assumptions and institutional inertia of our established systems. These inertial assumptions have obscured deeply rooted problems in health care and deflected attempts to address them. As hospitals begin to welcome all patients back, they should resist the temptation to go back to business as usual. Instead, they should retain the more deliberative, explicit, and transparent ways of thinking that have informed the development of crisis standards of care. The key lesson to be learned from those exercises in rational deliberation is that justice must be the ethical foundation of all standards of care. Justice demands that hospitals take a safety-net approach to providing services that prioritizes the most vulnerable segments of society, continue to expand telemedicine in ways that improve access without exacerbating disparities, invest in community-based care, and fully staff hospitals and clinics on nights and weekends.

Pediatric Palliative Care in a Pandemic: Role Obligations, Moral Distress, and the Care You Can Give.

Many ethical issues arise concerning the care of critically ill and dying patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In this issue's Ethics Rounds, we present 2 cases that highlight 2 different sorts of ethical issues. One is focused on the decisions that have to be made when the surge of patients with respiratory failure overwhelm ICUs. The other is focused on the psychological issues that arise for parents who are caring for a dying child when infection-control policies limit the number of visitors. Both of these situations raise challenges for caregivers who are trying to be honest, to deal with their own moral distress, and to provide compassionate palliative care.

Should Extremely Premature Babies Get Ventilators During the COVID-19 Crisis?

In a crisis, societal needs take precedence over a patient's best interests. Triage guidelines, however, differ on whether limited resources should focus on maximizing lives or life-years. Choosing between these two approaches has implications for neonatology. Neonatal units have ventilators, some adaptable for adults. This raises the question of whether, in crisis conditions, guidelines for treating extremely premature babies should be altered to free-up ventilators. Some adults who need ventilators will have a survival rate higher than some extremely premature babies. But surviving babies will likely live longer, maximizing life-years. Empiric evidence demonstrates that these babies can derive significant survival benefits from ventilation when compared to adults. When "triaging" or choosing between patients, justice demands fair guidelines. Premature babies do not deserve special consideration; they deserve equal consideration. Solidarity is crucial but must consider needs specific to patient populations and avoid biases against people with disabilities and extremely premature babies.