Strategies Used by Healthcare Systems to Communicate with Hospitalized Patients and Families with Limited English Proficiency During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Narrative Review.

The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected racial and ethnic minorities in the United States, including many with limited English proficiency (LEP). These patients face various communication barriers, including a shortage of available interpreters and the need for masks that exacerbated communication barriers. It is not known how hospitals responded to these unique challenges to providing language services for the large number of patients with LEP during COVID-19. This narrative review assessed literature and lay media to identify strategies utilized by hospitals to communicate with patients with LEP hospitalized during the COVID-19 pandemic. A search of APA PsychInfo, EBM Reviews, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Epub Ahead of Print, and Ebsco Megafile initially yielded 61 articles, 6 of which were ultimately included after reviewing abstracts and full texts. The identified interventions, which sought to increase accessibility of language-concordant care, increase accessibility of professional interpretation, and improve family communication and understanding, were described positively, though only one was tested for effectiveness.

Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Clinical Outcomes After Heart Failure Hospitalizations During the COVID-19 Pandemic, March to October 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and 30-day all-cause readmission and mortality between patients hospitalized for heart failure (HF) before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was conducted at 16 hospitals across 3 geographically dispersed US states. The study included 6769 adults (mean age, 74 years; 56% [5033 of 8989] men) with cumulative 8989 HF hospitalizations: 2341 hospitalizations during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 1 through October 30, 2020) and 6648 in the pre-COVID-19 (October 1, 2018, through February 28, 2020) comparator group. We used Poisson regression, Kaplan-Meier estimates, multivariable logistic, and Cox regression analysis to determine whether prespecified study outcomes varied by time frames. RESULTS: The adjusted 30-day readmission rate decreased from 13.1% (872 of 6648) in the pre-COVID-19 period to 10.0% (234 of 2341) in the COVID-19 pandemic period (relative risk reduction, 23%; hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.89). Conversely, all-cause mortality increased from 9.7% (645 of 6648) in the pre-COVID-19 period to 11.3% (264 of 2341) in the COVID-19 pandemic period (relative risk increase, 16%; number of admissions needed for one additional death, 62.5; hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.39). Despite significant differences in rates of index hospitalization, readmission, and mortality across the study time frames, the disease severity, HF subtypes, and treatment patterns remained unchanged (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: The findings of this large tristate multicenter cohort study of HF hospitalizations suggest lower rates of index hospitalizations and 30-day readmissions but higher incidence of 30-day mortality with broadly similar use of HF medication, surgical interventions, and devices during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the pre-COVID-19 time frame.

Systematic review of electronic health records to manage chronic conditions among displaced populations.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of electronic health records (EHRs) on health outcomes and care of displaced people with chronic health conditions and determine barriers and facilitators to EHR implementation in displaced populations. DESIGN: A systematic review protocol was developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Systematic Reviews. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Health Technology Assessment, Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched from inception to 12 April 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTED STUDIES: Inclusion criteria were original research articles, case reports and descriptions of EHR implementation in populations of displaced people, refugees or asylum seekers with related chronic diseases. Grey literature, reviews and research articles unrelated to chronic diseases or the care of refugees or asylum populations were excluded. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using a modified Cochrane, Newcastle-Ottawa and Joanna Briggs Institute tools. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data from each study using Covidence. Due to heterogeneity across study design and specific outcomes, a meta-analysis was not possible. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo V.12 (QSR International, Melbourne, Australia). An inductive analysis was used in order to uncover patterns and themes in the experiences, general outcomes and perceptions of EHR implementation. RESULTS: A total of 32 studies across nine countries were included: 14 in refugee camps/settlements and 18 in asylum countries. Our analysis suggested that EHRs improve health outcomes for chronic diseases by increasing provider adherence to guidelines or treatment algorithms, monitoring of disease indicators, patient counselling and patient adherence. In asylum countries, EHRs resource allocation to direct clinical care and public health services, as well as screening efforts. EHR implementation was facilitated by their adaptability and ability to integrate into management systems. However, barriers to EHR development, deployment and data analysis were identified in refugee settings. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that well-designed and integrated EHRs can be a powerful tool to improve healthcare systems and chronic disease outcomes in refugee settings. However, attention should be paid to the common barriers and facilitating actions that we have identified such as utilising a user-centred design. By implementing adaptable EHR solutions, health systems can be strengthened, providers better supported and the health of refugees improved.

Remote shared decision making through telemedicine: A systematic review of the literature.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the extent to which shared decision making (SDM) can take place in telemedicine (remote SDM). METHODS: We searched Medline, Cochrane, and Scopus from 2010 until August 7th, 2020 for articles on remote SDM in the care of any patient using any technology. We also conducted a search for telemedicine articles citing key reports on SDM outcome measures. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full text eligible studies, and synthesized their content using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Of the 12 eligible articles, most were European with patients with chronic disease or mental and behavioral health. 8 articles used synchronous remote SDM and 1 used asynchronous remote SDM. Themes related to interactional workability of both telemedicine technologies and SDM emerged, namely access to broadband, digital literacy, and satisfaction with the convenience of remote visits. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine technologies may foster virtual interactions that support remote SDM, which, in turn, may promote productive patient-clinician interactions and patient-centered care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Digitally-mediated consultations surged amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. The extent to which SDM frameworks developed for in-person use need any adaptation for remote SDM remains unclear. Investment in innovation, design, implementation, and effectiveness research to advance remote SDM are needed.

Anticoagulation in COVID-19: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Rapid Guidance From Mayo Clinic.

A higher risk of thrombosis has been described as a prominent feature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review synthesizes current data on thrombosis risk, prognostic implications, and anticoagulation effects in COVID-19. We included 37 studies from 4070 unique citations. Meta-analysis was performed when feasible. Coagulopathy and thrombotic events were frequent among patients with COVID-19 and further increased in those with more severe forms of the disease. We also present guidance on the prevention and management of thrombosis from a multidisciplinary panel of specialists from Mayo Clinic. The current certainty of evidence is generally very low and continues to evolve.

Antirheumatic Disease Therapies for the Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Antirheumatic disease therapies have been used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its complications. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the current evidence. METHODS: A search of published and preprint databases in all languages was performed. Included studies described ≥1 relevant clinical outcome for ≥5 patients who were infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and were treated with antirheumatic disease therapy between January 1, 2019 and May 29, 2020. Pairs of reviewers screened articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A meta-analysis of effect sizes using random-effects models was performed when possible. RESULTS: The search identified 3,935 articles, of which 45 were included (4 randomized controlled trials, 29 cohort studies, and 12 case series). All studies evaluated hospitalized patients, and 29 of the 45 studies had been published in a peer-reviewed journal. In a meta-analysis of 3 cohort studies with a low risk of bias, hydroxychloroquine use was not significantly associated with mortality (pooled hazard ratio [HR] 1.41 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.83, 2.42]). In a meta-analysis of 2 cohort studies with some concerns/higher risk of bias, anakinra use was associated with lower mortality (pooled HR 0.25 [95% CI 0.12, 0.52]). Evidence was inconclusive with regard to other antirheumatic disease therapies, and the majority of other studies had a high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, hydroxychloroquine use was not associated with benefit or harm regarding COVID-19 mortality. The evidence supporting the effect of other antirheumatic disease therapies in COVID-19 is currently inconclusive.

A Framework for Evidence Synthesis Programs to Respond to a Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires making rapid decisions based on sparse and rapidly changing evidence. Evidence synthesis programs conduct systematic reviews for guideline developers, health systems clinicians, and decision-makers that usually take an average 6 to 8 months to complete. We present a framework for evidence synthesis programs to respond to pandemics that has proven feasible and practical during the COVID-19 response in a large multistate health system employing more than 78,000 people. The framework includes four components: an approach for conducting rapid reviews, a repository of rapid reviews, a registry for all original studies about COVID-19, and twice-weekly prioritized update of new evidence sent to key stakeholders. As COVID-19 will not be our last pandemic, we share the details of this framework to allow replication in other institutions and re-implementation in future pandemics.

Cell-based therapy to reduce mortality from COVID-19: Systematic review and meta-analysis of human studies on acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Severe cases of COVID-19 infection, often leading to death, have been associated with variants of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Cell therapy with mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) is a potential treatment for COVID-19 ARDS based on preclinical and clinical studies supporting the concept that MSCs modulate the inflammatory and remodeling processes and restore alveolo-capillary barriers. The authors performed a systematic literature review and random-effects meta-analysis to determine the potential value of MSC therapy for treating COVID-19-infected patients with ARDS. Publications in all languages from 1990 to March 31, 2020 were reviewed, yielding 2691 studies, of which nine were included. MSCs were intravenously or intratracheally administered in 117 participants, who were followed for 14 days to 5 years. All MSCs were allogeneic from bone marrow, umbilical cord, menstrual blood, adipose tissue, or unreported sources. Combined mortality showed a favorable trend but did not reach statistical significance. No related serious adverse events were reported and mild adverse events resolved spontaneously. A trend was found of improved radiographic findings, pulmonary function (lung compliance, tidal volumes, PaO2 /FiO2 ratio, alveolo-capillary injury), and inflammatory biomarker levels. No comparisons were made between MSCs of different sources.