Accessing hemodialysis clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Transportation is a key element of access to healthcare. The COVID-19 pandemic posed unique and unforeseen challenges to patients receiving hemodialysis who rely on three times weekly transportation to receive their life-saving treatments, but there is little data on the problems they faced. This study explores the attitudes, fears, and concerns of hemodialysis patients during the pandemic with a focus on their travel to/from dialysis treatments. A mixed methods travel survey was distributed to hemodialysis patients from three urban centers in Montréal, Canada, during the pandemic (n = 43). The survey included closed questions that were analysed through descriptive statistics as well as open-ended questions that were assessed through thematic analysis. Descriptive statistics show that hemodialysis patients are more fearful of contracting COVID-19 in transit than they are at the treatment center. Patients taking paratransit, public transportation, and taxis are more fearful of COVID-19 while traveling than those who drive, who are driven, or who walk to the clinic. In the open-ended questions, patients reported struggling with confusing COVID-19 protocols in public transport, including conflicting information on whether paratransit taxis allowed one or multiple passengers. Paratransit was the most used travel mode to access treatment (n = 30), with problems identified in the open-ended questions, such as long and unreliable pickup windows, and extended travel times. To limit COVID-19 exposure and stress for paratransit users, agencies should consider sitting one patient per paratransit taxi, clearly communicating COVID-19 protocols online and in the vehicles, and tracking vehicles for more efficient pickups.

A third SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine dose in people receiving hemodialysis overcomes B cell defects but elicits a skewed CD4+ T cell profile.

Cellular immune defects associated with suboptimal responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA vaccination in people receiving hemodialysis (HD) are poorly understood. We longitudinally analyze antibody, B cell, CD4+, and CD8+ T cell vaccine responses in 27 HD patients and 26 low-risk control individuals (CIs). The first two doses elicit weaker B cell and CD8+ T cell responses in HD than in CI, while CD4+ T cell responses are quantitatively similar. In HD, a third dose robustly boosts B cell responses, leads to convergent CD8+ T cell responses, and enhances comparatively more T helper (TH) immunity. Unsupervised clustering of single-cell features reveals phenotypic and functional shifts over time and between cohorts. The third dose attenuates some features of TH cells in HD (tumor necrosis factor alpha [TNFα]/interleukin [IL]-2 skewing), while others (CCR6, CXCR6, programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1], and HLA-DR overexpression) persist. Therefore, a third vaccine dose is critical to achieving robust multifaceted immunity in hemodialysis patients, although some distinct TH characteristics endure.

Lived Experiences of Patients Receiving Hemodialysis during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study from the Quebec Renal Network.

Background: Hemodialysis patients have faced unique challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. They face high risk of death if infected and have unavoidable exposure to others when they come to hospital three times weekly for their life-saving treatments. The objective of this study was to gain a better understanding of the scope and magnitude of the effects of the pandemic on the lived experience of patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 patients who were undergoing dialysis treatments in five hemodialysis centers in Montreal from November 2020 to May 2021. Interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using thematic content analysis. Results: Most participants reported no negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on their hemodialysis care. Several patients had negative feelings related to forced changes in their dialysis schedules, and this was especially pronounced for indigenous patients in a shared living situation. Some patients were concerned about contracting COVID-19, especially during public transportation, whereas others expressed confidence that the physical distancing and screening measures implemented at the hospital would protect them and their loved ones. Some participants reported that masks negatively affected their interactions with health care workers, and for many others, the pandemic was associated with feelings of loneliness. Finally, some respondents reported some positive effects of the pandemic, including use of telemedicine and creating a sense of solidarity. Conclusions: Patients undergoing hemodialysis reported no negative effects on their medical care but faced significant disruptions in their routines and social interactions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, they showed great resilience in their ability to adapt to the new reality of their hemodialysis treatments. We also show that studies focused on understanding the lived experiences of indigenous patients and patients from different ethnic backgrounds are needed in order reduce inequities in care during public health emergencies.

Infection control measures to prevent outbreaks of COVID-19 in Quebec hemodialysis units: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Limited space and resources are potential obstacles to infection prevention and control (IPAC) measures in in-centre hemodialysis units. We aimed to assess IPAC measures implemented in Quebec's hemodialysis units during the spring of 2020, describe the characteristics of these units and document the cumulative infection rates during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: For this cross-sectional survey, we invited leaders from 54 hemodialysis units in Quebec to report information on the physical characteristics of the unit and their perceptions of crowdedness, which IPAC measures were implemented from Mar. 1 to June 30, 2020, and adherence to and feasibility of appropriate IPAC measures. Participating units were contacted again in March 2021 to collect information on the number of COVID-19 cases in order to derive the cumulative infection rate of each unit. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 38 of the 54 units contacted (70% response rate), which provided care to 4485 patients at the time of survey completion. Fourteen units (37%) had implemented appropriate IPAC measures by 3 weeks after Mar. 1, and all 38 units had implemented them by 6 weeks after. One-third of units were perceived as crowded. General measures, masks and screening questionnaires were used in more than 80% of units, and various distancing measures in 55%-71%; reduction in dialysis frequency was rare. Data on cumulative infection rates were obtained from 27 units providing care to 4227 patients. The cumulative infection rate varied from 0% to 50% (median 11.3%, interquartile range 5.2%-20.2%) and was higher than the reported cumulative infection rate in the corresponding region in 23 (85%) of the 27 units. INTERPRETATION: Rates of COVID-19 infection among hemodialysis recipients in Quebec were elevated compared to the general population during the first year of the pandemic, and although hemodialysis units throughout the province implemented appropriate IPAC measures rapidly in the spring of 2020, many units were crowded and could not maintain physical distancing. Future hemodialysis units should be designed to minimize airborne and droplet transmission of infection.