Utilization of Palliative Care for Patients with COVID-19 and Acute Kidney Injury during a COVID-19 Surge.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: AKI is a common complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and is associated with high mortality. Palliative care, a specialty that supports patients with serious illness, is valuable for these patients but is historically underutilized in AKI. The objectives of this paper are to describe the use of palliative care in patients with AKI and COVID-19 and their subsequent health care utilization. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of New York University Langone Health electronic health data of COVID-19 hospitalizations between March 2, 2020 and August 25, 2020. Regression models were used to examine characteristics associated with receiving a palliative care consult. RESULTS: Among patients with COVID-19 (n=4276; 40%), those with AKI (n=1310; 31%) were more likely than those without AKI (n=2966; 69%) to receive palliative care (AKI without KRT: adjusted odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.40 to 2.33; P<0.001; AKI with KRT: adjusted odds ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.52 to 3.97; P<0.001), even after controlling for markers of critical illness (admission to intensive care units, mechanical ventilation, or modified sequential organ failure assessment score); however, consults came significantly later (10 days from admission versus 5 days; P<0.001). Similarly, 66% of patients initiated on KRT received palliative care versus 37% (P<0.001) of those with AKI not receiving KRT, and timing was also later (12 days from admission versus 9 days; P=0.002). Despite greater use of palliative care, patients with AKI had a significantly longer length of stay, more intensive care unit admissions, and more use of mechanical ventilation. Those with AKI did have a higher frequency of discharges to inpatient hospice (6% versus 3%) and change in code status (34% versus 7%) than those without AKI. CONCLUSIONS: Palliative care was utilized more frequently for patients with AKI and COVID-19 than historically reported in AKI. Despite high mortality, consultation occurred late in the hospital course and was not associated with reduced initiation of life-sustaining interventions. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2022_02_24_CJN11030821.mp3.

Association Between Self-reported Importance of Religious or Spiritual Beliefs and End-of-Life Care Preferences Among People Receiving Dialysis.

Importance: Although people receiving maintenance dialysis have limited life expectancy and a high burden of comorbidity, relatively few studies have examined spirituality and religious beliefs among members of this population. Objective: To examine whether there is an association between the importance of religious or spiritual beliefs and care preferences and palliative care needs in people who receive dialysis. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted among adults who were undergoing maintenance dialysis at 31 facilities in Seattle, Washington, and Nashville, Tennessee, between April 22, 2015, and October 2, 2018. The survey included a series of questions assessing patients' knowledge, preferences, values, and expectations related to end-of-life care. Data were analyzed from February 12, 2020, to April 21, 2021. Exposures: The importance of religious or spiritual beliefs was ascertained by asking participants to respond to this statement: "My religious or spiritual beliefs are what really lie behind my whole approach to life." Response options were definitely true, tends to be true, tends not to be true, or definitely not true. Main Outcomes and Measurements: Outcome measures were based on self-reported engagement in advance care planning, resuscitation preferences, values regarding life prolongation, preferred place of death, decision-making preference, thoughts or discussion about hospice or stopping dialysis, prognostic expectations, and palliative care needs. Results: A total of 937 participants were included in the cohort, of whom the mean (SD) age was 62.8 (13.8) years and 524 (55.9%) were men. Overall, 435 (46.4%) participants rated the statement about religious or spiritual beliefs as definitely true, 230 (24.6%) rated it as tends to be true, 137 (14.6%) rated it as tends not to be true, and 135 (14.4%) rated it as definitely not true. Participants for whom these beliefs were more important were more likely to prefer cardiopulmonary resuscitation (estimated probability for definitely true: 69.8% [95% CI, 66.5%-73.2%]; tends to be true: 60.8% [95% CI, 53.4%-68.3%]; tends not to be true: 61.6% [95% CI, 53.6%-69.6%]; and definitely not true: 60.6% [95% CI, 52.5%-68.6%]; P for trend = .003) and mechanical ventilation (estimated probability for definitely true: 42.6% [95% CI, 38.1%-47.0%]; tends to be true: 33.5% [95% CI, 25.9%-41.2%]; tends not to be true: 35.1% [95% CI, 27.2%-42.9%]; and definitely not true: 27.9% [95% CI, 19.6%-36.1%]; P for trend = .002) and to prefer a shared role in decision-making (estimated probability for definitely true: 41.6% [95% CI, 37.7%-45.5%]; tends to be true: 35.4% [95% CI, 29.0%-41.8%]; tends not to be true: 36.0% [95% CI, 26.7%-45.2%]; and definitely not true: 23.8% [95% CI, 17.3%-30.3%]; P for trend = .001) and were less likely to have thought or spoken about stopping dialysis. These participants were no less likely to have engaged in advance care planning, to value relief of pain and discomfort, to prefer to die at home, to have ever thought or spoken about hospice, and to have unmet palliative care needs and had similar prognostic expectations. Conclusions and Relevance: The finding that religious or spiritual beliefs were important to most study participants suggests the value of an integrative approach that addresses these beliefs in caring for people who receive dialysis.

Challenges in communication, prognostication and dialysis decision-making in the COVID-19 pandemic: implications for interdisciplinary care during crisis settings.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Using case vignettes, we highlight challenges in communication, prognostication, and medical decision-making that have been exacerbated by the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic for patients with kidney disease. We include best practice recommendations to mitigate these issues and conclude with implications for interdisciplinary models of care in crisis settings. RECENT FINDINGS: Certain biomarkers, demographics, and medical comorbidities predict an increased risk for mortality among patients with COVID-19 and kidney disease, but concerns related to physical exposure and conservation of personal protective equipment have exacerbated existing barriers to empathic communication and value clarification for these patients. Variability in patient characteristics and outcomes has made prognostication nuanced and challenging. The pandemic has also highlighted the complexities of dialysis decision-making for older adults at risk for poor outcomes related to COVID-19. SUMMARY: The COVID-19 pandemic underscores the need for nephrologists to be competent in serious illness communication skills that include virtual and remote modalities, to be aware of prognostic tools, and to be willing to engage with interdisciplinary teams of palliative care subspecialists, intensivists, and ethicists to facilitate goal-concordant care during crisis settings.

The Impact of COVID-19 Surge on Clinical Palliative Care: A Descriptive Study From a New York Hospital System.

CONTEXT: In spring 2020, New York experienced a surge of patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19) disease, as part of a global pandemic. There are limited data on populations of COVID-19-infected patients seen by palliative care services. OBJECTIVE: To describe a palliative care population at one New York hospital system during the initial pandemic surge. METHODS: This repeated cross-sectional, observational study collected data on palliative care patients in a large health system seen during the COVID-19 outbreak and compared it with pre-COVID data. RESULTS: Palliative service volume surged from 678 (4% of total admissions) before COVID-19 to 1071 (10% of total admissions) during the COVID-19 outbreak. During the outbreak, 695 (64.9%) of the total palliative patients tested positive for the virus. Compared with a preoutbreak group, this COVID-19-positive group had higher rates of male (60.7% vs. 48.6%, P < 0.01) and Latino (21.3% vs. 13.3%; P < 0.01) patients and less white patients (21.3% vs. 13.3%; P < 0.01). Our patients with COVID-19 also had greater prevalence of obesity and diabetes and lower rates of end-stage organ disease and cancers. The COVID-19-positive group had a higher rate of intensive care unit admissions (58.9% vs. 33.9%; P < 0.01) and in-hospital mortality rate (57.4% vs. 13.1%; P < 0.01) than the preoutbreak group. There was increased odds of mortality in palliative care patients who were COVID-19 positive (odds ratio = 3.21; 95% confidence interval = 2.43-4.24) and those admitted to the intensive care unit (odds ratio = 1.45; 95% confidence interval = 1.11-1.9). CONCLUSION: During the initial surge of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York, palliative care services experienced a large surge of patients who tended to be healthier at baseline and more acutely ill at the time of admission than pre-COVID-19 palliative patients.