"You're Socially Distant and Trying Not to Be Emotionally Distant." Physicians' Perspectives of Communication and Therapeutic Relationships in the ICU During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

To: 1) characterize how COVID-19-related policies influence patient-clinician communication and relationships in the ICU, with attention to race and ethnicity as factors and 2) identify interventions that may facilitate patient-clinician communication. DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative study between September 2020 and February 2021 that explored facilitators and barriers to patient-clinician communication and the formation of therapeutic relationships. We used thematic analysis to develop findings describing patient-communication and therapeutic relationships within the ICU early in the COVID-19 pandemic. SETTING: We purposively selected hospital dyads from regions in the United States that experienced early and/or large surges of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. SUBJECTS: We recruited a national sample of ICU physicians from Veteran Affairs (VA) Health Care Systems and their associated academic affiliate hospitals. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-four intensivists from seven VA hospitals and six academic-affiliate hospitals participated. Intensivists noted the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on among people holding minoritized racial and ethnic identities, describing how language barriers and restrictive visitation policies exacerbated institutional mistrust and compromised physicians' ability to develop therapeutic relationships. We also identified several perceived influences on patient-clinician communication and the establishment of therapeutic relationships. Barriers included physicians' fear of becoming infected with COVID-19 and use of personal protective equipment, which created obstacles to effective physical and verbal interactions. Facilitators included the presence of on-site interpreters, use of web-based technology to interact with family members outside the ICU, and designation of a care team member or specialist service to provide routine updates to families. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has threatened patient-clinician communication and the development of therapeutic relationships in the ICU, particularly among people holding minoritized racial and ethnic identities and their families. We identified several facilitators to improve patient-clinician communication as perceived by intensivists that may help improve trust and foster therapeutic alliances.

Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Author Gender and Manuscript Acceptance Rates among Pulmonary and Critical Care Journals.

RATIONALE: The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected women more than men and may influence the publication of non-COVID research. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate whether the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with changes in manuscript acceptance rates among pulmonary/critical care journals, and gender-based disparities in these rates. METHODS: We analyzed first, senior, and corresponding-author gender (female vs. male, identified by matching first names in a validated Genderize database) of manuscripts submitted to four pulmonary/critical care journals between 1/1/18-12/31/20. We constructed interrupted time series regression models to evaluate whether the proportion of female first and senior authors of non-COVID-19 original research manuscripts changed with the pandemic. Next, we performed multivariable logistic regressions to evaluate the association of author gender with acceptance of original research manuscripts. RESULTS: Among 8,332 original research submissions, women comprised 39.9% and 28.3% of first and senior authors, respectively. We found no change in the proportion of female first or senior-authors of non-COVID-19 or COVID-19-submitted research manuscripts during the COVID-era. Non-COVID-19 manuscripts submitted during the COVID-era had reduced odds of acceptance, regardless of author gender (first-author: adjustedOR [aOR]0.46 [95%CI0.36-0.59]; senior-author: aOR0.46 [95%CI0.37-0.57]). Female senior-authorship was associated with decreased acceptance of non-COVID research manuscripts (crude rates: 14.4% [male] vs 13.2% [female]; aOR0.84, 95%CI0.71-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Although female author submissions were not disproportionately influenced by COVID-19, we found evidence suggesting gender disparities in manuscript acceptance rates. Journals may need to consider strategies to reduce this disparity and academic institutions may need to factor our findings, including lower acceptance rates for non-COVID manuscripts, into promotion decisions.

Psychiatric disorders newly diagnosed among veterans subsequent to hospitalization for COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of our study was to evaluate the development of new mental health diagnoses up to 6-months following COVID-19 hospitalization for in a large, national sample. METHOD: Data were extracted for all Veterans hospitalized at Veterans Health Administration hospitals for COVID-19 from March through August of 2020 utilizing national administrative data. After identifying the cohort, follow-up data were linked through six months post-hospitalization. Data were analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Eight percent of patients developed a new mental health diagnosis following hospitalization. The most common new mental health diagnoses involved depressive, anxiety, and adjustment disorders. Younger and rural patients were more likely to develop new mental health diagnoses. Women and those with more comorbidities were less likely to develop new diagnoses. CONCLUSION: A subpopulation of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 developed new mental health diagnoses. Unique demographics predictors indicate the potential need for additional outreach and screening to groups at elevated risk of post-hospitalization, mental health sequelae.

The Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on ICU Organization, Care Processes, and Frontline Clinician Experiences: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in unprecedented adjustments to ICU organization and care processes globally. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: Did hospital emergency responses to the COVID-19 pandemic differ depending on hospital setting? Which strategies worked well to mitigate strain as perceived by intensivists? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Between August and November 2020, we carried out semistructured interviews of intensivists from tertiary and community hospitals across six regions in the United States that experienced early or large surges of COVID-19 patients, or both. We identified themes of hospital emergency responses using the four S framework of acute surge planning: space, staff, stuff, system. RESULTS: Thirty-three intensivists from seven tertiary and six community hospitals participated. Clinicians across both settings believed that canceling elective surgeries was helpful to increase ICU capabilities and that hospitals should establish clearly defined thresholds at which surgeries are limited during future surge events. ICU staff was the most limited resource; staff shortages were improved by the use of tiered staffing models, just-in-time training for non-ICU clinicians, designated treatment teams, and deployment of trainees. Personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages and reuse were widespread, causing substantial distress among clinicians; hands-on PPE training was helpful to reduce clinicians' anxiety. Transparency and involvement of frontline clinicians as stakeholders were important components of effective emergency responses and helped to maintain trust among staff. INTERPRETATION: We identified several strategies potentially to mitigate strain as perceived by intensivists working in both tertiary and community hospital settings. Our study also demonstrated the importance of trust and transparency between frontline staff and hospital leadership as key components of effective emergency responses during public health crises.