One Year Later: Family Members of Patients with COVID-19 Experience Persistent Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.

Rationale: Family members of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have described increased symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Little is known about how these symptoms may change over time. Objectives: We studied changes in PTSD symptoms in family members of critically ill patients with COVID-19 over 12 months. Methods: This prospective, multisite observational cohort study recruited participants at 12 hospitals in five states. Calls were made to participants at 3-4 months, 6 months, and 12 months after patient admission to the intensive care unit. Results: There were 955 eligible family members, of whom 330 (53.3% of those reached) consented to participate. Complete longitudinal data was acquired for 115 individuals (34.8% consented). PTSD symptoms were measured by the IES-6 (Impact of Events Scale-6), with a score of at least 10 identifying significant symptoms. At 3 months, the mean IES-6 score was 11.9 ± 6.1, with 63.6% having significant symptoms, decreasing to 32.9% at 1 year (mean IES-6 score, 7.6 ± 5.0). Three clusters of symptom evolution emerged over time: persistent symptoms (34.8%, n = 40), recovered symptoms (33.0%, n = 38), and nondevelopment of symptoms (32.2%, n = 37). Although participants identifying as Hispanic demonstrated initially higher adjusted IES-6 scores (2.57 points higher [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1-4.1; P < 0.001]), they also demonstrated a more dramatic improvement in adjusted scores over time (4.7 greater decrease at 12 months [95% CI, 3.2-6.3; P < 0.001]). Conclusions: One year later, some family members of patients with COVID-19 continue to experience significant symptoms of PTSD. Further studies are needed to better understand how various differences contribute to increased risk for these symptoms.

Efficacy and Safety of Garadacimab in Combination with Standard of Care Treatment in Patients with Severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Garadacimab, a fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody, inhibits the kallikrein-kinin pathway at a key initiator, activated coagulation factor XII (FXIIa), and may play a protective role in preventing the progression of COVID-19. This phase 2 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of garadacimab plus standard of care (SOC) versus placebo plus SOC in patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: Patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were randomised (1:1) to a single intravenous dose of garadacimab (700 mg) plus SOC or placebo plus SOC. Co-primary endpoint was incidence of endotracheal intubation or death between randomisation and Day 28. All-cause mortality, safety and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters were assessed. RESULTS: No difference in incidence of tracheal intubation or death (p = 0.274) or all-cause mortality was observed (p = 0.382). Garadacimab was associated with a lower incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (60.3% vs 67.8%) and fewer serious adverse events (34 vs 45 events) versus placebo. No garadacimab-related deaths or bleeding events were reported, including in the 45.9% (n = 28/61) of patients who received concomitant heparin. Prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), and increased coagulation factor XII (FXII) levels were observed with garadacimab versus placebo to Day 14, whilst FXIIa-mediated kallikrein activity (FXIIa-mKA) was suppressed to Day 28. CONCLUSION: In patients with severe COVID-19, garadacimab did not confer a clinical benefit over placebo. Transient aPTT prolongation and suppressed FXIIa-mKA showed target engagement of garadacimab that was not associated with bleeding events even with concomitant anticoagulant use. The safety profile of garadacimab was consistent with previous studies in patients with hereditary angioedema. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04409509. Date of registration: 28 May, 2020.

Wellness and Coping of Physicians Who Worked in ICUs During the Pandemic: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional North American Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Few surveys have focused on physician moral distress, burnout, and professional fulfilment. We assessed physician wellness and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey using four validated instruments. SETTING: Sixty-two sites in Canada and the United States. SUBJECTS: Attending physicians (adult, pediatric; intensivist, nonintensivist) who worked in North American ICUs. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analysed 431 questionnaires (43.3% response rate) from 25 states and eight provinces. Respondents were predominantly male (229 [55.6%]) and in practice for 11.8 ± 9.8 years. Compared with prepandemic, respondents reported significant intrapandemic increases in days worked/mo, ICU bed occupancy, and self-reported moral distress (240 [56.9%]) and burnout (259 [63.8%]). Of the 10 top-ranked items that incited moral distress, most pertained to regulatory/organizational ( n = 6) or local/institutional ( n = 2) issues or both ( n = 2). Average moral distress (95.6 ± 66.9), professional fulfilment (6.5 ± 2.1), and burnout scores (3.6 ± 2.0) were moderate with 227 physicians (54.6%) meeting burnout criteria. A significant dose-response existed between COVID-19 patient volume and moral distress scores. Physicians who worked more days/mo and more scheduled in-house nightshifts, especially combined with more unscheduled in-house nightshifts, experienced significantly more moral distress. One in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We identified four coping profiles (active/social, avoidant, mixed/ambivalent, infrequent) that were associated with significant differences across all wellness measures. CONCLUSIONS: Despite moderate intrapandemic moral distress and burnout, physicians experienced moderate professional fulfilment. However, one in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We highlight potentially modifiable factors at individual, institutional, and regulatory levels to enhance physician wellness.

Stress-Related Disorders of Family Members of Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit With COVID-19.

Importance: The psychological symptoms associated with having a family member admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the COVID-19 pandemic are not well defined. Objective: To examine the prevalence of symptoms of stress-related disorders, primarily posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), in family members of patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 approximately 90 days after admission. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, multisite, mixed-methods observational cohort study assessed 330 family members of patients admitted to the ICU (except in New York City, which had a random sample of 25% of all admitted patients per month) between February 1 and July 31, 2020, at 8 academic-affiliated and 4 community-based hospitals in 5 US states. Exposure: Having a family member in the ICU with COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: Symptoms of PTSD at 3 months, as defined by a score of 10 or higher on the Impact of Events Scale 6 (IES-6). Results: A total of 330 participants (mean [SD] age, 51.2 [15.1] years; 228 [69.1%] women; 150 [52.8%] White; 92 [29.8%] Hispanic) were surveyed at the 3-month time point. Most individuals were the patients' child (129 [40.6%]) or spouse or partner (81 [25.5%]). The mean (SD) IES-6 score at 3 months was 11.9 (6.1), with 201 of 316 respondents (63.6%) having scores of 10 or higher, indicating significant symptoms of PTSD. Female participants had an adjusted mean IES-6 score of 2.6 points higher (95% CI, 1.4-3.8; P < .001) than male participants, whereas Hispanic participants scored a mean of 2.7 points higher compared with non-Hispanic participants (95% CI, 1.0-4.3; P = .002). Those with graduate school experience had an adjusted mean score of 3.3 points lower (95% CI, 1.5-5.1; P < .001) compared with those with up to a high school degree or equivalent. Qualitative analyses found no substantive differences in the emotional or communication-related experiences between those with high vs low PTSD scores, but those with higher scores exhibited more distrust of practitioners. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, symptoms of PTSD among family members of ICU patients with COVID-19 were high. Hispanic ethnicity and female gender were associated with higher symptoms. Those with higher scores reported more distrust of practitioners.

Kinetics and isotype assessment of antibodies targeting the spike protein receptor-binding domain of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 in COVID-19 patients as a function of age, biological sex and disease severity.

OBJECTIVES: There is an incomplete understanding of the host humoral immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-coronavirus (CoV)-2, which underlies COVID-19, during acute infection. Host factors such as age and sex as well as the kinetics and functionality of antibody responses are important factors to consider as vaccine development proceeds. The receptor-binding domain of the CoV spike (RBD-S) protein mediates host cell binding and infection and is a major target for vaccine design to elicit neutralising antibodies. METHODS: We assessed serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD-S IgG, IgM and IgA antibodies by a two-step ELISA and neutralising antibodies in a cross-sectional study of hospitalised COVID-19 patients of varying disease severities. Anti-RBD-S IgG levels were also determined in asymptomatic seropositives. RESULTS: We found equivalent levels of anti-RBD-S antibodies in male and female patients and no age-related deficiencies even out to 93 years of age. The anti-RBD-S response was evident as little as 6 days after onset of symptoms and for at least 5 weeks after symptom onset. Anti-RBD-S IgG, IgM and IgA responses were simultaneously induced within 10 days after onset, with anti-RBD-S IgG sustained over a 5-week period. Anti-RBD-S antibodies strongly correlated with neutralising activity. Lastly, anti-RBD-S IgG responses were higher in symptomatic COVID-19 patients during acute infection compared with asymptomatic seropositive donors. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that anti-RBD-S IgG reflect functional immune responses to SARS-CoV-2, but do not completely explain age- and sex-related disparities in COVID-19 fatalities.