Pandemic-Related Shifts in New Patients Admitted to Children's Hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, professional organizations recommended preferential transfer of pediatric patients from general hospitals to children's hospitals. Patients previously receiving all care at other facilities would be new to children's hospitals. As a proxy for care consolidation, we sought to describe changes in new patient encounters at children's hospitals and test associations between local severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) incidences and new patient encounters. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients aged 6 months to 18 years admitted to children's hospitals from March 15, 2019, to June 30, 2019 (control) and 2020 (pandemic period). Primary outcome was odds ratio of being a new versus established patient by study period. Generalized linear models estimated odds of being a new patient with adjustment for diagnosis. Analyses were also stratified by local SARS-CoV-2 transmission. RESULTS: There were 205 283 encounters (45.3% new patients). New patients were more common in the pandemic period than in the control (46.4 vs 44.7%, OR 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05 to 1.09). After adjusting for diagnosis, pandemic new patients were no more common than control new patients (adjusted odds ratio 1.00, 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.02). Compared with hospitals experiencing low local SARS-CoV-2 transmission, admission encounters at both medium and high transmission hospitals were more likely to be new (adjusted odds ratio 1.08, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.14 and 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.15, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: During the early coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, proportional increases in new patients to children's hospitals appeared to be due to changes in diagnoses but were also associated with local SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Pediatric care consolidation may have occurred; how this may have impacted outcomes for hospitalized children is unclear.

SARS-CoV-2 Monoclonal Antibodies in Children: Ethical Considerations.

The use of monoclonal antibodies in children with certain conditions and at high risk for severe COVID-19 has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration under the Emergency Use Authorization mechanism of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. No data on the tolerability or efficacy of these therapies in persons <18 years of age are available; there is risk. Whether they will work is unknown, but they could. A disproportionate number of these children who meet the criteria for treatment with mAbs are from communities of black, Native American, and other race. How should health systems, hospitals, and clinicians balance the tensions between being seen as experimenting with an untested drug as opposed to withholding a potentially life-saving treatment? This article identifies, analyzes, and makes recommendations on the methods by which health systems, hospitals, and individual clinicians can ethically balance these tensions.

Exploration and Ethical Analysis of Open-label Pediatric Vaccine Trials in a Pandemic.

Young children will ultimately need to be vaccinated to stop the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Initial studies of vaccine were performed in adults. Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard. In the COVID-19 pandemic, many questions need to be answered about the ethics and feasibility of these trials. Given the harms of the COVID-19 pandemic and the now-known efficacy of the vaccines in adults and teens, the question of whether clinical equipoise exists for a placebo-controlled trial of vaccines in younger children remains. Parents may be reluctant to enroll children in these trials because they want their child to receive the vaccine or because they are worried about vaccines or clinical trials in general. One option for gathering data on tolerability and efficacy in children would be to use a nonrandomized trial to enroll parents willing to vaccinate their children and those who are hesitant. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of such an open-label trial that could provide guidance for future pandemics. (Clin Ther.

Our Next Pandemic Ethics Challenge? Allocating "Normal" Health Care Services.

The pandemic creates unprecedented challenges to society and to health care systems around the world. Like all crises, these provide a unique opportunity to rethink the fundamental limiting assumptions and institutional inertia of our established systems. These inertial assumptions have obscured deeply rooted problems in health care and deflected attempts to address them. As hospitals begin to welcome all patients back, they should resist the temptation to go back to business as usual. Instead, they should retain the more deliberative, explicit, and transparent ways of thinking that have informed the development of crisis standards of care. The key lesson to be learned from those exercises in rational deliberation is that justice must be the ethical foundation of all standards of care. Justice demands that hospitals take a safety-net approach to providing services that prioritizes the most vulnerable segments of society, continue to expand telemedicine in ways that improve access without exacerbating disparities, invest in community-based care, and fully staff hospitals and clinics on nights and weekends.