Feasibility of an embedded palliative care clinic model for patients with an advanced thoracic malignancy.

PURPOSE: Early palliative care (PC) with standard oncology care has demonstrated improved patient outcomes, but multiple care delivery models are utilized. This study prospectively evaluated the feasibility of an embedded PC clinic model and collected patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and caregiver needs. METHODS: In this observational study of embedded outpatient PC for patients with advanced thoracic malignancies treated at The Ohio State University Thoracic Oncology clinic, patients received same-day coordinated oncology and palliative care visits at one clinic location. PC encounters included comprehensive symptom assessment and management, advanced care planning, and goals of care discussion. Multiple study assessments were utilized. We describe the feasibility of evaluating PROs and caregiver needs in an embedded PC model. RESULTS: Forty patients and 28 caregivers were enrolled. PROs were collected at baseline and follow-up visits. Over a 12-month follow-up, 36 patients discontinued study participation due to hospice enrollment, death, study withdrawal, or COVID restrictions. At baseline, 32 patients (80%) rated distress as moderate-severe with clinically significant depression (44%) and anxiety (36%). Survey completion rates significantly decreased over time: 3 months (24 eligible, 66% completed), 6 months (17 eligible; 41% completed), 9 months (9 eligible; 44% completed), and 12 months (4 eligible; 50% completed). CONCLUSION: We found that an embedded PC clinic was feasible, although there were challenges encountered in longitudinal collection of PROs due to high study attrition. Ongoing assessment and expansion of this embedded PC model will continue to identify strengths and challenges to improve patient and caregiver outcomes.

Assessment of Symptom, Disability, and Financial Trajectories in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 at 6 Months.

Importance: Individuals who survived COVID-19 often report persistent symptoms, disabilities, and financial consequences. However, national longitudinal estimates of symptom burden remain limited. Objective: To measure the incidence and changes over time in symptoms, disability, and financial status after COVID-19-related hospitalization. Design, Setting, and Participants: A national US multicenter prospective cohort study with 1-, 3-, and 6-month postdischarge visits was conducted at 44 sites participating in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury Network's Biology and Longitudinal Epidemiology: COVID-19 Observational (BLUE CORAL) study. Participants included hospitalized English- or Spanish-speaking adults without severe prehospitalization disabilities or cognitive impairment. Participants were enrolled between August 24, 2020, and July 20, 2021, with follow-up occurring through March 30, 2022. Exposure: Hospitalization for COVID-19 as identified with a positive SARS-CoV-2 molecular test. Main Outcomes and Measures: New or worsened cardiopulmonary symptoms, financial problems, functional impairments, perceived return to baseline health, and quality of life. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with new cardiopulmonary symptoms or financial problems at 6 months. Results: A total of 825 adults (444 [54.0%] were male, and 379 [46.0%] were female) met eligibility criteria and completed at least 1 follow-up survey. Median age was 56 (IQR, 43-66) years; 253 (30.7%) participants were Hispanic, 145 (17.6%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 360 (43.6%) were non-Hispanic White. Symptoms, disabilities, and financial problems remained highly prevalent among hospitalization survivors at month 6. Rates increased between months 1 and 6 for cardiopulmonary symptoms (from 67.3% to 75.4%; P = .001) and fatigue (from 40.7% to 50.8%; P < .001). Decreases were noted over the same interval for prevalent financial problems (from 66.1% to 56.4%; P < .001) and functional limitations (from 55.3% to 47.3%; P = .004). Participants not reporting problems at month 1 often reported new symptoms (60.0%), financial problems (23.7%), disabilities (23.8%), or fatigue (41.4%) at month 6. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study of people discharged after COVID-19 hospitalization suggest that recovery in symptoms, functional status, and fatigue was limited at 6 months, and some participants reported new problems 6 months after hospital discharge.

Psychological Distress and Heavy Alcohol Consumption Among U.S. Young Women During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The predictors of heavy drinking among U.S. young women during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are not well-examined. This study aims to determine the prospective relationship between COVID-19 psychological distress and heavy alcohol use among U.S. young adult women. DESIGN: This study used the COVID-19 Adult Resilience Experiences Study (CARES) data collected from April 13, 2020, to August 31, 2020 (T1) and September 21, 2020, to March 15, 2021 (T2). Among the young adults (ages 18-30) who participated in both surveys, a total of 684 identified as women (including transgender women) were included in the analysis. Three or more drinks as a typical intake were defined as heavy drinking. Psychological distress in T1 was measured using scores for financial stress, COVID-19-related worry, and COVID-19-related grief. A series of logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors associated with young women's heavy drinking during the pandemic. RESULTS: Twenty-two and one-half percent of young women reported heavy drinking in a typical intake. After controlling for covariates, women who reported high levels of COVID-19-related grief were more likely to report heavy drinking (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.13; p < .05). Those with high levels of COVID-19-related worry were less likely to report drinking heavily (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.97; p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Those who suffer from a deeper sense of COVID-19-related grief are particularly at risk of heavy drinking and should be targeted for outreach and clinical intervention. Further research is necessary to determine the long-term impacts of the pandemic on heavy drinking among young women and should include a more comprehensive assessment of psychological distress.

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.

Psychological support for healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed methods study involving support providers

Background: Healthcare staff represent a high-risk group for mental health difficulties as a result of their role during the COVID-19 pandemic. A number of wellbeing initiatives have been implemented to support this population, but remain largely untested in terms of their impact on both the recipients and providers of supports. Objective: To examine the experience of staff support providers in delivering psychological initiatives to healthcare staff, as well as obtain feedback on their perceptions of the effectiveness of different forms of support. Method: A mixed methods design employing a quantitative survey and qualitative focus group methodologies. An opportunity sample of 84 psychological therapists providing psychological supports to Northern Ireland healthcare staff participated in an online survey. Fourteen providers took part in two focus groups. Results: The majority of providers rated a number of supports as useful (e.g. staff wellbeing helplines, Hospital In-reach) and found the role motivating and satisfying. Thematic analysis yielded five themes related to provision of support: (1) Learning as we go, applying and altering the response;(2) The ‘call to arms', identity and trauma in the collective response;(3) Finding the value;(4) The experience of the new role;and (5) Moving forward. Conclusions: While delivering supports was generally a positive experience for providers, adaptation to the demands of this role was dependent upon important factors (e.g. clinical experience) that need to be considered in the planning phase. Robust guidance should be developed that incorporates such findings to ensure effective evidence-based psychological supports are available for healthcare staff during and after the pandemic. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Association of cannabis use during pregnancy with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cannabis use is increasingly common among pregnant individuals and might be a risk factor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We aimed to test whether prenatal cannabis use is associated with increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The study was conducted in California, USA. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 58 114 pregnancies (with outcomes from 5 March 2020 to 30 September 2021) among 57 287 unique pregnant women aged 14-54 years who were screened for prenatal substance use, enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) (a health-care system) and had not tested positive for COVID-19 prior to pregnancy onset. MEASUREMENTS: We utilized data from the KPNC electronic health record. Cannabis use status (current, recently quit and non-user) was based on universal screenings during prenatal care (including urine toxicology testing and self-reported use on a self-administered questionnaire). SARS-CoV-2 infection [based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests] was estimated in time-to-event analyses using Cox proportional hazard regression models adjusting for covariates. Secondary analyses examined differences in (a) SARS-CoV-2 testing rates and (b) SARS-CoV-2 infection rates among those tested. FINDINGS: We observed 348 810 person-months of follow-up time in our cohort with 41 064 SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests and 6% (n = 2414) of tests being positive. At the start of follow-up, 7% of pregnant individuals had current use, 12% had recently quit and 81% did not use cannabis. Adjusting for covariates, current use was associated with lower rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.49-0.74 than non-use. Those who had recently quit did not differ from non-cannabis users in infection rates (aHR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.86-1.08). Sensitivity analyses among patients who received a SARS-CoV-2 test also found lower odds of infection associated with current versus no cannabis use (aOR = 0.76, CI = 0.61-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Current cannabis use appears to be associated with a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among pregnant individuals.

Cigarette Smoking and Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and Disease Severity Among Adults in an Integrated Health Care System in California.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between cigarette smoking status and SARS-CoV-2 infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity is highly debated. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of >2.4 million adults in a large healthcare system to evaluate whether smoking is associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease severity. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of 2,427,293 adults in KPNC from 3/5/2020 (baseline) to 12/31/2020 (pre-vaccine) included smoking status (current, former, never), socio-demographics, and comorbidities from the electronic health record. SARS-CoV-2 infection (identified by a positive PCR test) and COVID-19 severity (hospitalization, ICU admission or death ≤30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis) were estimated in time-to-event analyses using Cox proportional hazard regression models adjusting for covariates. Secondary analyses examined COVID-19 severity among patients with COVID-19 using logistic regression. RESULTS: During the study, 44,270 patients had SARS-CoV-2 infection. Current smoking was associated with lower adjusted rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR=0.64 95%CI:0.61-0.67), COVID-19-related hospitalization (aHR=0.48 95%CI:0.40-0.58), ICU admission (aHR=0.62 95%CI:0.42-0.87), and death (aHR=0.52 95%CI:0.27-0.89) than never-smoking. Former smoking was associated with a lower adjusted rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR=0.96 95%CI:0.94-0.99) and higher rates of hospitalization (aHR=1.10 95%CI:1.03-1.08) and death (aHR=1.32 95%CI:1.11-1.56) than never-smoking. Logistic regression analyses among patients with COVID-19 found lower odds of hospitalization for current versus never-smoking and higher odds of hospitalization and death for former versus never-smoking. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest US study to date on smoking and COVID-19, current and former smoking showed lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection than never-smoking, while a history of smoking was associated with higher risk of severe COVID-19. IMPLICATIONS: In this cohort study of 2.4 million adults, adjusting for socio-demographics and medical comorbidities, current cigarette smoking was associated with a lower risk of both COVID-19 infection and severe COVID-19 illness compared to never-smoking. A history of smoking was associated with a slightly lower risk of COVID-19 infection and a modestly higher risk of severe COVID-19 illness compared to never-smoking. The lower observed COVID-19 risk for current versus never-smoking deserves further investigation. Results support prioritizing individuals with smoking-related comorbidities for vaccine outreach and treatments as they become available.

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.

Online dermatology curriculum experiences among US dermatology residents and faculty.

Many dermatology residency programs adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic by transitioning to online teaching methods. This may impact the quality of education and the satisfaction of residents. Dermatology faculty and residents nationwide were surveyed regarding their experiences with the novel online curricula. A total of 65 individuals representing at least 20 ACGME-accredited dermatology programs responded. Many programs implemented a predominantly online curriculum (78%). Most participants reported that both clinical dermatology and dermatopathology were online during the pandemic's peak (90%). Among those who had experienced a live curriculum prior to the pandemic, 49% reported that a virtual curriculum had similar effectiveness, whereas 36% deemed it less effective. Open-ended questions suggested that disadvantages of a virtual curricula included too many distractions, lack of human features, and less spontaneous feedback. They also suggested advantages to an online curriculum included flexibility and more opportunities to hear from guest speakers. Dissatisfaction before the curriculum change was the same as after (7%), suggesting that the educational experience was not worsened. Failing to adjust the curriculum to residents' needs can contribute to lower satisfaction and inadequate education. The variation of responses signifies the importance of seeking sufficient feedback from residents to meet their educational needs.

Geographic Accessibility of Retail Cannabis in Northern California and Prenatal Cannabis Use During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Prenatal cannabis use is associated with health risks for mothers and their children. Prior research suggests that rates of prenatal cannabis use in Northern California increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, but it is unknown whether increases varied with the local cannabis retail and policy environment. Objective: To test whether pandemic-related increases in prenatal cannabis use were greater among pregnant individuals with greater retail availability of cannabis around their homes or among those living in jurisdictions that allowed storefront retailers. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional, population-based time series study used data from pregnancies in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California health care system screened for cannabis use before (January 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020) and during (April 1 to December 31, 2020) the early COVID-19 pandemic. Proximity to the nearest retailer and number of retailers within a 15-minute drive from one's home and local cannabis storefront retailer policy (banned vs permitted) were calculated. Interrupted time series models were fit using multiplicative and additive Poisson regression, adjusting for age and race and ethnicity. Exposures: The COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prenatal cannabis use based on universal urine toxicology tests conducted during early pregnancy at entrance to prenatal care. Results: The sample (n = 99 127 pregnancies) included 26.2% Asian or Pacific Islander, 6.8% Black, 27.6% Hispanic, 34.4% non-Hispanic White, and 4.9% other, unknown, or multiracial individuals, with a mean (SD) age of 30.8 (5.3) years. Prenatal cannabis use before (6.8%) and during (8.2%) the pandemic was associated with closer proximity to a retailer, greater retailer density, and residing in a jurisdiction that permitted vs banned retailers. There was a greater absolute increase in cannabis use from before to during the pandemic among those within a 10-minute drive (<10 minutes: adjusted rate difference [aRD], 0.93 cases/100 patients; 95% CI, 0.56-1.29 cases/100 patients; ≥10 minutes: aRD, 0.40 cases/100 patients; 95% CI, 0.12-0.68 cases/100 patients; interaction P = .02). Otherwise, relative and absolute rates increased similarly across categories of cannabis retailer proximity/density and local policy (interaction P > .05). Conclusions and Relevance: Prenatal cannabis use was more common among individuals living in areas with greater retail availability of cannabis. Although relative rates increased similarly during the pandemic regardless of local cannabis retail and policy environment, there was a larger absolute increase associated with living closer to a storefront cannabis retailer. Continued monitoring of local cannabis policy, the retail environment, and prenatal cannabis use is needed.

Complexity and Challenges of the Clinical Diagnosis and Management of Long COVID.

Importance: There is increasing recognition of the long-term health effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection (sometimes called long COVID). However, little is yet known about the clinical diagnosis and management of long COVID within health systems. Objective: To describe dominant themes pertaining to the clinical diagnosis and management of long COVID in the electronic health records (EHRs) of patients with a diagnostic code for this condition (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision [ICD-10] code U09.9). Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative analysis used data from EHRs of a national random sample of 200 patients receiving care in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with documentation of a positive result on a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2 between February 27, 2020, and December 31, 2021, and an ICD-10 diagnostic code for long COVID between October 1, 2021, when the code was implemented, and March 1, 2022. Data were analyzed from February 5 to May 31, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: A text word search and qualitative analysis of patients' VA-wide EHRs was performed to identify dominant themes pertaining to the clinical diagnosis and management of long COVID. Results: In this qualitative analysis of documentation in the VA-wide EHR, the mean (SD) age of the 200 sampled patients at the time of their first positive PCR test result for SARS-CoV-2 in VA records was 60 (14.5) years. The sample included 173 (86.5%) men; 45 individuals (22.5%) were identified as Black and 136 individuals (68.0%) were identified as White. In qualitative analysis of documentation pertaining to long COVID in patients' EHRs 2 dominant themes were identified: (1) clinical uncertainty, in that it was often unclear whether particular symptoms could be attributed to long COVID, given the medical complexity and functional limitations of many patients and absence of specific markers for this condition, which could lead to ongoing monitoring, diagnostic testing, and specialist referral; and (2) care fragmentation, describing how post-COVID-19 care processes were often siloed from and poorly coordinated with other aspects of care and could be burdensome to patients. Conclusions and Relevance: This qualitative study of documentation in the VA EHR highlights the complexity of diagnosing long COVID in clinical settings and the challenges of caring for patients who have or are suspected of having this condition.

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.

Psychological Distress and Heavy Alcohol Consumption Among U.S. Young Women During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The predictors of heavy drinking among U.S. young women during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic are not well-examined. This study aims to determine the prospective relationship between COVID-19 psychological distress and heavy alcohol use among U.S. young adult women. DESIGN: This study used the COVID-19 Adult Resilience Experiences Study (CARES) data collected from April 13, 2020, to August 31, 2020 (T1) and September 21, 2020, to March 15, 2021 (T2). Among the young adults (ages 18-30) who participated in both surveys, a total of 684 identified as women (including transgender women) were included in the analysis. Three or more drinks as a typical intake were defined as heavy drinking. Psychological distress in T1 was measured using scores for financial stress, COVID-19-related worry, and COVID-19-related grief. A series of logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors associated with young women's heavy drinking during the pandemic. RESULTS: Twenty-two and one-half percent of young women reported heavy drinking in a typical intake. After controlling for covariates, women who reported high levels of COVID-19-related grief were more likely to report heavy drinking (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.13; p < .05). Those with high levels of COVID-19-related worry were less likely to report drinking heavily (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.97; p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Those who suffer from a deeper sense of COVID-19-related grief are particularly at risk of heavy drinking and should be targeted for outreach and clinical intervention. Further research is necessary to determine the long-term impacts of the pandemic on heavy drinking among young women and should include a more comprehensive assessment of psychological distress.

Association of cannabis use during pregnancy with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cannabis use is increasingly common among pregnant individuals and might be a risk factor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We aimed to test whether prenatal cannabis use is associated with increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The study was conducted in California, USA. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 58 114 pregnancies (with outcomes from 5 March 2020 to 30 September 2021) among 57 287 unique pregnant women aged 14-54 years who were screened for prenatal substance use, enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) (a health-care system) and had not tested positive for COVID-19 prior to pregnancy onset. MEASUREMENTS: We utilized data from the KPNC electronic health record. Cannabis use status (current, recently quit and non-user) was based on universal screenings during prenatal care (including urine toxicology testing and self-reported use on a self-administered questionnaire). SARS-CoV-2 infection [based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests] was estimated in time-to-event analyses using Cox proportional hazard regression models adjusting for covariates. Secondary analyses examined differences in (a) SARS-CoV-2 testing rates and (b) SARS-CoV-2 infection rates among those tested. FINDINGS: We observed 348 810 person-months of follow-up time in our cohort with 41 064 SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests and 6% (n = 2414) of tests being positive. At the start of follow-up, 7% of pregnant individuals had current use, 12% had recently quit and 81% did not use cannabis. Adjusting for covariates, current use was associated with lower rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.49-0.74 than non-use. Those who had recently quit did not differ from non-cannabis users in infection rates (aHR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.86-1.08). Sensitivity analyses among patients who received a SARS-CoV-2 test also found lower odds of infection associated with current versus no cannabis use (aOR = 0.76, CI = 0.61-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Current cannabis use appears to be associated with a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among pregnant individuals.

Changes in Perceived Stress of Pharmacy Students Pre- and Mid-COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine (1) the difference in perceived stress in first-year pharmacy students before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and (2) the difference in perceived stress among pharmacy students working different numbers of hours. Methods: Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), via an electronic survey, was administered throughout 2016-2021 using Qualtrics. End-of-year PSS scores were compared between the pre-pandemic group (2016-2018) and mid-pandemic group (2019-2021) using independent t-test and ANCOVA. All analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistic Version 28.0. Results: A total of 209 first-year pharmacy students participated (response rate of 88%). No significant difference in mean PSS score was detected in the mid-pandemic cohort when compared to pre-pandemic. The mean PSS score was greater in those who worked greater than 10 h weekly compared to those who worked less. Those who did not work had an even greater mean PSS score than those who worked. Conclusions: No significant difference was observed in perceived stress between the pre-pandemic and mid-pandemic cohorts, and an increased perceived stress score was observed in pharmacy students who did not work in comparison to students who worked 1-9 h and 10-29 h.

Stress and the Psychological Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Frontline Obstetrics and Gynecology Providers.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic rapidly overwhelmed global health care systems in 2020, with New York City (NYC) marking the first epicenter in the United States. High levels of stress amongst health care workers have been reported in pandemics, but less is known about stress amongst Obstetrics and Gynecology (OB/GYN) providers. We sought to describe levels of stress, anxiety, depression, and other aspects of mental health among OB/GYN health care workers during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional electronic survey of a wide range of OB/GYN clinicians in a large NYC hospital system in the spring of 2020. We used both original survey questions and validated screening tools to assess stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout. We calculated median scores for these tools and compared median score between provider types. We also adapted questions on pandemic-related stressors from the MERS and SARS pandemics to fit the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and OB/GYN providers. RESULTS: A total of 464 providers met study inclusion criteria, and 163 providers completed the survey (response rate = 35.1%). Approximately 35% of providers screened positive for anxiety and 21% for depression. Scores for depression, burnout, and fulfillment varied by provider type, with nurses scoring higher than physicians (p <0.05). The majority of respondents reported stress from pandemic and OB-specific stressors, including the possibility of transmitting COVID-19 to friends and family (83.9%, [95% confidence interval or CI 78.0-89.8%]), uncertainty regarding the pandemic's trajectory (91.3% [86.7-95.8%]), and frequent policy changes on labor and delivery (72.7% [65.1-80.3%]). CONCLUSION: OB/GYN providers reported high levels of stress during the COVID-19 pandemic. The stress of caring for laboring patients during a pandemic may disproportionately affect nurses and trainees and highlights the need to provide interventions to ameliorate the negative impact of a pandemic on the mental health of our OB/GYN health care workers. KEY POINTS: · COVID-19 led to stress amongst OB/GYN providers.. · Some stressors were unique to providing obstetric care.. · Nurses and trainees were more affected by this stress..

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.

Noteworthy Cardiac Literature From 2021: Coronary Guideline Change Without New Data, Heart Transplant Donation After Cardiac Death, Covid Effects on Global Cardiac Surgery, and Attempt to Improve Dissection Remodeling.

Cardiac surgery continues to evolve. The last year has been notable for many reasons. The guidelines for coronary revascularization introduced significant discord. The pandemic continues to affect the care on a global scale. Advances in organ procurement and dissection care move forward with better understanding and better technology.

Perceptions of a virtual interview process for pharmacy residents during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multisite survey of residency candidates, preceptors, and residency program directors.

PURPOSE: To describe the perceptions of residency candidates, residency practitioners (current residents and preceptors), and residency program directors (RPDs) regarding a virtual interview process for pharmacy residency programs across multiple institutions. METHODS: In May 2021, an anonymous web-based questionnaire characterizing perceptions of the virtual interview process used during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was distributed to residency candidates, residency practitioners, and RPDs across 13 institutions. Quantitative responses measured on a 5-point Likert scale were summarized with descriptive statistics, and open-ended questions were analyzed using thematic qualitative methods. RESULTS: 236 residency candidates and 253 residency practitioners/RPDs completed the questionnaire, yielding response rates of 27.8% (236 of 848), and 38.1% (253 of 663), respectively. Overall, both groups perceived the virtual interview format positively. When asked whether virtual interviews should replace in-person interviews moving forward, 60.0% (18 of 30) of RPDs indicated they agreed or strongly agreed, whereas only 30.5% (61 of 200) of current preceptors/residents and 28.7% (66 of 230) of residency candidates agreed or strongly agreed. Thematic analysis of qualitative responses revealed that while virtual interviews were easier logistically, the lack of in-person interactions was a common concern for many stakeholders. Lastly, the majority (65.0%) of residency candidates reported greater than $1,000 in savings with virtual interviews. CONCLUSION: Virtual interviews offered logistical and financial benefits. The majority of RPDs were in favor of offering virtual interviews to replace in-person interviews, whereas the majority of residency candidates and practitioners preferred on-site interviews. As restrictions persist with the ongoing pandemic, our results provide insight into best practices for virtual pharmacy residency interviews.

Perspectives of Triage Team Members Participating in Statewide Triage Simulations for Scarce Resource Allocation During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Washington State.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted health care institutions worldwide to develop plans for allocation of scarce resources in crisis capacity settings. These plans frequently rely on rapid deployment of institutional triage teams that would be responsible for prioritizing patients to receive scarce resources; however, little is known about how these teams function or how to support team members participating in this unique task. Objective: To identify themes illuminating triage team members' perspectives and experiences pertaining to the triage process. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study was conducted using inductive thematic analysis of observations of Washington state triage team simulations and semistructured interviews with participants during the COVID-19 pandemic from December 2020 to February 2021. Participants included clinician and ethicist triage team members. Data were analyzed from December 2020 through November 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Emergent themes describing the triage process and experience of triage team members. Results: Among 41 triage team members (mean [SD] age, 50.3 [11.4] years; 21 [51.2%] women) who participated in 12 simulations and 21 follow-up interviews, there were 5 Asian individuals (12.2%) and 35 White individuals (85.4%); most participants worked in urban hospital settings (32 individuals [78.0%]). Three interrelated themes emerged from qualitative analysis: (1) understanding the broader approach to resource allocation: participants strove to understand operational and ethical foundations of the triage process, which was necessary to appreciate their team's specific role; (2) contending with uncertainty: team members could find it difficult or feel irresponsible making consequential decisions based on limited clinical and contextual patient information, and they grappled with ethically ambiguous features of individual cases and of the triage process as a whole; and (3) transforming mindset: participants struggled to disentangle narrow determinations about patients' likelihood of survival to discharge from implicit biases and other ethically relevant factors, such as quality of life. They cited the team's open deliberative process, as well as practice and personal experience with triage as important in helping to reshape their usual cognitive approach to align with this unique task. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that there were challenges in adapting clinical intuition and training to a distinctive role in the process of scarce resource allocation. These findings suggest that clinical experience, education in ethical and operational foundations of triage, and experiential training, such as triage simulations, may help prepare clinicians for this difficult role.