"Do-not-resuscitate (DNR)" status determines mortality in patients with COVID-19

Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders by COVID-19 Status Throughout the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, whether performing CPR on patients with COVID-19 would be effective or increase COVID-19 transmission to health care workers was unclear.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Did the prevalence of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders by COVID-19 status change over the first year of the pandemic as risks such as COVID-19 transmission to health care workers improved?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study assessed DNR orders for all adult patients admitted to ICUs at two academic medical centers in Chicago, IL, between April 2020 and April 2021. DNR orders by COVID-19 status were assessed using risk-adjusted mixed-effects logistic regression and propensity score matching by patient severity of illness.

RESULTS

The study population of 3,070 critically ill patients were 46% Black, 53% male, with median age (interquartile range [IQR]) 63 (50-73) years. Eighteen percent were COVID-19 positive and 27% had a DNR order. Black and Latinx patients had higher absolute rates of DNR orders than White patients (30% vs 29% vs 23%; P = .006). After adjustment for patient characteristics, illness severity, and hospital location, DNR orders were more likely in patients with COVID-19 in the nonpropensity score-matched (n = 3,070; aOR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.64-2.38) and propensity score-matched (n = 1,118; aOR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.45-2.52) cohorts. The prevalence of DNR orders remained higher for patients with COVID-19 than patients without COVID-19 during all months of the study period (difference in prevalence over time, P = .751).

INTERPRETATION

In this multihospital study, DNR orders remained persistently higher for patients with COVID-19 vs patients without COVID-19 with similar severity of illness during the first year of the pandemic. The specific reasons why DNR orders remained persistently elevated for patients with COVID-19 should be assessed in future studies, because these changes may continue to affect COVID-19 patient care and outcomes.

Code status orders in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic created complex challenges regarding the timing and appropriateness of do-not-attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) and/or Do Not Intubate (DNI) code status orders. This paper sought to determine differences in utilization of DNACPR and/or DNI orders during different time periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, including prevalence, predictors, timing, and outcomes associated with having a documented DNACPR and/or DNI order in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Methods

A cohort study of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at two hospitals located in the Midwest. DNACPR code status orders including, DNI orders, demographics, labs, COVID-19 treatments, clinical interventions during hospitalization, and outcome measures including mortality, discharge disposition, and hospice utilization were collected. Patients were divided into two time periods (early and late) by timing of hospitalization during the first wave of the pandemic (March-October 2020).

Results

Among 1375 hospitalized patients with COVID-19, 19% (n = 258) of all patients had a documented DNACPR and/or DNI order. In multivariable analysis, age (older) p =< 0.01, OR 1.12 and hospitalization early in the pandemic p = 0.01, OR 2.08, were associated with having a DNACPR order. Median day from DNACPR order to death varied between cohorts p => 0.01 (early cohort 5 days versus late cohort 2 days). In-hospital mortality did not differ between cohorts among patients with DNACPR orders, p = 0.80.

Conclusions

There was a higher prevalence of DNACPR and/or DNI orders and these orders were written earlier in the hospital course for patients hospitalized early in the pandemic versus later despite similarities in clinical characteristics and medical interventions. Changes in clinical care between cohorts may be due to fear of resource shortages and changes in knowledge about COVID-19.

Home or hospital? An observational study of what affects the place of death of people with COVID-19 in Mexico

BACKGROUND

Out-of-hospital deaths increased during peak coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic periods. However, aside from COVID-19 severity, which variables are related to being hospitalized have not been properly studied. We examine the association of several variables with dying at home from COVID-19 as opposed to in a hospital.

METHODS

We used COVID-19 open data from Mexico City from March 2020 until February 2021. A causal model was prespecified to identify variables of interest. Adjusted logistic regressions were performed to calculate ORs for associations between variables of interest and dying out of hospital due to COVID-19.

RESULTS

Among 61 112 people who died due to COVID-19, 8080 died out of hospital. Older age (OR 3.49, age 90 vs 60 y), male sex (OR 1.18) and higher bed occupancy (OR 2.68, 90% vs 50% occupancy) were positively associated with dying outside of hospital.

CONCLUSION

Older age could confer different patient wishes or less ability to look for healthcare. Higher bed occupancy may have prevented hospital admission from people who required in-hospital care.

One-Year Medical Utilization and Mortality in Home Health and Nursing Home Care Recipients from Northern Taiwan

OBJECTIVES

Home health care (HHC) and nursing home care (NHC) are mainstays of long-term service in the aged population. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the factors associated with 1-year medical utilization and mortality in HHC and NHC recipients in Northern Taiwan.

DESIGN

This study employed a prospective cohort design.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We enrolled 815 HHC and NHC participants who started receiving medical care services from the National Taiwan University Hospital, Beihu Branch between January 2015 and December 2017.

METHODS

Multivariate Poisson regression modeling was used to quantify the relationship between care model (HHC vs NHC) and medical utilization. Cox proportional-hazards modeling was used to estimate hazard ratios and factors associated with mortality.

RESULTS

Compared with NHC recipients, HHC recipients had higher 1-year utilization of emergency department services [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 2.04, 95% CI 1.16-3.59] and hospital admissions (IRR 1.49, 95% CI 1.14-1.93), as well as longer total hospital length of stay (LOS) (IRR 1.61, 95% CI 1.52-1.71) and LOS per hospital admission (IRR 1.31, 95% CI 1.22-1.41). Living at home or in a nursing home did not affect the 1-year mortality.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Compared with NHC recipients, HHC recipients had a higher number of emergency department services and hospital admissions, as well as longer hospital LOS. Policies should be developed to reduce emergency department and hospitalization utilization in HHC recipients.

COVID-19 clinical outcomes by patient disability status: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

People with disabilities might experience worse clinical outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but evidence is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if people with disabilities requiring assistance are more likely to experience severe COVID-19 or death.

METHODS

Data from the Johns Hopkins COVID-19 Precision Medicine Analytics Platform Registry (JH-CROWN) included 6494 adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and admitted between March 4, 2020-October 29, 2021. Severe COVID-19 and death were defined using the occurrence and timing of clinical events. Assistive needs due to disabilities were reported by patients or their proxies upon admission. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the associations between disability status and severe COVID-19 or death. Primary models adjusted for demographics and secondary models additionally adjusted for clinical covariates.

RESULTS

In this clinical cohort (47-73 years, 49% female, 39% Black), patients with disabilities requiring assistance had 1.35 times (95% confidence interval [CI]:1.01, 1.81) the hazard of severe COVID-19 among patients <65 years, but not among those ≥65 years, equating to an additional 17.5 severe COVID-19 cases (95% CI:7.7, 28.2) per 100 patients. A lower risk of mortality was found among patients <65 years, but this finding was not robust due to the small number of deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

People with disabilities requiring assistance aged <65 years are more likely to develop severe COVID-19. Although our study is limited by using a medical model of disability, these analyses intend to further our understanding of COVID-19 outcomes among people with disabilities. Also, standardized disability data collection within electronic health records is needed.

The role of prone positioning in patients with SARS-CoV-2-related respiratory failure in non-intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Prone positioning (PP) is an established and commonly used lung recruitment method for intubated patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, with potential benefits in clinical outcome. The role of PP outside the intensive care unit (ICU) setting is debated.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed at assessing the role of PP in death and ICU admission in non-intubated patients with acute respiratory failure related to COronaVIrus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pneumonia.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective analysis of a collaborative multicenter database obtained by merging local non-interventional cohorts.

METHODS

Consecutive adult patients with COVID-19-related respiratory failure were included in a collaborative cohort and classified based on the severity of respiratory failure according to the partial arterial oxygen pressure to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (PaO₂/FiO₂) and on clinical severity by the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score. The primary study outcome was the composite of in-hospital death or ICU admission within 30 days from hospitalization.

RESULTS

PP was used in 114 of 536 study patients (21.8%), more commonly in patients with lower PaO₂/FiO₂ or receiving non-invasive ventilation and less commonly in patients with known comorbidities. A primary study outcome event occurred in 163 patients (30.4%) and in-hospital death in 129 (24.1%). PP was not associated with death or ICU admission (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.78-1.74) and not with death (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.61-1.67) at multivariable analysis; PP was an independent predictor of ICU admission (HR 2.64, 95% CI 1.53-4.40). The lack of association between PP and death or ICU admission was confirmed at propensity score-matching analysis.

CONCLUSION

PP is used in a non-negligible proportion of non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related severe respiratory failure and is not associated with death but with ICU admission. The role of PP in this setting merits further evaluation in randomized studies.

Impact of healthcare strain on access to mechanical ventilation and mortality of hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Healthcare saturation has been a prominent worry during the COVID-19 pandemic. Increase of hospital beds with mechanical ventilators has been central in Mexico's approach, but it is not known whether this actually improves access to care and the resulting quality of it. This study aimed to determine the impact of healthcare strain and other pre-specified variables on dying from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) without receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using open data from Mexico City between 8 May 2020 and 5 January 2021. We performed Cox proportional hazards models to identify the strength of the association between proposed variables and the outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 33 797 hospitalized patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, 19 820 (58.6%) did not require IMV and survived, 5414 (16.1%) required IMV and were intubated and 8563 (25.3%) required IMV but died without receiving it. A greater occupation of IMV-capable beds increased the hazard of death without receiving IMV (hazard ratio [HR] 1.56, comparing 90% with 50% occupation). Private healthcare was the most protective factor for death without IMV (HR 0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher hospital bed saturation increased the hazard of dying without being intubated and worsened the outcomes among mechanically ventilated patients. Older age also increased the hazard of the outcomes, while private healthcare dramatically decreased them.

Treatment limitations and clinical outcomes in critically ill frail patients with and without COVID-19 pneumonitis

BACKGROUND

The presence of treatment limitations in patients with frailty at intensive care unit (ICU) admission is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the presence and predictors of treatment limitations in patients with and without COVID-19 pneumonitis in those admitted to Australian and New Zealand ICUs.

METHODS

This registry-based multicenter, retrospective cohort study included all frail adults (≥16 years) with documented clinical frailty scale (CFS) scores, admitted to ICUs with admission diagnostic codes for viral pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) over 2 years between January 01, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Frail patients (CFS ≥5) coded as having viral pneumonitis or ARDS due to COVID-19 were compared to those with other causes of viral pneumonitis or ARDS for documented treatment limitations.

RESULTS

884 frail patients were included in the final analysis from 129 public and private ICUs. 369 patients (41.7%) had confirmed COVID-19. There were more male patients in COVID-19 (55.3% vs 47.0%; p = 0.015). There were no differences in age or APACHE-III scores between the two groups. Overall, 36.0% (318/884) had treatment limitations, but similar between the two groups (35.8% [132/369] vs 36.1% [186/515]; p = 0.92). After adjusting for confounders, increasing frailty (OR = 1.72; 95%-CI 1.39-2.14), age (OR = 1.05; 95%-CI 1.04-1.06), and presence of chronic respiratory condition (OR = 1.58; 95%-CI 1.10-2.27) increased the likelihood of instituting treatment limitations. However, the presence of COVID-19 by itself did not influence treatment limitations (odds ratio [OR] = 1.39; 95%-CI 0.98-1.96).

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of treatment limitations was similar in patients with frailty with or without COVID-19 pneumonitis at ICU admission.

The Vicissitude of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) Order During COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan – A Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Evaluation of Hospitalized Patient Outcomes in COVID-19 Infection for Continued versus Discontinued Use of Preadmission Antiplatelet Regimen

OBJECTIVE

In SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection, it is unclear if continuation of preadmission antiplatelet regimens upon hospitalization will improve hypercoagulability outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed adult patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 infection for a 6-week period from March 13, 2020, to April 27, 2020. Preadmission antiplatelet regimen continuation for less than 75% of admission was compared to continuation for at least 75% of admission. Pregnancy, either death or withdrawal of care within 24 hours of admission, and admission beyond the studied timeframe were excluded. The primary endpoint was difference in World Health Organization COVID-19 Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement values (World Health Organization [WHO] scores) between maximum score during admission to that upon discharge. Secondary endpoints were mechanical ventilation requirement, mortality, radiologically confirmed venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and length of stay.

RESULTS

This study included 171 patients. Patients failing to continue antiplatelet regimens for at least 75% of admission (n = 76) had significantly worse WHO score differences than those who did (n = 95) (median -1 vs 2; P < .05). Mechanical ventilation requirement (57% vs 27%; P < .05) and mortality (58% vs 29%; P < .05) also favored antiplatelet continuation. All other endpoints were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Significantly improved WHO scores, mechanical ventilation requirement, and mortality occurred in patients continuing preadmission antiplatelet regimens in COVID-19 infection. Future prospective studies of COVID-19 patients with consistently collected baseline hypercoagulability markers (platelets, D-dimer, fibrinogen, and coagulation studies) and similar severe disease risk factors are required to confirm potential benefits of antiplatelet therapy during hospitalization.

Geriatrics-focused indicators predict mortality more than age in older adults hospitalized with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Age has been implicated as the main risk factor for COVID-19-related mortality. Our objective was to utilize administrative data to build an explanatory model accounting for geriatrics-focused indicators to predict mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of adults age 65 and older (N = 4783) hospitalized with COVID-19 in the greater New York metropolitan area between 3/1/20-4/20/20. Data included patient demographics and clinical presentation. Stepwise logistic regression with Akaike Information Criterion minimization was used.

RESULTS

The average age was 77.4 (SD = 8.4), 55.9% were male, 20.3% were African American, and 15.0% were Hispanic. In multivariable analysis, male sex (adjusted odds ration (adjOR) = 1.06, 95% CI:1.03-1.09); Asian race (adjOR = 1.08, CI:1.03-1.13); history of chronic kidney disease (adjOR = 1.05, CI:1.01-1.09) and interstitial lung disease (adjOR = 1.35, CI:1.28-1.42); low or normal body mass index (adjOR:1.03, CI:1.00-1.07); higher comorbidity index (adjOR = 1.01, CI:1.01-1.02); admission from a facility (adjOR = 1.14, CI:1.09-1.20); and mechanical ventilation (adjOR = 1.52, CI:1.43-1.62) were associated with mortality. While age was not an independent predictor of mortality, increasing age (centered at 65) interacted with hypertension (adjOR = 1.02, CI:0.98-1.07, reducing by a factor of 0.96 every 10 years); early Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR, life-sustaining treatment preferences) (adjOR = 1.38, CI:1.22-1.57, reducing by a factor of 0.92 every 10 years); and severe illness on admission (at 65, adjOR = 1.47, CI:1.40-1.54, reducing by a factor of 0.96 every 10 years).

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight that residence prior to admission, early DNR, and acute illness severity are important predictors of mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19. Readily available administrative geriatrics-focused indicators that go beyond age can be utilized when considering prognosis.

Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions in people admitted with suspected COVID-19: Secondary analysis of the PRIEST observational cohort study

AIMS

We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of adults admitted to hospital with suspected COVID-19 according to their DNACPR decisions, and identify factors associated with DNACPR decisions.

METHODS

We undertook a secondary analysis of 13,977 adults admitted to hospital with suspected COVID-19 and included in the Pandemic Respiratory Infection Emergency System Triage (PRIEST) study. We recorded presenting characteristics and outcomes (death or organ support) up to 30 days. We categorised patients as early DNACPR (before or on the day of admission) or late/no DNACPR (no DNACPR or occurring after the day of admission). We undertook descriptive analysis comparing these groups and multivariable analysis to identify independent predictors of early DNACPR.

RESULTS

We excluded 1249 with missing DNACPR data, and identified 3929/12748 (31%) with an early DNACPR decision. They had higher mortality (40.7% v 13.1%) and lower use of any organ support (11.6% v 15.7%), but received a range of organ support interventions, with some being used at rates comparable to those with late or no DNACPR (e.g. non-invasive ventilation 4.4% v 3.5%). On multivariable analysis, older age (p < 0.001), active malignancy (p < 0.001), chronic lung disease (p < 0.001), limited performance status (p < 0.001), and abnormal physiological variables were associated with increased recording of early DNACPR. Asian ethnicity was associated with reduced recording of early DNACPR (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Early DNACPR decisions were associated with recognised predictors of adverse outcome, and were inversely associated with Asian ethnicity. Most people with an early DNACPR decision survived to 30 days and many received potentially life-saving interventions.

REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN28342533, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN28342533.

Profiles and outcomes in patients with COVID-19 admitted to wards of a French oncohematological hospital: A clustering approach

OBJECTIVES

Although some prognostic factors for COVID-19 were consistently identified across the studies, differences were found for other factors that could be due to the characteristics of the study populations and the variables incorporated into the statistical model. We aimed to a priori identify specific patient profiles and then assess their association with the outcomes in COVID-19 patients with respiratory symptoms admitted specifically to hospital wards.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective single-center study from February 2020 to April 2020. A non-supervised cluster analysis was first used to detect patient profiles based on characteristics at admission of 220 consecutive patients admitted to our institution. Then, we assessed the prognostic value using Cox regression analyses to predict survival.

RESULTS

Three clusters were identified, with 47 patients in cluster 1, 87 in cluster 2, and 86 in cluster 3; the presentation of the patients differed among the clusters. Cluster 1 mostly included sexagenarian patients with active malignancies who were admitted early after the onset of COVID-19. Cluster 2 included the oldest patients, who were generally overweight and had hypertension and renal insufficiency, while cluster 3 included the youngest patients, who had gastrointestinal symptoms and delayed admission. Sixty-day survival rates were 74.3%, 50.6% and 96.5% in clusters 1, 2, and 3, respectively. This was confirmed by the multivariable Cox analyses that showed the prognostic value of these patterns.

CONCLUSION

The cluster approach seems appropriate and pragmatic for the early identification of patient profiles that could help physicians segregate patients according to their prognosis.