COVID-19 outcomes in patients waitlisted for kidney transplantation and kidney transplant recipients.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented challenges to the transplant community. The reduction in transplantation volume during this time is partly due to concerns over potentially increased susceptibility and worsened outcomes of COVID-19 in immunosuppressed recipients. The consequences of COVID-19 on patients waitlisted for kidney transplantation, however, have not previously been characterized. We studied 56 waitlisted patients and 80 kidney transplant recipients diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 13 and May 20, 2020. Despite similar demographics and burden of comorbidities between waitlisted and transplant patients, waitlisted patients were more likely to require hospitalization (82% vs. 65%, P = .03) and were at a higher risk of mortality (34% vs. 16%, P = .02). Intubation was required in one third of hospitalized patients in each group, and portended a very poor prognosis. The vast majority of patients who died were male (84% waitlist, 100% transplant). Multivariate analysis demonstrated waitlist status, age, and male sex were independently associated with mortality. COVID-19 has had a dramatic impact on waitlisted patients, decreasing their opportunities for transplantation and posing significant mortality risk. Understanding the impact of COVID-19 on waitlist patients in comparison to transplant recipients may aid centers in weighing the risks and benefits of transplantation in the setting of ongoing COVID-19.

Healthcare Provider Perspectives Regarding Use of Medical Interpreters During End-of-Life Conversations With Limited English Proficient Patients.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare providers increasingly care for patients with Limited English Proficiency (LEP). There is limited research evaluating healthcare provider utilization practices, attitudes, perceived benefits and barriers regarding the use of medical interpreters in end of life (EOL) and goals of care (GOC) conversations. OBJECTIVES: To elicit healthcare providers' opinions of the role, factors that impact decisions to use medical interpreters and perceived utility of using medical interpreters when conducting EOL and GOC conversations with LEP patients and their families. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of internal medicine trainees and attending physicians from a U.S. medical center. RESULTS: A total of 117 surveys were collected with a response rate of 51%. In-person medical interpreters received higher ratings with regard to their helpfulness compared to telephone medical interpreters during EOL and GOC conversations. Being an attending physician and having received training in the use of a medical interpreter predicted higher composite scores reflecting greater awareness of the roles of medical interpreters and endorsement of best communication practices. In-person interpreters were viewed by a subset of participants as "standard of care" during EOL and GOC conversations. CONCLUSION: Having more years in practice and receiving training in the use of medical interpreters correlated with more favorable attitudes toward the role of medical interpreters and positive communication practices. Incorporating early training in the use of medical interpreters could help enhance communication practices and outcomes during EOL and GOC conversations with LEP patients.

Missed Opportunities When Communicating With Limited English-Proficient Patients During End-of-Life Conversations: Insights From Spanish-Speaking and Chinese-Speaking Medical Interpreters.

CONTEXT: Research has shown that using medical interpreters in language-discordant patient-provider encounters improves outcomes. There is limited research evaluating the views of medical interpreters on best interpreter practices when they are used to break bad news or participate in end-of-life (EOL) conversations. OBJECTIVES: To develop insights from medical interpreters about their role when interpreting discussions regarding EOL issues, identify practices interpreters perceive as helping to improve or hinder patient-provider communication, and obtain suggestions on how to improve communication during EOL conversations with Spanish-speaking and Chinese-speaking patients. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with Spanish or Chinese medical interpreters. Participants were recruited until thematic saturation was reached. Twelve interviews were conducted, audiotape recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using standard qualitative methods. RESULTS: Six major themes were identified: medical interpreters' perceived comfort level during EOL interpretation; perception of interpreter role; communication practices perceived as barriers to effective communication; communication practices felt to facilitate effective communication; concrete recommendations how to best use medical interpreters; and training received/perceived training needs. CONCLUSION: Medical interpreters provide literal interpretation of the spoken word. Because of cultural nuances in Chinese-speaking and Spanish-speaking patients/family members during EOL conversations, medical interpreters can translate the meaning of the message within a specific cultural context. Conducting premeetings and debriefings after the encounter are potentially important strategies to maximize communication during EOL conversations.