Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care "6-Clicks" for the Prediction of Short-term Clinical Outcomes in Individuals Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the ability of the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) "6-Clicks" assessments of mobility and activity to predict key clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: An academic health system in the United States consisting of 5 inpatient hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients (N=1486) urgently or emergently admitted who tested positive for COVID-19 and had at least 1 AM-PAC assessment. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Discharge destination, hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and readmission. RESULTS: A total of 1486 admission records were included in the analysis. After controlling for covariates, initial and final mobility (odds ratio, 0.867 and 0.833, respectively) and activity scores (odds ratio, 0.892 and 0.862, respectively) were both independent predictors of discharge destination with a high accuracy of prediction (area under the curve [AUC]=0.819-0.847). Using a threshold score of 17.5, sensitivity ranged from 0.72-0.79, whereas specificity ranged from 0.74-0.83. Both initial AM-PAC mobility and activity scores were independent predictors of mortality (odds ratio, 0.885 and 0.877, respectively). Initial mobility, but not activity, scores were predictive of prolonged length of stay (odds ratio, 0.957 and 0.980, respectively). However, the accuracy of prediction for both outcomes was weak (AUC=0.659-0.679). AM-PAC scores did not predict rehospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Functional status as measured by the AM-PAC "6-Clicks" mobility and activity scores are independent predictors of key clinical outcomes individual hospitalized with COVID-19.

Reevaluating Rehabilitation Practice for Patients Who Were Critically Ill After COVID-19 Infection: An Administrative Case Report.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this case report is to describe the process, challenges, and opportunities of implementing rehabilitation for individuals who were critically ill and required both mechanical ventilation (MV) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support following a coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection in an academic medical center. METHODS: This administrative case report is set in a heart and vascular intensive care unit, a 35-bed critical care unit that provides services for patients with various complex cardiovascular surgical interventions, including transplantation. Patients were admitted to the heart and vascular intensive care unit with either COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome or pulmonary fibrosis for consideration of bilateral orthotropic lung transplantation. The authors describe the process of establishing rehabilitation criteria for patients who, by previously established guidelines, would be considered too ill to engage in rehabilitation. RESULTS: The rehabilitation team, in coordination with an interprofessional team of critical care providers including physicians, respiratory care providers, perfusionists, and registered nurses, collaborated to implement a rehabilitation program for patients with critical COVID-19 being considered for bilateral orthotropic lung transplantation. This was accomplished by (1) reviewing previously published guidelines and practices; (2) developing an interdisciplinary framework for the consideration of rehabilitation treatment; and (3) implementing the framework for patients in our heart and vascular intensive care unit. CONCLUSION: In response to the growing volume of patients admitted with critical COVID-19, the team initiated and developed an interprofessional framework and successfully provided rehabilitation services to patients who were critically ill. While resource-intensive, the process demonstrates that rehabilitation can be implemented on a case-by-case basis for select patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and MV, who would previously have been considered too critically ill for rehabilitation services. IMPACT: Rehabilitating patients with end-stage pulmonary disease on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and MV support is challenging but feasible with appropriate interprofessional collaboration and knowledge sharing.

Rehabilitation Characteristics and Outcomes for Lung Transplantation for COVID-19: A Case Series.

OBJECTIVE: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can result in irreversible lung damage, with some individuals requiring lung transplantation. The purpose of this case series is to describe the initial experience with the rehabilitation and functional outcomes of 9 patients receiving a lung transplant for COVID-19. METHODS: Nine individuals, ranging in age from 37 to 68 years, received bilateral orthotopic lung transplantation (BOLT) for COVID-19 between December 2020 and July 2021. Rehabilitation was provided before and after the transplant, including in-hospital rehabilitation, postacute care inpatient rehabilitation, and outpatient rehabilitation. RESULTS: Progress with mobility was limited in the pretransplant phase despite rehabilitation efforts. Following transplantation, 2 individuals expired before resuming rehabilitation, and 2 others had complications that delayed their progress. The remaining 5 experienced clinically important improvements in mobility and walking capacities. CONCLUSION: Considerable rehabilitation resources are required to care for individuals both before and after BOLT for COVID-19. Rehabilitation can have a profound impact on both functional and clinical outcomes for this unique patient population. IMPACT: There is limited literature on the rehabilitation efforts and outcomes for patients who received BOLT for COVID-19. Occupational therapists and physical therapists play an important role during the pretransplant and posttransplant recovery process for this novel patient population. LAY SUMMARY: Patients with a bilateral orthotopic lung transplant due to COVID-19 require a unique rehabilitation process. They have significant difficulties with activities of daily living and functional mobility across the pretransplant and posttransplant continuum of care, but progressive gains in functional performance may be possible with a comprehensive multidisciplinary rehabilitation program.

Recommendations for Psychosocial Evaluation of VAD candidates: Adoption, completion, and barriers to implementation.

BACKGROUND: Recommendations exist to guide clinicians on a comprehensive psychosocial (PS) evaluation prior to Mechanical Circulatory Support (MCS) implantation. OBJECTIVES: Assess adoption, beliefs, methodologies, and barriers to completion of the 2018 ISHLT/APM/AST/ICCAC/STSW Recommendations for Psychosocial evaluation of adult cardiothoracic transplant and long term mechanical circulatory support. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey distributed to all 183 implanting LVAD centers in North America via mail and email. RESULTS: Total of 58 Programs (35.6% response rate) representing 29 states and all regions of the United States responded. Respondents reported implanting 1,183 adults (range 0 - 85; mean = 21.5, SD = 18) in 2018. A majority (n = 55, 94.8%) reported that the 2018 Recommendations were consistent with their clinical practice and most (n = 51, 87.9%) had adopted the recommendations. The Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplant (SIPAT) (n = 25, 47.1%) was the most commonly cited assessment tool in the use, although 15 centers reported utilizing more than one tool during the assessment process. Most common barriers influencing completion of the PS evaluation include patient too ill (total responses = 104), lack of time (total responses = 89), patient poor candidate (total responses = 44), and lack of Insurance coverage/reimbursement (total responses = 41). CONCLUSION: The 2018 ISHLT Recommendations for PS evaluation of LVAD Candidates are widely adopted by respondents in clinical practice, although barriers are still reported to their implementation. Additional research is needed to understand strategies to reduce barriers to implementation and maintenance of the recommendations in clinical practice.

Acute Rehabilitation of a Patient With COVID-19 Myocarditis: A Case Report.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this case report is to describe the acute rehabilitation of an individual with severe COVID-19 complicated by myocarditis, focusing on both facility-wide and patient-specific strategies. METHODS: A 50-year-old male presented to the emergency department with progressive dyspnea and confirmed COVID-19. He developed hypoxic respiratory failure and heart failure requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Mobility was limited by severe impairments in strength, endurance, balance, and cognition. The referral, screening, and rehabilitation of this patient were guided by a COVID-19 Service Delivery Plan designed to maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of care delivery while minimizing staff exposure to the virus. Coordinated physical and occupational therapy sessions focused on progressive mobility and cognitive retraining. Progress was monitored using a series of standardized outcome measures, including the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care, Timed Up and Go test, and the Saint Louis University Mental Status examination. RESULTS: Rehabilitation was initiated on day 18, and the patient participated in 19 treatment sessions, each approximately 30 minutes, over the remaining 30 days of his hospital stay. His Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care mobility and function scores both improved from 100% to 0% disability, he experienced substantial improvements in both Timed Up and Go (Δ = 4.2 seconds) and Saint Louis University Mental Status (discharge score = 25). There were no adverse events. He was discharged to home with his family and home rehabilitation services. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 contributed to severe declines in mobility and function in this middle-aged man. He experienced substantial gains in his function, mobility, and cognition during his in-hospital rehabilitation, which was guided by a facility-wide plan to prevent virus transmission. IMPACT: The rehabilitation of individuals with severe COVID-19 presents significant challenges, both at the level of the individual patient and the whole facility. This report describes clinical decision-making required to manage these individuals in the setting of a global pandemic.

Assessment of pre-operative psychosocial function among people receiving left ventricular assist devices: A national survey of US LVAD programs.

BACKGROUND: The International Society for Heart & Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) guidelines for Mechanical Circulatory Support (MCS) includes assessment of four elements of psychosocial functioning prior to Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) implantation. Information about the practices and impact of assessments of psychosocial functioning are limited. OBJECTIVE: To describe the psychosocial function assessment practices used within US LVAD programs and the influence of psychosocial assessment results on clinical decisions for LVAD patient selection. METHODS: In 2017, a cross-sectional survey of LVAD programs listed in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) (N = 164) was conducted to understand practices used for and the influence of psychosocial assessments for post-operative care planning decisions. RESULTS: Respondents included representatives of 69 LVAD programs from throughout the U.S. that implanted 64.8% of all U.S LVADs in 2016. More than 39 psychosocial screening instruments were used. Assessment of family, social and emotional support occurred most frequently (84.1% (n = 58) of programs assessed 100% of patients), but assessment was least likely to be conducted with standardized instruments (36.2%). Cognitive dysfunction was the least likely characteristic to be assessed (26.1% (n = 18) of programs assessed 100% of patients), but was most often conducted with standardized instruments (53.8% of programs). Twenty seven percent of programs used non-standardized instruments or patient observation. The influence of assessments on clinical decisions to implant an LVAD was most influential in the bridge to transplant pathway with 60% (n = 39) of respondents rating it very influential and least influential for patients in the destination therapy pathway with 39.4% (n = 26) of respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Current psychosocial assessment practices in LVAD programs vary widely and often yield non-standardized, non-comparable data that may lead to variations in care and limit generation of an evidence base for decision making regarding psychosocial eligibility for LVAD implantation.