Characteristics Associated With Homebound Vaccination Against COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Homebound patients are older and suffer from multiple comorbidities, and many experienced difficulties getting vaccinated because of their inability to routinely leave the home due to health and function. Home-based primary care (HBPC) programs offer vaccination at home to reach this high-risk population. We evaluated an urban HBPC program's COVID-19 vaccination campaign to explore whether home-based vaccination can reduce inequity in vaccine administration or improve vaccine efforts. DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional study to examine characteristics of homebound patients who were vaccinated through an HBPC program or were vaccinated elsewhere. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed 795 patients enrolled in the HBPC program who were eligible for vaccination at home in 2021. METHODS: We collected vaccination data from patients, demographic data from the electronic medical record, and neighborhood-level characteristics for each patient based on census tract. RESULTS: Homebound patients vaccinated by HBPC were significantly more likely than homebound patients vaccinated outside of the program to have a history of dementia (P = .003), live in public housing (P < .001), have Medicaid (P = .005), be enrolled in HBPC for longer (P = .03), and live in neighborhoods with higher proportions of immigrants (P = .022), lower English proficiency (P = .007), lower computer usage (P = .001), and greater poverty (P < .001). CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Home-based vaccination campaigns may help lower-resourced patients get vaccinated by mitigating logistic barriers and using the influence of trusted patient-provider relationships established through HBPCs.

Community paramedicine in dementia care.

BACKGROUND: Novel hospital diversion strategies are needed to support a growing number of patients with dementia living in the community. One promising model is community paramedicine (CP), which deploys paramedics to the home, who consult with a physician to coordinate treatment and assess disposition. While evidence suggests CP can manage many patients without escalation to the emergency department (ED), no studies have evaluated optimal CP utilization for patients with dementia. Therefore, we compare the use and outcomes of CP for homebound patients with and without dementia. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examines 251 homebound patients receiving home-based primary care, who utilized a physician-led CP service between March 2017 and May 2022. Linked electronic health record data included patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and CP encounter details. Dementia status and CP outcomes, including rates of ED transport, over-transport (i.e., transported, but not hospitalized), and under-transport (i.e., not transported, but ED visit within 3 days), were determined via chart review. Using logistic regression, we modeled the association of dementia status with over- and under-transport, adjusting for age, sex, and chief complaint. RESULTS: Fifty-three percent of CP patients had dementia. Their most common chief complaints were dyspnea (24.3%), altered mental status (17.9%), and generalized weakness (9.8%). We found no significant difference in ED transport rates by dementia status (25.4 vs. 22.8%, p = 0.54). Dementia diagnosis was associated with lower rates of over-transport (OR = 0.21, p = 0.03, CI [0.05, 0.85]) and comparable rates of under-transport (OR = 0.70, p = 0.47, CI [0.27, 1.83]) in adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: CP has effectively managed a diverse population of homebound patients with dementia cared for via home-based primary care. Future work should examine potential cost savings and use of CP in dementia care across geographic and healthcare settings.

A randomized controlled trial of a novel home-based palliative care program: A report of a trial that could not be completed.

BACKGROUND: In response to a growing need for accessible, efficient, and effective palliative care services, we designed, implemented, and evaluated a novel palliative care at home (PC@H) model for people with serious illness that is centered around a community health worker, a registered nurse, and a social worker, with an advanced practice nurse and a physician for support. Our objectives were to measure the impact of receipt of PC@H on patient symptoms, quality of life, and healthcare utilization and costs. METHODS: We enrolled 136 patients with serious illness in this parallel, randomized controlled trial. Our primary outcome was change in symptom burden at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes included change in symptom burden at 3 months, change in quality of life at 6 weeks and 3 months, estimated using a group t-test. In an exploratory aim, we examined the impact of PC@H on healthcare utilization and cost using a generalized linear model. RESULTS: PC@H resulted in a greater improvement in patient symptoms at 6 weeks (1.30 score improvement, n = 37) and 3 months (3.14 score improvement, n = 21) compared with controls. There were no differences in healthcare utilization and costs between the two groups. Unfortunately, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and a loss of funding, the trial was not able to be completed as originally intended. CONCLUSIONS: A palliative care at home model that leverages community health workers, registered nurses, and social workers as the primary deliverers of care may result in improved patient symptoms and quality of life compared with standard care. We did not demonstrate significant differences in healthcare utilization and cost associated with receipt of PC@H, likely due to inability to reach the intended sample size and insufficient statistical power, due to elements beyond the investigators' control such as the COVID-19 public health emergency and changes in grant funding.

Implications of anemia in patients undergoing PCI with Impella-support: insights from the PROTECT III study.

Background: Anemia is prevalent among patients with cardiovascular disease and is associated with adverse outcomes. However, data regarding the impact of anemia in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HRPCI) are limited. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of anemia in patients undergoing Impella-supported HRPCI in the PROTECT III study. Methods: Patients undergoing Impella-supported HRPCI in the multicenter PROTECT III study were assessed for anemia based on baseline hemoglobin levels according to World Health Organization criteria. Patients were stratified into three groups, namely, no anemia, mild anemia, and moderate or severe anemia. Major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE: all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischemic attack, and repeat revascularization) at 30 and 90 days, and major bleeding events were compared across groups. Results: Of 1,071 patients with baseline hemoglobin data, 37.9% had no anemia, 43.4% had mild anemia, and 18.7% had moderate or severe anemia. Anemic patients were older and more likely to have comorbidities. Anemia was associated with higher MACCE rates at 30 days (moderate to severe, 12.3%; mild, 9.8%; no anemia, 5.4%; p = 0.02) and at 90 days (moderate to severe, 18.7%; mild, 14.6%; none, 8.3%; p = 0.004). These differences persisted after adjustment for potential confounders at 30 and 90 days, and sensitivity analysis excluding dialysis showed similar results. Major bleeding at 30 days was also higher in anemic patients (5.5% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.002). Conclusion: Baseline anemia in Impella-supported HRPCI is common and independently associated with MACCE and major bleeding, emphasizing its significance as a prognostic factor. Specific management strategies to reduce anemia-associated MACCE risk after HRPCI should be examined. Clinical Trial Information Trial Name: The Global cVAD Study (cVAD)ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT04136392URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04136392?term=cvad&draw=2&rank=2.