Improving Hospital-to-Home for Medically Complex Children: Views From Spanish-Speaking Caregivers.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Children with medical complexity (CMC) experience increased risk of adverse events during and after hospitalization, and these risks are even greater for CMC whose caregiver has a preferred language other than English. Because many adverse events for CMC may be attributable to communication challenges, understanding caregiver and physician perspectives may help prevent adverse events. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with Spanish-speaking caregivers of hospitalized CMC and their inpatient attending physicians. Each interview was conducted 24 to 72 hours after hospital discharge. Interviews continued until thematic sufficiency was reached. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and translated verbatim. Investigators independently coded and reconciled codes using constant comparison to develop themes via inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: We conducted 28 interviews (14 caregivers, 14 physicians). Three themes were identified: (1) barriers exist in providing language-concordant care in planning for transitions from hospital-to-home; (2) both physicians and caregivers perceived logistical challenges in using interpreters at the point of care; and (3) many caregivers felt uncomfortable asking physicians questions related to their child's medical management because of their language barrier. Participants also offered strategies to improve the transition from hospital to home: (1) empower families to ask questions and take notes, (2) consider the use of medical educators, and (3) improve the ability of hospital-based physicians to follow up with patients after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians strive for language-concordant care at each stage of discharge planning. However, unresolved gaps such as the lack of interpreter availability during medical-device education, require attention to promote safe transitions from hospital to home.

A randomized controlled study of convalescent plasma for individuals hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia.

BackgroundAntibody-based strategies for COVID-19 have shown promise in prevention and treatment of early disease. COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) has been widely used but results from randomized trials supporting its benefit in hospitalized patients with pneumonia are limited. Here, we assess the efficacy of CCP in severely ill, hospitalized adults with COVID-19 pneumonia.MethodsWe performed a randomized control trial (PennCCP2), with 80 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia, comparing up to 2 units of locally sourced CCP plus standard care versus standard care alone. The primary efficacy endpoint was comparison of a clinical severity score. Key secondary outcomes include 14- and 28-day mortality, 14- and 28-day maximum 8-point WHO ordinal score (WHO8) score, duration of supplemental oxygenation or mechanical ventilation, respiratory SARS-CoV-2 RNA, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.ResultsEighty hospitalized adults with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia were enrolled at median day 6 of symptoms and day 1 of hospitalization; 60% were anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody seronegative. Participants had a median of 3 comorbidities, including risk factors for severe COVID-19 and immunosuppression. CCP treatment was safe and conferred significant benefit by clinical severity score (median [MED] and interquartile range [IQR] 10 [5.5-30] vs. 7 [2.75-12.25], P = 0.037) and 28-day mortality (n = 10, 26% vs. n = 2, 5%; P = 0.013). All other prespecified outcome measures showed weak evidence toward benefit of CCP.ConclusionTwo units of locally sourced CCP administered early in hospitalization to majority seronegative participants conferred a significant benefit in clinical severity score and 28-day mortality. Results suggest CCP may benefit select populations, especially those with comorbidities who are treated early.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04397757.FundingUniversity of Pennsylvania.