Rationing Limited Healthcare Resources in the COVID-19 Era and Beyond: Ethical Considerations Regarding Older Adults

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to impact older adults disproportionately with respect to serious consequences ranging from severe illness and hospitalization to increased mortality risk. Concurrently, concerns about potential shortages of healthcare professionals and health supplies to address these issues have focused attention on how these resources are ultimately allocated and used. Some strategies, for example, misguidedly use age as an arbitrary criterion that disfavors older adults in resource allocation decisions. This is a companion article to the American Geriatrics Society (AGS) position statement, “Resource Allocation Strategies and Age-Related Considerations in the COVID-19 Era and Beyond.” It is intended to inform stakeholders including hospitals, health systems, and policymakers about ethical considerations that should be considered when developing strategies for allocation of scarce resources during an emergency involving older adults. This review presents the legal and ethical background for the position statement and discusses these issues that informed the development of the AGS positions: (1) age as a determining factor, (2) age as a tiebreaker, (3) criteria with a differential impact on older adults, (4) individual choices and advance directives, (5) racial/ethnic disparities and resource allocation, and (6) scoring systems and their impact on older adults. It also considers the role of advance directives as expressions of individual preferences in pandemics. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1143–1149, 2020.     

Bedside Ultrasound Is a Practical and Reliable Measurement Tool for Assessing Quadriceps Muscle Layer Thickness

Background: Critically ill patients commonly experience skeletal muscle wasting that may predict clinical outcome. Ultrasound is a noninvasive method that can measure muscle quadriceps muscle layer thickness (QMLT) and subsequently lean body mass (LBM) at the bedside. However, currently the reliability of these measurements are unknown. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the intra‐ and interreliability of measuring QMLT using bedside ultrasound. Methods: Ultrasound measurements of QMLT were conducted at 7 centers on healthy volunteers. Trainers were instructed to perform measurements twice on each patient, and then a second trainee repeated the measurement. Intrarater reliability measured how consistently the same person measured the subject according to intraclass correlation (ICC). Interrater reliability measured how consistently trainer and trainee agreed when measuring the same subject according to the ICC. Results: We collected 42 pairs of within operator measurements with an ICC of .98 and 78 pairs of trainer‐to‐trainee measurements with an ICC of .95. There were no statistically significant differences between the trainer and trainee results (trainer and trainee mean = ?0.028 cm, 95% CI = ?0.067 to ?0.011, P = .1607). Conclusions: Excellent intra‐ and interrater reliability for ultrasound measurements of QMLT in healthy volunteers was observed when performed by a range of providers with no prior ultrasound experience, including dietitians, nurses, physicians, and research assistants. This technique shows promise as a method to evaluate LBM status in ICU or hospital settings and as a method to assess the effects of nutrition and exercise‐based interventions on muscle wasting.     

Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention–sponsored Summit

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) offers promise for increasing screening rates, but optimal strategies for implementation have not been well synthesized. In June 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of subject matter experts and stakeholders to answer key questions regarding mailed FIT implementation in the United States. Points of agreement included: 1) primers, such as texts, telephone calls, and printed mailings before mailed FIT, appear to contribute to effectiveness; 2) invitation letters should be brief and easy to read, and the signatory should be tailored based on setting; 3) instructions for FIT completion should be simple and address challenges that may lead to failed laboratory processing, such as notation of collection date; 4) reminders delivered to initial noncompleters should be used to increase the FIT return rate; 5) data infrastructure should identify eligible patients and track each step in the outreach process, from primer delivery through abnormal FIT follow-up; 6) protocols and procedures such as navigation should be in place to promote colonoscopy after abnormal FIT; 7) a high-quality, 1-sample FIT should be used; 8) sustainability requires a program champion and organizational support for the work, including sufficient funding and external policies (such as quality reporting requirements) to drive commitment to program investment; and 9) the cost effectiveness of mailed FIT has been established. Participants concluded that mailed FIT is an effective and efficient strategy with great potential for increasing colorectal cancer screening in diverse health care settings if more widely implemented.