COVID‐19 hospital and emergency department visitor policies in the United States: Impact on persons with cognitive or physical impairment or receiving end‐of‐life care
Objective To characterize the national distribution of COVID‐19 hospital and emergency department visitor restriction policies across the United States, focusing on patients with cognitive or physical impairment or receiving end‐of‐life care. Methods Cross‐sectional study of visitor policies and exc...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open Vol. 3; no. 1; pp. e12622 - n/a |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
United States
John Wiley & Sons, Inc
01-02-2022
John Wiley and Sons Inc Wiley |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Objective
To characterize the national distribution of COVID‐19 hospital and emergency department visitor restriction policies across the United States, focusing on patients with cognitive or physical impairment or receiving end‐of‐life care.
Methods
Cross‐sectional study of visitor policies and exceptions, using a nationally representative random sample of EDs and hospitals during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic, by trained study investigators using standardized instrument.
Results
Of the 352 hospitals studied, 326 (93%) had a COVID‐19 hospital‐wide visitor restriction policy and 164 (47%) also had an ED‐specific policy. Hospital‐wide policies were more prevalent at academic than non‐academic (96% vs 90%; P < 0.05) and at urban than rural sites (95% vs 84%; P < 0.001); however, the prevalence of ED‐specific policies did not significantly differ across these site characteristics. Geographic region was not associated with the prevalence of any visitor policies. Among all study sites, only 58% of hospitals reported exceptions for patients receiving end‐of‐life care, 39% for persons with cognitive impairment, and 33% for persons with physical impairment, and only 12% provided policies in non‐English languages. Sites with ED‐specific policies reported even fewer exceptions for patients with cognitive impairment (29%), with physical impairments (24%), or receiving end‐of‐life care (26%).
Conclusion
Although the benefits of visitor policies towards curbing COVID‐19 transmission had not been firmly established, such policies were widespread among US hospitals. Exceptions that permitted family or other caregivers for patients with cognitive or physical impairments or receiving end‐of‐life care were predominantly lacking, as were policies in non‐English languages. |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | JACEP Open The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see 10.1002/emp2.12659 By See related editorial www.icmje.org Supervising Editor: Catherine Marco, MD Funding and support ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 See related editorial: 10.1002/emp2.12659 Funding and support: By JACEP Open policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org). The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. |
| ISSN: | 2688-1152 2688-1152 |
| DOI: | 10.1002/emp2.12622 |