Jan Dyer

The US Department of Defense (DoD) has unveiled a plan for returning to normal operations. The plan is tied to “local conditions” and does not have specific dates for opening. Instead, the plan provides phase-by-phase guidance to commanders, supervisors, and employees to safely and effectively return to Pentagon Reservation offices. Along with guidelines for in-office and telework targets; vulnerable populations; entrance screening; and the status and cleaning of common areas, food courts, gyms and other facilities, the plan includes mandatory requirements regarding face coverings, social distancing, and symptomatic personnel throughout each phase.

Building on the 3-phase White House “Opening Up America Again” plan, the Joint Staff, military services, and the DoD COVID Task Force have developed a 5-phase plan. Currently, the department is at Phase Zero. The Pentagon Reservation Plan for Resilience and ‘Aligning with National Guidelines for Opening Up America Again’ “places the health and safety of our workforce first,” is “nested” within the White House, Office of Management and Budget, and Office of Personnel Management guidelines and plans. The goal is to allow the workforce to return to the Pentagon Reservation “in a controlled and steady manner.”

The DoD reported nearly 10,000 COVID-19 cases as of June 1, 2020, including 6,596 active-duty service members, 1,124 dependents, 1,516 civilians, and 649 DoD contractors. To date, 3 service members and 5 dependents have died of COVID-19, including Capt. Douglas Linn Hickok, a physician assistant and member of the New Jersey National Guard, who died March 28, 2020.

Since mid-March the DoD says it has taken “aggressive steps” to stop the spread of COVID-19, implementing health protection measures that resulted in a sustained transmission rate below that of the region at large. Teams have deep cleaned and sanitized more than 1 million square feet of office space on the Pentagon Reservation to US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention standards. And for the first time ever, according to the DoD, maximized telework options have enabled more than two-thirds of the Pentagon Reservation workforce to continue to work at alternate locations.

The criteria to enter Phase 1 require a downward trajectory of influenza-like illnesses reported with a 14-day period and a downward trajectory of COVID-like symptoms reported within a 14-day period. There must also be a downward trajectory of documented COVID-19 cases within a 14-day period or a downward trajectory of positive COVID-19 tests as a percentage of total tests within a 14-day period (flat or increasing volume of tests).

Finally, hospitals must treat all patients without crisis care and have a “robust” testing program in place for at-risk health care workers, including emerging antibody testing.

Those same criteria must be met between each phase of the plan. The “gates” for controlling moves from phase to phase are not tied to dates but are based on state, regional, and local public health conditions, availability of hospitals and testing capacity, and monitoring through the DoD’s Electronic Surveillance System for Early Notification of Community-based Epidemics (ESSENCE).

If the monitors detect a resurgence in the spread of COVID-19, the department will reassess its protection measures and workforce phase and respond appropriately. DoD service members and civilian employees are advised to talk with their commanders or supervisors to determine when it’s all right to return.

The US Department of Defense (DoD) has unveiled a plan for returning to normal operations. The plan is tied to “local conditions” and does not have specific dates for opening. Instead, the plan provides phase-by-phase guidance to commanders, supervisors, and employees to safely and effectively return to Pentagon Reservation offices. Along with guidelines for in-office and telework targets; vulnerable populations; entrance screening; and the status and cleaning of common areas, food courts, gyms and other facilities, the plan includes mandatory requirements regarding face coverings, social distancing, and symptomatic personnel throughout each phase.

Building on the 3-phase White House “Opening Up America Again” plan, the Joint Staff, military services, and the DoD COVID Task Force have developed a 5-phase plan. Currently, the department is at Phase Zero. The Pentagon Reservation Plan for Resilience and ‘Aligning with National Guidelines for Opening Up America Again’ “places the health and safety of our workforce first,” is “nested” within the White House, Office of Management and Budget, and Office of Personnel Management guidelines and plans. The goal is to allow the workforce to return to the Pentagon Reservation “in a controlled and steady manner.”

The DoD reported nearly 10,000 COVID-19 cases as of June 1, 2020, including 6,596 active-duty service members, 1,124 dependents, 1,516 civilians, and 649 DoD contractors. To date, 3 service members and 5 dependents have died of COVID-19, including Capt. Douglas Linn Hickok, a physician assistant and member of the New Jersey National Guard, who died March 28, 2020.

Since mid-March the DoD says it has taken “aggressive steps” to stop the spread of COVID-19, implementing health protection measures that resulted in a sustained transmission rate below that of the region at large. Teams have deep cleaned and sanitized more than 1 million square feet of office space on the Pentagon Reservation to US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention standards. And for the first time ever, according to the DoD, maximized telework options have enabled more than two-thirds of the Pentagon Reservation workforce to continue to work at alternate locations.

The criteria to enter Phase 1 require a downward trajectory of influenza-like illnesses reported with a 14-day period and a downward trajectory of COVID-like symptoms reported within a 14-day period. There must also be a downward trajectory of documented COVID-19 cases within a 14-day period or a downward trajectory of positive COVID-19 tests as a percentage of total tests within a 14-day period (flat or increasing volume of tests).

Finally, hospitals must treat all patients without crisis care and have a “robust” testing program in place for at-risk health care workers, including emerging antibody testing.

Those same criteria must be met between each phase of the plan. The “gates” for controlling moves from phase to phase are not tied to dates but are based on state, regional, and local public health conditions, availability of hospitals and testing capacity, and monitoring through the DoD’s Electronic Surveillance System for Early Notification of Community-based Epidemics (ESSENCE).

If the monitors detect a resurgence in the spread of COVID-19, the department will reassess its protection measures and workforce phase and respond appropriately. DoD service members and civilian employees are advised to talk with their commanders or supervisors to determine when it’s all right to return.

The US Department of Defense (DoD) has unveiled a plan for returning to normal operations. The plan is tied to “local conditions” and does not have specific dates for opening. Instead, the plan provides phase-by-phase guidance to commanders, supervisors, and employees to safely and effectively return to Pentagon Reservation offices. Along with guidelines for in-office and telework targets; vulnerable populations; entrance screening; and the status and cleaning of common areas, food courts, gyms and other facilities, the plan includes mandatory requirements regarding face coverings, social distancing, and symptomatic personnel throughout each phase.

Building on the 3-phase White House “Opening Up America Again” plan, the Joint Staff, military services, and the DoD COVID Task Force have developed a 5-phase plan. Currently, the department is at Phase Zero. The Pentagon Reservation Plan for Resilience and ‘Aligning with National Guidelines for Opening Up America Again’ “places the health and safety of our workforce first,” is “nested” within the White House, Office of Management and Budget, and Office of Personnel Management guidelines and plans. The goal is to allow the workforce to return to the Pentagon Reservation “in a controlled and steady manner.”

The DoD reported nearly 10,000 COVID-19 cases as of June 1, 2020, including 6,596 active-duty service members, 1,124 dependents, 1,516 civilians, and 649 DoD contractors. To date, 3 service members and 5 dependents have died of COVID-19, including Capt. Douglas Linn Hickok, a physician assistant and member of the New Jersey National Guard, who died March 28, 2020.

Since mid-March the DoD says it has taken “aggressive steps” to stop the spread of COVID-19, implementing health protection measures that resulted in a sustained transmission rate below that of the region at large. Teams have deep cleaned and sanitized more than 1 million square feet of office space on the Pentagon Reservation to US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention standards. And for the first time ever, according to the DoD, maximized telework options have enabled more than two-thirds of the Pentagon Reservation workforce to continue to work at alternate locations.

The criteria to enter Phase 1 require a downward trajectory of influenza-like illnesses reported with a 14-day period and a downward trajectory of COVID-like symptoms reported within a 14-day period. There must also be a downward trajectory of documented COVID-19 cases within a 14-day period or a downward trajectory of positive COVID-19 tests as a percentage of total tests within a 14-day period (flat or increasing volume of tests).

Finally, hospitals must treat all patients without crisis care and have a “robust” testing program in place for at-risk health care workers, including emerging antibody testing.

Those same criteria must be met between each phase of the plan. The “gates” for controlling moves from phase to phase are not tied to dates but are based on state, regional, and local public health conditions, availability of hospitals and testing capacity, and monitoring through the DoD’s Electronic Surveillance System for Early Notification of Community-based Epidemics (ESSENCE).

If the monitors detect a resurgence in the spread of COVID-19, the department will reassess its protection measures and workforce phase and respond appropriately. DoD service members and civilian employees are advised to talk with their commanders or supervisors to determine when it’s all right to return.

When a mass trauma or disaster hit, mental health clinicians often focus on encouraging resilience. In the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, however, interventions that maintain calm, build community, and sustain hope may take priority, according to a working group of clinical experts from the International College of Obsessive Compulsive Spectrum Disorders and the Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders Research Network of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

While the COVID-19 pandemic has tested everyone, “[p]erhaps no group of individuals with mental illness is as directly affected by the worsening outbreak of COVID-19 as people living with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD),” say the group members, who include clinicians from Stanford University, University of California, and VAHCS in Palo Alto. “Paradoxically, they are ‘experts by experience’ in attempting to avert dangers through enacting compulsive behaviors.”

Consequently, coronavirus may become all these patients think about. Some who have contamination-related OCD may express doubts about the rationality of their therapies, while other  patients have told their clinicians they were “right all along.” Moreover, people with OCD can be inflexible at “unlearning” danger responses and are thus conditioned to prolonged virus-induced distress and anxiety.

In response to the emerging crisis and growing calls from patients and clinicians, the working group produced a consensus statement with the aim of delivering “pragmatic guidance” for the treatment of OCD under COVID-19 conditions. Their report covers the issues they judged currently most relevant for clinicians.

Stipulating that the best available treatments for most patients are likely to include evidence-based pharmacotherapy and modifying or pausing cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in conjunction with enhanced supportive therapies, the panel also recommends:

• Using telemedicine, including telephone or video calls, but be aware of the patient’s circumstances: For some, poverty makes it hard to stay home. Regularly check on patients who are likely to engage in particularly harmful decontamination rituals or behaviors. The added benefit of video calling is that it helps the therapist perform a visual risk evaluation—which is especially valuable for patients living alone—to determine the condition of the patient's hands, presence of food in the fridge or cupboard, etc.
• Taking a careful history, clarifying the extent to which the symptoms represent a rational or exaggerated reaction to recent highly stressful events, or a worsening of the OCD. Don’t assume that every patient with contamination fears related to germs and illness will necessarily be excessively concerned about COVID-19.
• Assessing suicide risk. Factors such as a recent increase in OCD severity, experiencing a family member found positive for COVID-19, or finding the effects of quarantine or isolation distressing have anecdotally been shown to raise suicide risk.
• Providing balanced information about the known risks and impact of COVID-19 on physical and mental health. This includes the difficulties managing uncertainty associated with the virus, which might be particularly challenging for some people with OCD, hypochondriasis or anxiety. Patients need to understand that this health crisis may persist for some time, and they will need to manage their stress levels over that time (eg, by putting into play long-term routines of mindfulness techniques, exercise and structure).
• Inquiring about Internet usage and news consumption. Some patients spend hours a day watching television and online media sources, which may significantly exacerbate OCD and anxiety symptoms. Offer a balanced approach (eg, individuals should not spend more than a half-hour in the morning and at night to stay informed about the pandemic, to minimize the triggering of symptoms). Suggest trusted sources to avoid myths, rumors and misinformation.
• Identifying and discouraging high-risk obsessive-compulsive behaviors, such as washing in water that is too hot or bleach, or total fasting. Some patients, as a result of doubt or uncertainty about whether food in the house is contaminated, respond by throwing everything away and consequently have little or nothing to eat. Encourage eating and drinking to maintain health.

Keeping people calm and reducing the risk of depression using supportive techniques are an essential element of care. Nevertheless, the group says, clinicians should still try to find ways to help patients foster resilience towards obsessional thinking and compulsive acts.

“We are aware this guidance marks a change in practice for many clinicians treating OCD,” they note. “Temporarily modifying or pausing in vivo CBT with ERP [exposure response prevention] for contamination-related OCD, … is a difficult decision to make, but as with any treatment, the benefits and risks need to be balanced up and clear messages that take public health into account need to be given at this time of heightened risk of infection, to avoid confusion. On the other hand, many forms of CBT can be continued with modification for safety as needed.”

Understanding the impact of a pandemic like COVID-19 on patients with mental health disorders can provide important insights into the environmental determinants, the panel says. They urge research-active groups to investigate the effects of such changes on health outcomes—as well as exploring ways to address the expected rise in incidence of OCD once the pandemic is over.

When a mass trauma or disaster hit, mental health clinicians often focus on encouraging resilience. In the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, however, interventions that maintain calm, build community, and sustain hope may take priority, according to a working group of clinical experts from the International College of Obsessive Compulsive Spectrum Disorders and the Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders Research Network of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

While the COVID-19 pandemic has tested everyone, “[p]erhaps no group of individuals with mental illness is as directly affected by the worsening outbreak of COVID-19 as people living with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD),” say the group members, who include clinicians from Stanford University, University of California, and VAHCS in Palo Alto. “Paradoxically, they are ‘experts by experience’ in attempting to avert dangers through enacting compulsive behaviors.”

Consequently, coronavirus may become all these patients think about. Some who have contamination-related OCD may express doubts about the rationality of their therapies, while other  patients have told their clinicians they were “right all along.” Moreover, people with OCD can be inflexible at “unlearning” danger responses and are thus conditioned to prolonged virus-induced distress and anxiety.

In response to the emerging crisis and growing calls from patients and clinicians, the working group produced a consensus statement with the aim of delivering “pragmatic guidance” for the treatment of OCD under COVID-19 conditions. Their report covers the issues they judged currently most relevant for clinicians.

Stipulating that the best available treatments for most patients are likely to include evidence-based pharmacotherapy and modifying or pausing cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in conjunction with enhanced supportive therapies, the panel also recommends:

• Using telemedicine, including telephone or video calls, but be aware of the patient’s circumstances: For some, poverty makes it hard to stay home. Regularly check on patients who are likely to engage in particularly harmful decontamination rituals or behaviors. The added benefit of video calling is that it helps the therapist perform a visual risk evaluation—which is especially valuable for patients living alone—to determine the condition of the patient's hands, presence of food in the fridge or cupboard, etc.
• Taking a careful history, clarifying the extent to which the symptoms represent a rational or exaggerated reaction to recent highly stressful events, or a worsening of the OCD. Don’t assume that every patient with contamination fears related to germs and illness will necessarily be excessively concerned about COVID-19.
• Assessing suicide risk. Factors such as a recent increase in OCD severity, experiencing a family member found positive for COVID-19, or finding the effects of quarantine or isolation distressing have anecdotally been shown to raise suicide risk.
• Providing balanced information about the known risks and impact of COVID-19 on physical and mental health. This includes the difficulties managing uncertainty associated with the virus, which might be particularly challenging for some people with OCD, hypochondriasis or anxiety. Patients need to understand that this health crisis may persist for some time, and they will need to manage their stress levels over that time (eg, by putting into play long-term routines of mindfulness techniques, exercise and structure).
• Inquiring about Internet usage and news consumption. Some patients spend hours a day watching television and online media sources, which may significantly exacerbate OCD and anxiety symptoms. Offer a balanced approach (eg, individuals should not spend more than a half-hour in the morning and at night to stay informed about the pandemic, to minimize the triggering of symptoms). Suggest trusted sources to avoid myths, rumors and misinformation.
• Identifying and discouraging high-risk obsessive-compulsive behaviors, such as washing in water that is too hot or bleach, or total fasting. Some patients, as a result of doubt or uncertainty about whether food in the house is contaminated, respond by throwing everything away and consequently have little or nothing to eat. Encourage eating and drinking to maintain health.

Keeping people calm and reducing the risk of depression using supportive techniques are an essential element of care. Nevertheless, the group says, clinicians should still try to find ways to help patients foster resilience towards obsessional thinking and compulsive acts.

“We are aware this guidance marks a change in practice for many clinicians treating OCD,” they note. “Temporarily modifying or pausing in vivo CBT with ERP [exposure response prevention] for contamination-related OCD, … is a difficult decision to make, but as with any treatment, the benefits and risks need to be balanced up and clear messages that take public health into account need to be given at this time of heightened risk of infection, to avoid confusion. On the other hand, many forms of CBT can be continued with modification for safety as needed.”

Understanding the impact of a pandemic like COVID-19 on patients with mental health disorders can provide important insights into the environmental determinants, the panel says. They urge research-active groups to investigate the effects of such changes on health outcomes—as well as exploring ways to address the expected rise in incidence of OCD once the pandemic is over.

When a mass trauma or disaster hit, mental health clinicians often focus on encouraging resilience. In the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, however, interventions that maintain calm, build community, and sustain hope may take priority, according to a working group of clinical experts from the International College of Obsessive Compulsive Spectrum Disorders and the Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders Research Network of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

While the COVID-19 pandemic has tested everyone, “[p]erhaps no group of individuals with mental illness is as directly affected by the worsening outbreak of COVID-19 as people living with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD),” say the group members, who include clinicians from Stanford University, University of California, and VAHCS in Palo Alto. “Paradoxically, they are ‘experts by experience’ in attempting to avert dangers through enacting compulsive behaviors.”

Consequently, coronavirus may become all these patients think about. Some who have contamination-related OCD may express doubts about the rationality of their therapies, while other  patients have told their clinicians they were “right all along.” Moreover, people with OCD can be inflexible at “unlearning” danger responses and are thus conditioned to prolonged virus-induced distress and anxiety.

In response to the emerging crisis and growing calls from patients and clinicians, the working group produced a consensus statement with the aim of delivering “pragmatic guidance” for the treatment of OCD under COVID-19 conditions. Their report covers the issues they judged currently most relevant for clinicians.

Stipulating that the best available treatments for most patients are likely to include evidence-based pharmacotherapy and modifying or pausing cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in conjunction with enhanced supportive therapies, the panel also recommends:

• Using telemedicine, including telephone or video calls, but be aware of the patient’s circumstances: For some, poverty makes it hard to stay home. Regularly check on patients who are likely to engage in particularly harmful decontamination rituals or behaviors. The added benefit of video calling is that it helps the therapist perform a visual risk evaluation—which is especially valuable for patients living alone—to determine the condition of the patient's hands, presence of food in the fridge or cupboard, etc.
• Taking a careful history, clarifying the extent to which the symptoms represent a rational or exaggerated reaction to recent highly stressful events, or a worsening of the OCD. Don’t assume that every patient with contamination fears related to germs and illness will necessarily be excessively concerned about COVID-19.
• Assessing suicide risk. Factors such as a recent increase in OCD severity, experiencing a family member found positive for COVID-19, or finding the effects of quarantine or isolation distressing have anecdotally been shown to raise suicide risk.
• Providing balanced information about the known risks and impact of COVID-19 on physical and mental health. This includes the difficulties managing uncertainty associated with the virus, which might be particularly challenging for some people with OCD, hypochondriasis or anxiety. Patients need to understand that this health crisis may persist for some time, and they will need to manage their stress levels over that time (eg, by putting into play long-term routines of mindfulness techniques, exercise and structure).
• Inquiring about Internet usage and news consumption. Some patients spend hours a day watching television and online media sources, which may significantly exacerbate OCD and anxiety symptoms. Offer a balanced approach (eg, individuals should not spend more than a half-hour in the morning and at night to stay informed about the pandemic, to minimize the triggering of symptoms). Suggest trusted sources to avoid myths, rumors and misinformation.
• Identifying and discouraging high-risk obsessive-compulsive behaviors, such as washing in water that is too hot or bleach, or total fasting. Some patients, as a result of doubt or uncertainty about whether food in the house is contaminated, respond by throwing everything away and consequently have little or nothing to eat. Encourage eating and drinking to maintain health.

Keeping people calm and reducing the risk of depression using supportive techniques are an essential element of care. Nevertheless, the group says, clinicians should still try to find ways to help patients foster resilience towards obsessional thinking and compulsive acts.

“We are aware this guidance marks a change in practice for many clinicians treating OCD,” they note. “Temporarily modifying or pausing in vivo CBT with ERP [exposure response prevention] for contamination-related OCD, … is a difficult decision to make, but as with any treatment, the benefits and risks need to be balanced up and clear messages that take public health into account need to be given at this time of heightened risk of infection, to avoid confusion. On the other hand, many forms of CBT can be continued with modification for safety as needed.”

Understanding the impact of a pandemic like COVID-19 on patients with mental health disorders can provide important insights into the environmental determinants, the panel says. They urge research-active groups to investigate the effects of such changes on health outcomes—as well as exploring ways to address the expected rise in incidence of OCD once the pandemic is over.

Cirrhosis hospitalizations are declining during the coronavirus pandemic, according to researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and Corporal Michael J. Crescenz US Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Philadelphia. They found a “clear drop-off” among patients who ordinarily would meet acute care criteria.

Using data from the Veterans Outcomes and Costs Associated with Liver Disease (VOCAL) cohort, the researchers collected data that included length of stay, type of hospital, and region for 7,216 patients and 12,467 hospitalizations between January 1 and April 15 in 2019 and 2020. They designated 3 2020 subgroups: pre-COVID (before February 29), early COVID (February 29 - March 25), and late COVID (March 26 - April 15). The breakpoints were chosen because the Veterans Health Administration announced a COVID-19 Response Plan on March 23 that was implemented widely within 3 days.

Analyzing the differences in data from the 2 years, the researchers found weekly cirrhosis hospitalizations were on average 159.5 fewer in the late-COVID era, while admissions for end-stage liver disease were significantly higher. Patients also had shorter lengths of stay in 2020 when compared with 2019 (median, 2 days vs 3), and fewer hospital transfers (7.5% vs 11.1%).

The late-COVID era also was characterized by significantly fewer academic hospital admissions (63.6% vs 68.1% pre-COVID). And more patients were discharged to home in the late-COVID era (91.1% vs 88.8% pre-COVID) and fewer to facilities (5.1% vs 9.0% pre-COVID).

The changes likely reflect initiatives to preserve inpatient resources, the researchers say. “Importantly,” they suggest, their findings probably “parallel changes in other inpatient resource-intensive conditions,” such as congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and myocardial infarction.

The pandemic response also may be sending conflicting messages to people who already have serious illnesses: Patients may be following guidance encouraging them to stay home, or avoiding going to the hospital until their symptoms are severe, perhaps from fears about COVID-19.

It is unclear how these patients are being managed, the researchers add. “Given the baseline vulnerability of patients with cirrhosis, it is likely that many do not currently have adequate healthcare access.”

Cirrhosis hospitalizations are declining during the coronavirus pandemic, according to researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and Corporal Michael J. Crescenz US Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Philadelphia. They found a “clear drop-off” among patients who ordinarily would meet acute care criteria.

Using data from the Veterans Outcomes and Costs Associated with Liver Disease (VOCAL) cohort, the researchers collected data that included length of stay, type of hospital, and region for 7,216 patients and 12,467 hospitalizations between January 1 and April 15 in 2019 and 2020. They designated 3 2020 subgroups: pre-COVID (before February 29), early COVID (February 29 - March 25), and late COVID (March 26 - April 15). The breakpoints were chosen because the Veterans Health Administration announced a COVID-19 Response Plan on March 23 that was implemented widely within 3 days.

Analyzing the differences in data from the 2 years, the researchers found weekly cirrhosis hospitalizations were on average 159.5 fewer in the late-COVID era, while admissions for end-stage liver disease were significantly higher. Patients also had shorter lengths of stay in 2020 when compared with 2019 (median, 2 days vs 3), and fewer hospital transfers (7.5% vs 11.1%).

The late-COVID era also was characterized by significantly fewer academic hospital admissions (63.6% vs 68.1% pre-COVID). And more patients were discharged to home in the late-COVID era (91.1% vs 88.8% pre-COVID) and fewer to facilities (5.1% vs 9.0% pre-COVID).

The changes likely reflect initiatives to preserve inpatient resources, the researchers say. “Importantly,” they suggest, their findings probably “parallel changes in other inpatient resource-intensive conditions,” such as congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and myocardial infarction.

The pandemic response also may be sending conflicting messages to people who already have serious illnesses: Patients may be following guidance encouraging them to stay home, or avoiding going to the hospital until their symptoms are severe, perhaps from fears about COVID-19.

It is unclear how these patients are being managed, the researchers add. “Given the baseline vulnerability of patients with cirrhosis, it is likely that many do not currently have adequate healthcare access.”

Cirrhosis hospitalizations are declining during the coronavirus pandemic, according to researchers from the University of Pennsylvania and Corporal Michael J. Crescenz US Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Philadelphia. They found a “clear drop-off” among patients who ordinarily would meet acute care criteria.

Using data from the Veterans Outcomes and Costs Associated with Liver Disease (VOCAL) cohort, the researchers collected data that included length of stay, type of hospital, and region for 7,216 patients and 12,467 hospitalizations between January 1 and April 15 in 2019 and 2020. They designated 3 2020 subgroups: pre-COVID (before February 29), early COVID (February 29 - March 25), and late COVID (March 26 - April 15). The breakpoints were chosen because the Veterans Health Administration announced a COVID-19 Response Plan on March 23 that was implemented widely within 3 days.

Analyzing the differences in data from the 2 years, the researchers found weekly cirrhosis hospitalizations were on average 159.5 fewer in the late-COVID era, while admissions for end-stage liver disease were significantly higher. Patients also had shorter lengths of stay in 2020 when compared with 2019 (median, 2 days vs 3), and fewer hospital transfers (7.5% vs 11.1%).

The late-COVID era also was characterized by significantly fewer academic hospital admissions (63.6% vs 68.1% pre-COVID). And more patients were discharged to home in the late-COVID era (91.1% vs 88.8% pre-COVID) and fewer to facilities (5.1% vs 9.0% pre-COVID).

The changes likely reflect initiatives to preserve inpatient resources, the researchers say. “Importantly,” they suggest, their findings probably “parallel changes in other inpatient resource-intensive conditions,” such as congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and myocardial infarction.

The pandemic response also may be sending conflicting messages to people who already have serious illnesses: Patients may be following guidance encouraging them to stay home, or avoiding going to the hospital until their symptoms are severe, perhaps from fears about COVID-19.

It is unclear how these patients are being managed, the researchers add. “Given the baseline vulnerability of patients with cirrhosis, it is likely that many do not currently have adequate healthcare access.”

No one really knows how long the COVID-19 pandemic will endure, and it’s highly likely personal protective equipment (PPE) will be a pressing priority for months to come. Ensuring supplies has become a creative endeavor, with new partnerships forming to fill gaps.

The US Department of Defense (DoD), for instance, has signed a $126 million contract with 3M to produce 26 million N95 masks per month, starting in October, according to DoD spokesperson Lt. Col. Mike Andrews. 3M will expedite design, procurement, production facilities, and equipment to increase respirator production by at least 312 million annually within the next 12 months. The company is ramping up: It has already placed orders for raw material and 2 new N95 manufacturing lines, in addition to beginning initial production in Wisconsin and expanding a facility in South Dakota.

The project, funded through the CARES Act, is spearheaded by the Joint Acquisition Task Force, which serves as the DoD’s overarching framework for acquisition support.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) also has a new procurement partner: New Hampshire. The state’s leadership, community business leaders and the VA Secretary’s Center for Strategic Partnerships secured millions of masks for VA workforce nationwide.

“Once again, New Hampshire stands out as a leader in our nation for its collaborative nature benefiting veterans,” said Acting VA Deputy Secretary Pamela Powers. “Governor Sununu and Dean Kamen [a New Hampshire-based inventor] made it possible for VA to purchase 4.5 million masks…. Having these additional resources is truly incredible and on behalf of the department, I offer our sincere gratitude.”

A FedEx cargo plane stocked with 110,000 pounds of PPE landed at Manchester Airport, the third such shipment to arrive in the state. “It is a tribute to our state that we were more aggressive and proactive in our approach to readiness from the get-go,” said Maj. Gen. David J. Mikolaities, the adjutant general of the New Hampshire Army National Guard, which stood ready to support deployment of the new supplies. “We didn’t wait for the need to occur; we secured the supplies so when and if the demand hits we’d be ready with our PPE distribution.”

The need has been getting stronger. More than 1,300 VA employees have tested positive for COVID-19 according to the VA, and 28 are reported to have died. The cases span 114 VA facilities, but with infections affecting less than 1% of the VA health care workforce, the rate is lower at VA than at several large health care systems, including a 4.4% infection rate at University of Washington Medicine and 2.1% of the Detroit-based Henry Ford Health System.

VA nurses and other hospital employees had been warning for weeks that they did not have enough protective gear. Although VA officials denied this, an April 16 memo sent to network directors by the VA's deputy under secretary for health for operations and management indicated the agency was implementing conservation procedures to stretch supplies.

According to The Washington Post, some of those conservation measures were necessary because FEMA had diverted millions of masks and other PPE that VA had ordered away from the department. In a Post interview, Richard Stone, MD, VHA Executive in Charge, acknowledged that he’d been forced to move to “austerity levels” at some hospitals. (At some facilities, VA employees were provided with one surgical mask per week and N95s were reportedly nearly impossible to find.)

Stone said FEMA had directed vendors with equipment on order from VA to instead send it to FEMA to replenish the government’s rapidly depleting emergency stockpile: “I had 5 million masks incoming that disappeared.” At the time, Stone told the Post, the VA’s four-week supply of equipment was almost gone, and the system was burning through about 200,000 masks in a day. The supply system was responding to FEMA, he said. “I couldn’t tell you when my next delivery was coming in.”

According to a recent ProPublica report, the VA has tried other means to acquire PPE, with limited success. The VA contracted to pay $34.5 million for 6 million N95 respirators, a 350% markup on the normal cost of the masks. Unfortunately, even at that price, the contractor received higher bids for the masks and the VA ended up cancelling the contract.

In an effort to reassure veterans and employees, the VA issued a press release insisting that it had stable and “sufficient” supplies on May 13. According to the release, the VA had on hand “the capacity to take in 12,215 critical and non-critical patients,” and its occupancy rates “remain steady at 35-40% nationwide in both acute care and intensive care units (ICUs).” The release also asserted that the “VA’s stock of medical supplies remains robust with millions of N95 masks on hand,” and 1,943 ICU ventilators.

No one really knows how long the COVID-19 pandemic will endure, and it’s highly likely personal protective equipment (PPE) will be a pressing priority for months to come. Ensuring supplies has become a creative endeavor, with new partnerships forming to fill gaps.

The US Department of Defense (DoD), for instance, has signed a $126 million contract with 3M to produce 26 million N95 masks per month, starting in October, according to DoD spokesperson Lt. Col. Mike Andrews. 3M will expedite design, procurement, production facilities, and equipment to increase respirator production by at least 312 million annually within the next 12 months. The company is ramping up: It has already placed orders for raw material and 2 new N95 manufacturing lines, in addition to beginning initial production in Wisconsin and expanding a facility in South Dakota.

The project, funded through the CARES Act, is spearheaded by the Joint Acquisition Task Force, which serves as the DoD’s overarching framework for acquisition support.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) also has a new procurement partner: New Hampshire. The state’s leadership, community business leaders and the VA Secretary’s Center for Strategic Partnerships secured millions of masks for VA workforce nationwide.

“Once again, New Hampshire stands out as a leader in our nation for its collaborative nature benefiting veterans,” said Acting VA Deputy Secretary Pamela Powers. “Governor Sununu and Dean Kamen [a New Hampshire-based inventor] made it possible for VA to purchase 4.5 million masks…. Having these additional resources is truly incredible and on behalf of the department, I offer our sincere gratitude.”

A FedEx cargo plane stocked with 110,000 pounds of PPE landed at Manchester Airport, the third such shipment to arrive in the state. “It is a tribute to our state that we were more aggressive and proactive in our approach to readiness from the get-go,” said Maj. Gen. David J. Mikolaities, the adjutant general of the New Hampshire Army National Guard, which stood ready to support deployment of the new supplies. “We didn’t wait for the need to occur; we secured the supplies so when and if the demand hits we’d be ready with our PPE distribution.”

The need has been getting stronger. More than 1,300 VA employees have tested positive for COVID-19 according to the VA, and 28 are reported to have died. The cases span 114 VA facilities, but with infections affecting less than 1% of the VA health care workforce, the rate is lower at VA than at several large health care systems, including a 4.4% infection rate at University of Washington Medicine and 2.1% of the Detroit-based Henry Ford Health System.

VA nurses and other hospital employees had been warning for weeks that they did not have enough protective gear. Although VA officials denied this, an April 16 memo sent to network directors by the VA's deputy under secretary for health for operations and management indicated the agency was implementing conservation procedures to stretch supplies.

According to The Washington Post, some of those conservation measures were necessary because FEMA had diverted millions of masks and other PPE that VA had ordered away from the department. In a Post interview, Richard Stone, MD, VHA Executive in Charge, acknowledged that he’d been forced to move to “austerity levels” at some hospitals. (At some facilities, VA employees were provided with one surgical mask per week and N95s were reportedly nearly impossible to find.)

Stone said FEMA had directed vendors with equipment on order from VA to instead send it to FEMA to replenish the government’s rapidly depleting emergency stockpile: “I had 5 million masks incoming that disappeared.” At the time, Stone told the Post, the VA’s four-week supply of equipment was almost gone, and the system was burning through about 200,000 masks in a day. The supply system was responding to FEMA, he said. “I couldn’t tell you when my next delivery was coming in.”

According to a recent ProPublica report, the VA has tried other means to acquire PPE, with limited success. The VA contracted to pay $34.5 million for 6 million N95 respirators, a 350% markup on the normal cost of the masks. Unfortunately, even at that price, the contractor received higher bids for the masks and the VA ended up cancelling the contract.

In an effort to reassure veterans and employees, the VA issued a press release insisting that it had stable and “sufficient” supplies on May 13. According to the release, the VA had on hand “the capacity to take in 12,215 critical and non-critical patients,” and its occupancy rates “remain steady at 35-40% nationwide in both acute care and intensive care units (ICUs).” The release also asserted that the “VA’s stock of medical supplies remains robust with millions of N95 masks on hand,” and 1,943 ICU ventilators.

No one really knows how long the COVID-19 pandemic will endure, and it’s highly likely personal protective equipment (PPE) will be a pressing priority for months to come. Ensuring supplies has become a creative endeavor, with new partnerships forming to fill gaps.

The US Department of Defense (DoD), for instance, has signed a $126 million contract with 3M to produce 26 million N95 masks per month, starting in October, according to DoD spokesperson Lt. Col. Mike Andrews. 3M will expedite design, procurement, production facilities, and equipment to increase respirator production by at least 312 million annually within the next 12 months. The company is ramping up: It has already placed orders for raw material and 2 new N95 manufacturing lines, in addition to beginning initial production in Wisconsin and expanding a facility in South Dakota.

The project, funded through the CARES Act, is spearheaded by the Joint Acquisition Task Force, which serves as the DoD’s overarching framework for acquisition support.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) also has a new procurement partner: New Hampshire. The state’s leadership, community business leaders and the VA Secretary’s Center for Strategic Partnerships secured millions of masks for VA workforce nationwide.

“Once again, New Hampshire stands out as a leader in our nation for its collaborative nature benefiting veterans,” said Acting VA Deputy Secretary Pamela Powers. “Governor Sununu and Dean Kamen [a New Hampshire-based inventor] made it possible for VA to purchase 4.5 million masks…. Having these additional resources is truly incredible and on behalf of the department, I offer our sincere gratitude.”

A FedEx cargo plane stocked with 110,000 pounds of PPE landed at Manchester Airport, the third such shipment to arrive in the state. “It is a tribute to our state that we were more aggressive and proactive in our approach to readiness from the get-go,” said Maj. Gen. David J. Mikolaities, the adjutant general of the New Hampshire Army National Guard, which stood ready to support deployment of the new supplies. “We didn’t wait for the need to occur; we secured the supplies so when and if the demand hits we’d be ready with our PPE distribution.”

The need has been getting stronger. More than 1,300 VA employees have tested positive for COVID-19 according to the VA, and 28 are reported to have died. The cases span 114 VA facilities, but with infections affecting less than 1% of the VA health care workforce, the rate is lower at VA than at several large health care systems, including a 4.4% infection rate at University of Washington Medicine and 2.1% of the Detroit-based Henry Ford Health System.

VA nurses and other hospital employees had been warning for weeks that they did not have enough protective gear. Although VA officials denied this, an April 16 memo sent to network directors by the VA's deputy under secretary for health for operations and management indicated the agency was implementing conservation procedures to stretch supplies.

According to The Washington Post, some of those conservation measures were necessary because FEMA had diverted millions of masks and other PPE that VA had ordered away from the department. In a Post interview, Richard Stone, MD, VHA Executive in Charge, acknowledged that he’d been forced to move to “austerity levels” at some hospitals. (At some facilities, VA employees were provided with one surgical mask per week and N95s were reportedly nearly impossible to find.)

Stone said FEMA had directed vendors with equipment on order from VA to instead send it to FEMA to replenish the government’s rapidly depleting emergency stockpile: “I had 5 million masks incoming that disappeared.” At the time, Stone told the Post, the VA’s four-week supply of equipment was almost gone, and the system was burning through about 200,000 masks in a day. The supply system was responding to FEMA, he said. “I couldn’t tell you when my next delivery was coming in.”

According to a recent ProPublica report, the VA has tried other means to acquire PPE, with limited success. The VA contracted to pay $34.5 million for 6 million N95 respirators, a 350% markup on the normal cost of the masks. Unfortunately, even at that price, the contractor received higher bids for the masks and the VA ended up cancelling the contract.

In an effort to reassure veterans and employees, the VA issued a press release insisting that it had stable and “sufficient” supplies on May 13. According to the release, the VA had on hand “the capacity to take in 12,215 critical and non-critical patients,” and its occupancy rates “remain steady at 35-40% nationwide in both acute care and intensive care units (ICUs).” The release also asserted that the “VA’s stock of medical supplies remains robust with millions of N95 masks on hand,” and 1,943 ICU ventilators.

In early March, 35 residents in the Life Care Center in Kirkland, Washington, died due to complications associated with COVID-19. And that facility thus became the first example of how extremely vulnerable nursing home residents are to COVID-19. Since then, around the US, thousands of nursing home residents have died from complications of the virus. US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing homes, while rated high in VA health inspection reports, have not been exempt.

As of April 21, the VA had confirmed > 5,500 coronavirus cases in 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. More than 350 veterans have died of COVID-19, according to VA data. The VA calculates its rates by health care system or VA medical center and does not provide separate data for the community living centers (CLCs).

The VA initiated an isolation strategy on March 10 that suspended most new admissions and barred outsiders from all of its 134 nursing homes. The only exception to the rule was when a patient was expected to die soon. The VA has taken other precautions as well, including extra screening and directing patients to use telehealth where possible.

State-run long-term care facilities for veterans have been hard hit across the country. At the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke, Massachusetts, which is run by the state of Massachusetts, 5 of 11 veterans who died recently tested positive for COVID-19. At the 4 state-run nursing homes in Alabama, as of April 14, 45 people were confirmed positive and 2 residents had died. The largest outbreak was in the Bill Nichols State Veterans Home in Alexander City. Alabama State Rep. Ed Oliver and Commissioner Kent Davis, of the Alabama Department of Veterans Affairs (ADVA), are looking into how the outbreak started and whether it could have been prevented. “We have reports of lack of hand sanitizers, and those are the things we’re looking at right now,” Rep. Oliver said. The ADVA says residents who test positive are isolated for treatment, and infected employees are prohibited from entering the homes.

States have deployed National Guard troops to facilities following large scale outbreaks and multiple deaths. Pennsylvania deployed 30 National Guard troops to its Southeastern Veterans Center facility in Spring City after at least 10 veterans had died and at least 19 health care workers had tested positive for the virus. The facility is 1 of 6 extended-care facilities run by the Pennsylvania Department of Military and Veterans Affairs. In New Jersey, 40 National Guard troops, 25 New Jersey Department of Health nurses, and 90 VA nurses were deployed to 2 of its veterans facilities amid worsening outbreaks. At the Paramus facility, 155 residents had tested positive and 39 had died, and at the home in Edison, 86 veterans had tested positive and 25 died; 6 more died at a third state facility.

However, reporting remains inconsistent across many states and facilities. Only on April 19 did the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) order nursing home facilities to inform residents and families about COVID-19 cases inside. This followed similar orders in New Jersey, New York, California, Washington, and other states.

“Nursing homes have been ground zero for COVID-19,” said CMS Administrator Seema Verma in a written statement. “Nursing home reporting to the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] is a critical component of the go-forward national COVID-19 surveillance system and to efforts to reopen America.”

In early March, 35 residents in the Life Care Center in Kirkland, Washington, died due to complications associated with COVID-19. And that facility thus became the first example of how extremely vulnerable nursing home residents are to COVID-19. Since then, around the US, thousands of nursing home residents have died from complications of the virus. US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing homes, while rated high in VA health inspection reports, have not been exempt.

As of April 21, the VA had confirmed > 5,500 coronavirus cases in 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. More than 350 veterans have died of COVID-19, according to VA data. The VA calculates its rates by health care system or VA medical center and does not provide separate data for the community living centers (CLCs).

The VA initiated an isolation strategy on March 10 that suspended most new admissions and barred outsiders from all of its 134 nursing homes. The only exception to the rule was when a patient was expected to die soon. The VA has taken other precautions as well, including extra screening and directing patients to use telehealth where possible.

State-run long-term care facilities for veterans have been hard hit across the country. At the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke, Massachusetts, which is run by the state of Massachusetts, 5 of 11 veterans who died recently tested positive for COVID-19. At the 4 state-run nursing homes in Alabama, as of April 14, 45 people were confirmed positive and 2 residents had died. The largest outbreak was in the Bill Nichols State Veterans Home in Alexander City. Alabama State Rep. Ed Oliver and Commissioner Kent Davis, of the Alabama Department of Veterans Affairs (ADVA), are looking into how the outbreak started and whether it could have been prevented. “We have reports of lack of hand sanitizers, and those are the things we’re looking at right now,” Rep. Oliver said. The ADVA says residents who test positive are isolated for treatment, and infected employees are prohibited from entering the homes.

States have deployed National Guard troops to facilities following large scale outbreaks and multiple deaths. Pennsylvania deployed 30 National Guard troops to its Southeastern Veterans Center facility in Spring City after at least 10 veterans had died and at least 19 health care workers had tested positive for the virus. The facility is 1 of 6 extended-care facilities run by the Pennsylvania Department of Military and Veterans Affairs. In New Jersey, 40 National Guard troops, 25 New Jersey Department of Health nurses, and 90 VA nurses were deployed to 2 of its veterans facilities amid worsening outbreaks. At the Paramus facility, 155 residents had tested positive and 39 had died, and at the home in Edison, 86 veterans had tested positive and 25 died; 6 more died at a third state facility.

However, reporting remains inconsistent across many states and facilities. Only on April 19 did the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) order nursing home facilities to inform residents and families about COVID-19 cases inside. This followed similar orders in New Jersey, New York, California, Washington, and other states.

“Nursing homes have been ground zero for COVID-19,” said CMS Administrator Seema Verma in a written statement. “Nursing home reporting to the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] is a critical component of the go-forward national COVID-19 surveillance system and to efforts to reopen America.”

In early March, 35 residents in the Life Care Center in Kirkland, Washington, died due to complications associated with COVID-19. And that facility thus became the first example of how extremely vulnerable nursing home residents are to COVID-19. Since then, around the US, thousands of nursing home residents have died from complications of the virus. US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing homes, while rated high in VA health inspection reports, have not been exempt.

As of April 21, the VA had confirmed > 5,500 coronavirus cases in 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. More than 350 veterans have died of COVID-19, according to VA data. The VA calculates its rates by health care system or VA medical center and does not provide separate data for the community living centers (CLCs).

The VA initiated an isolation strategy on March 10 that suspended most new admissions and barred outsiders from all of its 134 nursing homes. The only exception to the rule was when a patient was expected to die soon. The VA has taken other precautions as well, including extra screening and directing patients to use telehealth where possible.

State-run long-term care facilities for veterans have been hard hit across the country. At the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke, Massachusetts, which is run by the state of Massachusetts, 5 of 11 veterans who died recently tested positive for COVID-19. At the 4 state-run nursing homes in Alabama, as of April 14, 45 people were confirmed positive and 2 residents had died. The largest outbreak was in the Bill Nichols State Veterans Home in Alexander City. Alabama State Rep. Ed Oliver and Commissioner Kent Davis, of the Alabama Department of Veterans Affairs (ADVA), are looking into how the outbreak started and whether it could have been prevented. “We have reports of lack of hand sanitizers, and those are the things we’re looking at right now,” Rep. Oliver said. The ADVA says residents who test positive are isolated for treatment, and infected employees are prohibited from entering the homes.

States have deployed National Guard troops to facilities following large scale outbreaks and multiple deaths. Pennsylvania deployed 30 National Guard troops to its Southeastern Veterans Center facility in Spring City after at least 10 veterans had died and at least 19 health care workers had tested positive for the virus. The facility is 1 of 6 extended-care facilities run by the Pennsylvania Department of Military and Veterans Affairs. In New Jersey, 40 National Guard troops, 25 New Jersey Department of Health nurses, and 90 VA nurses were deployed to 2 of its veterans facilities amid worsening outbreaks. At the Paramus facility, 155 residents had tested positive and 39 had died, and at the home in Edison, 86 veterans had tested positive and 25 died; 6 more died at a third state facility.

However, reporting remains inconsistent across many states and facilities. Only on April 19 did the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) order nursing home facilities to inform residents and families about COVID-19 cases inside. This followed similar orders in New Jersey, New York, California, Washington, and other states.

“Nursing homes have been ground zero for COVID-19,” said CMS Administrator Seema Verma in a written statement. “Nursing home reporting to the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] is a critical component of the go-forward national COVID-19 surveillance system and to efforts to reopen America.”

“All VA facilities are equipped with essential items and supplies, and we are continually monitoring the status of those items to ensure a robust supply chain,” US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Press Secretary Christina Noel insisted on April 14th. The problem? The Wall Street Journal had just reported that internal VA memos detailing concerns about shortages in personal protective equipment (PPE), including memos saying PPE rationing had begun, were circulating at the highest levels. Top VA officials, including Secretary Robert Wilkie, had been briefed several times on systemwide shortages, the memos indicated.

The department had about 2 weeks’ worth of masks on hand, the Journal said, according to a briefing made to Congress several days earlier.

One April 7, 2020 memo noted that the “United States is experiencing challenges procuring adequate supplies of [facemasks and N95 respirators] to protect Veterans Health Administration (VHA) staff” and suggested limiting access to PPE. “Mask supply levels in VHA do not support providing masks to all other employees not working directly with COVID-19 infected veterans,” the memo noted. The memo also recommended that one mask per day for health care workers involved in “screening program activities” and taking care of “COVID-19 positive patients not undergoing high risk procedures.” Even employees “performing high risk procedures or activities on suspect or confirmed COVID19 patients,” were recommended to “wear an N95 respirator for extended use with multiple COVID-19 patients.”

Secretary Wilkie conceded to the Wall Street Journal that,  “[W]e don’t have the supplies that we would have in an optimal situation, we have the supplies that we need as the [CDC] prescribes.”

The VA COVID-19 National Summary reported 5,468 positive cases of COVID-19 and 339 inpatient deaths on April 20. Although the rate of infection for veterans remains low—just .06% of veterans in the VHA system have tested positive—the 6.2% rate of death is higher than the US rate (4.6%) and nearly as high as the global rate. More than 1,600 employees at the VHA have tested positive for COVID-19, according to the VA, and 14 medical center employees had died of complications due to the virus.

The VA now appears to be increasing the number of health workers allotted protective masks. In an April 15 email, Executive in Charge Richard A. Stone, MD, sought to reassure VHA employees. “VA always had a contingency supply of PPE,” Stone explained. “However, when this crisis started to face every healthcare organization in the nation, it became more difficult to project our incoming supply chain. For this reason, and out of an abundance of caution, we implemented austerity measures to ensure that every person working with COVID-19 patients had the equipment they needed.”

According to Stone, the VA is now more confident in its supply chain. Under his direction “all employees in a community living center, spinal cord injury unit or inpatient mental health unit will receive one mask a day to support their duties. We will continue providing N95 masks to those directly in contact with COVID-19-positive patients.”

“Your safety is the most important thing to us – we need to protect you,” Stone insisted. “I give you my word that we are doing everything to help you continue to take care of our Veterans.

“All VA facilities are equipped with essential items and supplies, and we are continually monitoring the status of those items to ensure a robust supply chain,” US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Press Secretary Christina Noel insisted on April 14th. The problem? The Wall Street Journal had just reported that internal VA memos detailing concerns about shortages in personal protective equipment (PPE), including memos saying PPE rationing had begun, were circulating at the highest levels. Top VA officials, including Secretary Robert Wilkie, had been briefed several times on systemwide shortages, the memos indicated.

The department had about 2 weeks’ worth of masks on hand, the Journal said, according to a briefing made to Congress several days earlier.

One April 7, 2020 memo noted that the “United States is experiencing challenges procuring adequate supplies of [facemasks and N95 respirators] to protect Veterans Health Administration (VHA) staff” and suggested limiting access to PPE. “Mask supply levels in VHA do not support providing masks to all other employees not working directly with COVID-19 infected veterans,” the memo noted. The memo also recommended that one mask per day for health care workers involved in “screening program activities” and taking care of “COVID-19 positive patients not undergoing high risk procedures.” Even employees “performing high risk procedures or activities on suspect or confirmed COVID19 patients,” were recommended to “wear an N95 respirator for extended use with multiple COVID-19 patients.”

Secretary Wilkie conceded to the Wall Street Journal that,  “[W]e don’t have the supplies that we would have in an optimal situation, we have the supplies that we need as the [CDC] prescribes.”

The VA COVID-19 National Summary reported 5,468 positive cases of COVID-19 and 339 inpatient deaths on April 20. Although the rate of infection for veterans remains low—just .06% of veterans in the VHA system have tested positive—the 6.2% rate of death is higher than the US rate (4.6%) and nearly as high as the global rate. More than 1,600 employees at the VHA have tested positive for COVID-19, according to the VA, and 14 medical center employees had died of complications due to the virus.

The VA now appears to be increasing the number of health workers allotted protective masks. In an April 15 email, Executive in Charge Richard A. Stone, MD, sought to reassure VHA employees. “VA always had a contingency supply of PPE,” Stone explained. “However, when this crisis started to face every healthcare organization in the nation, it became more difficult to project our incoming supply chain. For this reason, and out of an abundance of caution, we implemented austerity measures to ensure that every person working with COVID-19 patients had the equipment they needed.”

According to Stone, the VA is now more confident in its supply chain. Under his direction “all employees in a community living center, spinal cord injury unit or inpatient mental health unit will receive one mask a day to support their duties. We will continue providing N95 masks to those directly in contact with COVID-19-positive patients.”

“Your safety is the most important thing to us – we need to protect you,” Stone insisted. “I give you my word that we are doing everything to help you continue to take care of our Veterans.

“All VA facilities are equipped with essential items and supplies, and we are continually monitoring the status of those items to ensure a robust supply chain,” US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Press Secretary Christina Noel insisted on April 14th. The problem? The Wall Street Journal had just reported that internal VA memos detailing concerns about shortages in personal protective equipment (PPE), including memos saying PPE rationing had begun, were circulating at the highest levels. Top VA officials, including Secretary Robert Wilkie, had been briefed several times on systemwide shortages, the memos indicated.

The department had about 2 weeks’ worth of masks on hand, the Journal said, according to a briefing made to Congress several days earlier.

One April 7, 2020 memo noted that the “United States is experiencing challenges procuring adequate supplies of [facemasks and N95 respirators] to protect Veterans Health Administration (VHA) staff” and suggested limiting access to PPE. “Mask supply levels in VHA do not support providing masks to all other employees not working directly with COVID-19 infected veterans,” the memo noted. The memo also recommended that one mask per day for health care workers involved in “screening program activities” and taking care of “COVID-19 positive patients not undergoing high risk procedures.” Even employees “performing high risk procedures or activities on suspect or confirmed COVID19 patients,” were recommended to “wear an N95 respirator for extended use with multiple COVID-19 patients.”

Secretary Wilkie conceded to the Wall Street Journal that,  “[W]e don’t have the supplies that we would have in an optimal situation, we have the supplies that we need as the [CDC] prescribes.”

The VA COVID-19 National Summary reported 5,468 positive cases of COVID-19 and 339 inpatient deaths on April 20. Although the rate of infection for veterans remains low—just .06% of veterans in the VHA system have tested positive—the 6.2% rate of death is higher than the US rate (4.6%) and nearly as high as the global rate. More than 1,600 employees at the VHA have tested positive for COVID-19, according to the VA, and 14 medical center employees had died of complications due to the virus.

The VA now appears to be increasing the number of health workers allotted protective masks. In an April 15 email, Executive in Charge Richard A. Stone, MD, sought to reassure VHA employees. “VA always had a contingency supply of PPE,” Stone explained. “However, when this crisis started to face every healthcare organization in the nation, it became more difficult to project our incoming supply chain. For this reason, and out of an abundance of caution, we implemented austerity measures to ensure that every person working with COVID-19 patients had the equipment they needed.”

According to Stone, the VA is now more confident in its supply chain. Under his direction “all employees in a community living center, spinal cord injury unit or inpatient mental health unit will receive one mask a day to support their duties. We will continue providing N95 masks to those directly in contact with COVID-19-positive patients.”

“Your safety is the most important thing to us – we need to protect you,” Stone insisted. “I give you my word that we are doing everything to help you continue to take care of our Veterans.

Hydroxychloroquine, which has been touted without definitive scientific support as a treatment for COVID-19 infection, has special significance for the millions of US military service members and veterans who served in Southwest Asia and other countries with endemic malaria: It’s a critical antimalarial drugs. It’s also needed for US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

On March 24, the VA Inspector General (IG) surveyed VA medical facilities to determine shortages in equipment as well as “antibiotics, sedatives, pain, and antiviral medications,” although there no known effective treatments for COVID-19. The OIG reported that 12 facilities indicated that they anticipated a shortage of medications, including hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, IV immunoglobulin, and nebulizer products in the next 14 to 28 days. Facilities in West Haven, CT; Martinsburg, WV; Baltimore, MD; Washington, DC; Durham, NC; Columbia, SC; Tampa, FL; Detroit, MI; Temple, TX; Oklahoma City, OK; Aurora, CO; Seattle, WA; and Phoenix, AZ, all indicated anticipated shortages. At least one facility explicitly worried about access to medications and supplies produced in China and concern about disrupted supply chains may have concerned other facilities as well.

Nevertheless, hydroxychloroquine was at the top of mind both OIG inspectors as well as Veterans Health Administration (VHA) officials. In a formal response to the OIG survey, the VHA asserted: “We object to OIG’s assertions that a 14-day supply of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine would have any merit. This is both inaccurate and irresponsible. There are active investigations into these drugs and many others, as discussed by Dr. Anthony Fauci. Yet no conclusions have been made on their effectiveness. To insist that a 14 days’ supply of these drugs is appropriate or not appropriate displays this dangerous lack of expertise on COVID-19 and Pandemic response.”

Hydroxychloroquine has been associated with serious adverse effects, such as cardiac arrhythmias and hypoglycemia, and its use against COVID-19 is based, so far, on thin evidence. It has shown promise in a laboratory setting against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and in small studies with patients. Nonetheless, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted limited emergency authorization for certain uses of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19. The rapid approval came apparently at the behest of the White House.

Former FDA leaders say the authorization has jeopardized research to learn the drugs’ real value in pandemic patients. They also charge that the decision undermines FDA’s scientific authority because it appears to be reacting to political advocacy. 

Despite the concerns, a run on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine has been underway. According to a March 20 blog post by Premier, a hospital purchasing organization, orders for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine jumped “dramatically” between March 1 and March 17, by 3,000% and 260%, respectively. Fortunately, these are older, relatively inexpensive oral drugs, Premier says, which means their manufacturing is “far less complicated” than for other drugs. To offer immediate help, Premier notes, drug makers such as Teva and Bayer have announced they will donate millions of tablets of the drugs to hospitals or the federal government for further testing.

Owing to “extraordinary public interest” in the off-label use of these drugs, numerous state boards of pharmacy have enacted emergency restrictions on the inappropriate dispensing of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, says the Quinism Foundation, a nonprofit organization that supports education and research on medical conditions caused by chloroquine and related drugs. And because of the very real potential for substitution of more dangerous quinolines (such as mefloquine) in place of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, the foundation recently called on state boards of pharmacy to enact uniform restrictions on the dispensing of all quinoline antimalarial drugs, with the understanding that any emergency use of any of these medications for public health purposes as attempted pandemic countermeasures would be best coordinated nationally through distribution from the Strategic National Stockpile.

In the meantime, research into hydroxychloroquine’s effectiveness is ongoing. “Coming at it from every angle”—that’s how Terry Welch, spokesman for the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research told Task & Purpose the Army is “leveraging specific competencies” to attack the COVID-19 problem. Among other things, WRAIR’s Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch (EIDB) is working to develop a vaccine against COVID-19 infection, including several versions of a novel vaccine candidate that has been tested in humans. WRAIR has also been conducting research into novel treatments, such as drug candidates similar to those successfully developed to treat malaria, and monoclonal antibodies.

WRAI was able to start its anti-COVID-19 research in early January—directly on the heels of the first reported cases of infection—because of the Institute’s history of researching related viruses. “If we hadn’t done that, we’d be weeks behind,” said Dr. Kayvon Modjarrad, director of EIDB.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has also begun a clinical trial, the Outcomes Related to COVID-19 treated with hydroxychloroquine among in-patients with symptomatic Diseases (ORCHID) study. The study will enroll more than 500 adults who are hospitalized with COVID-19 or in an emergency department awaiting hospitalization. All patients will continue to receive clinical care; some will be randomly assigned to also receive hydroxychloroquine. The first participants have been enrolled at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, in Nashville, one of the centers in the Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury (PETAL) Network.

In the “urgent race to find effective therapies,” NIH also launched the first clinical trial in the US to evaluate remdesivir, a broad-spectrum antiviral, as a potential treatment for COVID-19.  The trial, which started March 6 at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, is expected to conclude in May. Clinical trials of remdesivir have been ongoing in China, where the virus originated. The NIH study “takes into account” those trial designs. 

Many US hospitals are already using hydroxychloroquine as first-line therapy for COVID-19 patients, despite the lack of supportive clinical evidence. Wesley Self, MD, MPH, lead investigator in the ORCHID trial, says “[D]ata on hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 are urgently needed to inform clinical practice.”

Not only research is needed, but clear expression of the facts about the drugs. In March, shortly after the president began lauding hydroxychloroquine, a Phoenix man died of cardiac arrest and his wife ended up in critical care after they misguidedly ingested chloroquine phosphate, a chemical used to clean fish tanks.  “[W]e understand that people are trying to find new ways to prevent or treat this virus,” said Dr. Daniel Brooks, medical director of the Banner Poison and Drug Information Center in Phoenix, “but self-medicating is not the way to do so.”

Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and one of the main spokespersons for science in the hydroxychloroquine debate, has continued to try to make his concerns clear: “I think we’ve got to be careful that we don’t make that majestic leap to assume this is a knockout drug,” he said in late March. “We still need to do the kinds of studies that definitively prove whether any intervention—not just this one, any intervention—is truly safe and effective.”

Hydroxychloroquine, which has been touted without definitive scientific support as a treatment for COVID-19 infection, has special significance for the millions of US military service members and veterans who served in Southwest Asia and other countries with endemic malaria: It’s a critical antimalarial drugs. It’s also needed for US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

On March 24, the VA Inspector General (IG) surveyed VA medical facilities to determine shortages in equipment as well as “antibiotics, sedatives, pain, and antiviral medications,” although there no known effective treatments for COVID-19. The OIG reported that 12 facilities indicated that they anticipated a shortage of medications, including hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, IV immunoglobulin, and nebulizer products in the next 14 to 28 days. Facilities in West Haven, CT; Martinsburg, WV; Baltimore, MD; Washington, DC; Durham, NC; Columbia, SC; Tampa, FL; Detroit, MI; Temple, TX; Oklahoma City, OK; Aurora, CO; Seattle, WA; and Phoenix, AZ, all indicated anticipated shortages. At least one facility explicitly worried about access to medications and supplies produced in China and concern about disrupted supply chains may have concerned other facilities as well.

Nevertheless, hydroxychloroquine was at the top of mind both OIG inspectors as well as Veterans Health Administration (VHA) officials. In a formal response to the OIG survey, the VHA asserted: “We object to OIG’s assertions that a 14-day supply of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine would have any merit. This is both inaccurate and irresponsible. There are active investigations into these drugs and many others, as discussed by Dr. Anthony Fauci. Yet no conclusions have been made on their effectiveness. To insist that a 14 days’ supply of these drugs is appropriate or not appropriate displays this dangerous lack of expertise on COVID-19 and Pandemic response.”

Hydroxychloroquine has been associated with serious adverse effects, such as cardiac arrhythmias and hypoglycemia, and its use against COVID-19 is based, so far, on thin evidence. It has shown promise in a laboratory setting against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and in small studies with patients. Nonetheless, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted limited emergency authorization for certain uses of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19. The rapid approval came apparently at the behest of the White House.

Former FDA leaders say the authorization has jeopardized research to learn the drugs’ real value in pandemic patients. They also charge that the decision undermines FDA’s scientific authority because it appears to be reacting to political advocacy. 

Despite the concerns, a run on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine has been underway. According to a March 20 blog post by Premier, a hospital purchasing organization, orders for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine jumped “dramatically” between March 1 and March 17, by 3,000% and 260%, respectively. Fortunately, these are older, relatively inexpensive oral drugs, Premier says, which means their manufacturing is “far less complicated” than for other drugs. To offer immediate help, Premier notes, drug makers such as Teva and Bayer have announced they will donate millions of tablets of the drugs to hospitals or the federal government for further testing.

Owing to “extraordinary public interest” in the off-label use of these drugs, numerous state boards of pharmacy have enacted emergency restrictions on the inappropriate dispensing of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, says the Quinism Foundation, a nonprofit organization that supports education and research on medical conditions caused by chloroquine and related drugs. And because of the very real potential for substitution of more dangerous quinolines (such as mefloquine) in place of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, the foundation recently called on state boards of pharmacy to enact uniform restrictions on the dispensing of all quinoline antimalarial drugs, with the understanding that any emergency use of any of these medications for public health purposes as attempted pandemic countermeasures would be best coordinated nationally through distribution from the Strategic National Stockpile.

In the meantime, research into hydroxychloroquine’s effectiveness is ongoing. “Coming at it from every angle”—that’s how Terry Welch, spokesman for the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research told Task & Purpose the Army is “leveraging specific competencies” to attack the COVID-19 problem. Among other things, WRAIR’s Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch (EIDB) is working to develop a vaccine against COVID-19 infection, including several versions of a novel vaccine candidate that has been tested in humans. WRAIR has also been conducting research into novel treatments, such as drug candidates similar to those successfully developed to treat malaria, and monoclonal antibodies.

WRAI was able to start its anti-COVID-19 research in early January—directly on the heels of the first reported cases of infection—because of the Institute’s history of researching related viruses. “If we hadn’t done that, we’d be weeks behind,” said Dr. Kayvon Modjarrad, director of EIDB.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has also begun a clinical trial, the Outcomes Related to COVID-19 treated with hydroxychloroquine among in-patients with symptomatic Diseases (ORCHID) study. The study will enroll more than 500 adults who are hospitalized with COVID-19 or in an emergency department awaiting hospitalization. All patients will continue to receive clinical care; some will be randomly assigned to also receive hydroxychloroquine. The first participants have been enrolled at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, in Nashville, one of the centers in the Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury (PETAL) Network.

In the “urgent race to find effective therapies,” NIH also launched the first clinical trial in the US to evaluate remdesivir, a broad-spectrum antiviral, as a potential treatment for COVID-19.  The trial, which started March 6 at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, is expected to conclude in May. Clinical trials of remdesivir have been ongoing in China, where the virus originated. The NIH study “takes into account” those trial designs. 

Many US hospitals are already using hydroxychloroquine as first-line therapy for COVID-19 patients, despite the lack of supportive clinical evidence. Wesley Self, MD, MPH, lead investigator in the ORCHID trial, says “[D]ata on hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 are urgently needed to inform clinical practice.”

Not only research is needed, but clear expression of the facts about the drugs. In March, shortly after the president began lauding hydroxychloroquine, a Phoenix man died of cardiac arrest and his wife ended up in critical care after they misguidedly ingested chloroquine phosphate, a chemical used to clean fish tanks.  “[W]e understand that people are trying to find new ways to prevent or treat this virus,” said Dr. Daniel Brooks, medical director of the Banner Poison and Drug Information Center in Phoenix, “but self-medicating is not the way to do so.”

Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and one of the main spokespersons for science in the hydroxychloroquine debate, has continued to try to make his concerns clear: “I think we’ve got to be careful that we don’t make that majestic leap to assume this is a knockout drug,” he said in late March. “We still need to do the kinds of studies that definitively prove whether any intervention—not just this one, any intervention—is truly safe and effective.”

Hydroxychloroquine, which has been touted without definitive scientific support as a treatment for COVID-19 infection, has special significance for the millions of US military service members and veterans who served in Southwest Asia and other countries with endemic malaria: It’s a critical antimalarial drugs. It’s also needed for US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

On March 24, the VA Inspector General (IG) surveyed VA medical facilities to determine shortages in equipment as well as “antibiotics, sedatives, pain, and antiviral medications,” although there no known effective treatments for COVID-19. The OIG reported that 12 facilities indicated that they anticipated a shortage of medications, including hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, IV immunoglobulin, and nebulizer products in the next 14 to 28 days. Facilities in West Haven, CT; Martinsburg, WV; Baltimore, MD; Washington, DC; Durham, NC; Columbia, SC; Tampa, FL; Detroit, MI; Temple, TX; Oklahoma City, OK; Aurora, CO; Seattle, WA; and Phoenix, AZ, all indicated anticipated shortages. At least one facility explicitly worried about access to medications and supplies produced in China and concern about disrupted supply chains may have concerned other facilities as well.

Nevertheless, hydroxychloroquine was at the top of mind both OIG inspectors as well as Veterans Health Administration (VHA) officials. In a formal response to the OIG survey, the VHA asserted: “We object to OIG’s assertions that a 14-day supply of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine would have any merit. This is both inaccurate and irresponsible. There are active investigations into these drugs and many others, as discussed by Dr. Anthony Fauci. Yet no conclusions have been made on their effectiveness. To insist that a 14 days’ supply of these drugs is appropriate or not appropriate displays this dangerous lack of expertise on COVID-19 and Pandemic response.”

Hydroxychloroquine has been associated with serious adverse effects, such as cardiac arrhythmias and hypoglycemia, and its use against COVID-19 is based, so far, on thin evidence. It has shown promise in a laboratory setting against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and in small studies with patients. Nonetheless, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted limited emergency authorization for certain uses of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19. The rapid approval came apparently at the behest of the White House.

Former FDA leaders say the authorization has jeopardized research to learn the drugs’ real value in pandemic patients. They also charge that the decision undermines FDA’s scientific authority because it appears to be reacting to political advocacy. 

Despite the concerns, a run on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine has been underway. According to a March 20 blog post by Premier, a hospital purchasing organization, orders for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine jumped “dramatically” between March 1 and March 17, by 3,000% and 260%, respectively. Fortunately, these are older, relatively inexpensive oral drugs, Premier says, which means their manufacturing is “far less complicated” than for other drugs. To offer immediate help, Premier notes, drug makers such as Teva and Bayer have announced they will donate millions of tablets of the drugs to hospitals or the federal government for further testing.

Owing to “extraordinary public interest” in the off-label use of these drugs, numerous state boards of pharmacy have enacted emergency restrictions on the inappropriate dispensing of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, says the Quinism Foundation, a nonprofit organization that supports education and research on medical conditions caused by chloroquine and related drugs. And because of the very real potential for substitution of more dangerous quinolines (such as mefloquine) in place of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, the foundation recently called on state boards of pharmacy to enact uniform restrictions on the dispensing of all quinoline antimalarial drugs, with the understanding that any emergency use of any of these medications for public health purposes as attempted pandemic countermeasures would be best coordinated nationally through distribution from the Strategic National Stockpile.

In the meantime, research into hydroxychloroquine’s effectiveness is ongoing. “Coming at it from every angle”—that’s how Terry Welch, spokesman for the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research told Task & Purpose the Army is “leveraging specific competencies” to attack the COVID-19 problem. Among other things, WRAIR’s Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch (EIDB) is working to develop a vaccine against COVID-19 infection, including several versions of a novel vaccine candidate that has been tested in humans. WRAIR has also been conducting research into novel treatments, such as drug candidates similar to those successfully developed to treat malaria, and monoclonal antibodies.

WRAI was able to start its anti-COVID-19 research in early January—directly on the heels of the first reported cases of infection—because of the Institute’s history of researching related viruses. “If we hadn’t done that, we’d be weeks behind,” said Dr. Kayvon Modjarrad, director of EIDB.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has also begun a clinical trial, the Outcomes Related to COVID-19 treated with hydroxychloroquine among in-patients with symptomatic Diseases (ORCHID) study. The study will enroll more than 500 adults who are hospitalized with COVID-19 or in an emergency department awaiting hospitalization. All patients will continue to receive clinical care; some will be randomly assigned to also receive hydroxychloroquine. The first participants have been enrolled at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, in Nashville, one of the centers in the Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury (PETAL) Network.

In the “urgent race to find effective therapies,” NIH also launched the first clinical trial in the US to evaluate remdesivir, a broad-spectrum antiviral, as a potential treatment for COVID-19.  The trial, which started March 6 at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, is expected to conclude in May. Clinical trials of remdesivir have been ongoing in China, where the virus originated. The NIH study “takes into account” those trial designs. 

Many US hospitals are already using hydroxychloroquine as first-line therapy for COVID-19 patients, despite the lack of supportive clinical evidence. Wesley Self, MD, MPH, lead investigator in the ORCHID trial, says “[D]ata on hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 are urgently needed to inform clinical practice.”

Not only research is needed, but clear expression of the facts about the drugs. In March, shortly after the president began lauding hydroxychloroquine, a Phoenix man died of cardiac arrest and his wife ended up in critical care after they misguidedly ingested chloroquine phosphate, a chemical used to clean fish tanks.  “[W]e understand that people are trying to find new ways to prevent or treat this virus,” said Dr. Daniel Brooks, medical director of the Banner Poison and Drug Information Center in Phoenix, “but self-medicating is not the way to do so.”

Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and one of the main spokespersons for science in the hydroxychloroquine debate, has continued to try to make his concerns clear: “I think we’ve got to be careful that we don’t make that majestic leap to assume this is a knockout drug,” he said in late March. “We still need to do the kinds of studies that definitively prove whether any intervention—not just this one, any intervention—is truly safe and effective.”

Updated April 2, 2020.

The commander of a US Navy aircraft carrier in the midst of a COVID-19 outbreak was swiftly fired by Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly following media coverage of the plight of more than 200 COVID-19 positive sailors on the USS Theodore Roosevelt.

In a statement released April 2, Modly announced the removal of Capt. Brett Crozier for writing a memo that was later leaked to the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper. According to Acting Secretary Modly, the memo was sent “outside the chain of command” and his action “made his Sailors, their families, and many in the public believe that his letter was the only reason help from our larger Navy family was forthcoming, which was hardly the case.”

On Monday, March 30, Capt. Crozier, commanding officer of the nuclear aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt, sent an urgent request for assistance to senior Navy officials: “[I]n combat we are willing to take certain risks that are not acceptable in peacetime. However, we are not at war, and therefore cannot allow a single Sailor to perish as a result of this pandemic unnecessarily. Decisive action is required now in order to comply with CDC and NAVADMIN 083/20 guidance and prevent tragic outcomes.”

Even as a number of cruise ships with ill and dying passengers were—are—waiting to be allowed to dock in Florida and elsewhere, the USS Theodore Roosevelt was also dealing with a COVID-19 outbreak onboard—and awaiting permission to let the crew of more than 4,000 on shore so they could quarantine safely.

Crozier pointed to “lessons learned” from the Diamond Princess—the only comparable situation at the time. He quoted from the abstract to an epidemiological research study: An index case on board the cruise ship was reported in late January; a month later, 619 of 3,700 passengers and crew had tested positive. Without any interventions, the abstract noted, between January 21st and February 19th an estimated 2,920 of the passengers would have been infected. Isolation and quarantine, it concluded, prevented 2,307 cases. Further, an early evacuation would have been associated with 76 infected persons.

The Diamond Princess, Crozier wrote, was able to more effectively isolate people due to a higher percentage of individual and compartmentalized accommodations. However, due to a warship’s “inherent limitations of space,” his crew could not comply with orders to practice social distancing. “With the exceptions of a handful of senior officer staterooms,” he wrote, “none of the berthing onboard a warship is appropriate for quarantine or isolation.” He also pointed to other obstacles: shared bathrooms, shared sleeping quarters, group mealtimes, and ladders and other surfaces touched and possibly contaminated as crew move around the ship.

Moreover, Crozier wrote, “The spread of the disease is ongoing and accelerating.” By Tuesday March 31st, nearly 1,300 sailors had been tested, and hundreds were testing negative, but 243 sailors had tested positive and 87 more were showing symptoms, according to the latest reports. So far, none are showing serious symptoms.

“If we do not act now, we are failing to take care of our most trusted asset—our sailors,” Capt Crozier wrote. At first, no one seemed to be listening, but after the Chronicle broke the story and it began circulating in the media—things changed. “I heard about the letter from Capt. Crozier [Tuesday] morning,” said Acting Secretary Modly in an interview with the Chronicle. “I know that our command organization has been aware of this for about 24 hours and we have been working actually the last 7 days to move those sailors off the ship and get them into accommodations in Guam. The problem is that Guam doesn’t have enough beds right now and we’re having to talk to the government there to see if we can get some hotel space, create tent-type facilities.”

He noted that the situation for the USS Theodore Roosevelt is “a little bit different and unique” in that it has aircraft and armaments on it, fire hazards, and “we have to run a nuclear power plant.” Crozier had proposed that approximately 10% of the crew remain on board to take care of the duties such as tending to the nuclear reactor.

As of April 1, the Navy plans to remove some 2,700 sailors to the hotel rooms government officials on Guam have secured for them. Secretary Modly made no mention of the care or treatment of infected sailors in his April 2nd statement, but offered this reassurance: "You can offer comfort to your fellow citizens who are struggling and fearful here at home by standing the watch, and working your way through this pandemic with courage and optimism and set the example for the nation. We have an obligation to ensure you have everything you need as fast as we can get it there, and you have my commitment that we will not let you down."

Updated April 2, 2020.

The commander of a US Navy aircraft carrier in the midst of a COVID-19 outbreak was swiftly fired by Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly following media coverage of the plight of more than 200 COVID-19 positive sailors on the USS Theodore Roosevelt.

In a statement released April 2, Modly announced the removal of Capt. Brett Crozier for writing a memo that was later leaked to the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper. According to Acting Secretary Modly, the memo was sent “outside the chain of command” and his action “made his Sailors, their families, and many in the public believe that his letter was the only reason help from our larger Navy family was forthcoming, which was hardly the case.”

On Monday, March 30, Capt. Crozier, commanding officer of the nuclear aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt, sent an urgent request for assistance to senior Navy officials: “[I]n combat we are willing to take certain risks that are not acceptable in peacetime. However, we are not at war, and therefore cannot allow a single Sailor to perish as a result of this pandemic unnecessarily. Decisive action is required now in order to comply with CDC and NAVADMIN 083/20 guidance and prevent tragic outcomes.”

Even as a number of cruise ships with ill and dying passengers were—are—waiting to be allowed to dock in Florida and elsewhere, the USS Theodore Roosevelt was also dealing with a COVID-19 outbreak onboard—and awaiting permission to let the crew of more than 4,000 on shore so they could quarantine safely.

Crozier pointed to “lessons learned” from the Diamond Princess—the only comparable situation at the time. He quoted from the abstract to an epidemiological research study: An index case on board the cruise ship was reported in late January; a month later, 619 of 3,700 passengers and crew had tested positive. Without any interventions, the abstract noted, between January 21st and February 19th an estimated 2,920 of the passengers would have been infected. Isolation and quarantine, it concluded, prevented 2,307 cases. Further, an early evacuation would have been associated with 76 infected persons.

The Diamond Princess, Crozier wrote, was able to more effectively isolate people due to a higher percentage of individual and compartmentalized accommodations. However, due to a warship’s “inherent limitations of space,” his crew could not comply with orders to practice social distancing. “With the exceptions of a handful of senior officer staterooms,” he wrote, “none of the berthing onboard a warship is appropriate for quarantine or isolation.” He also pointed to other obstacles: shared bathrooms, shared sleeping quarters, group mealtimes, and ladders and other surfaces touched and possibly contaminated as crew move around the ship.

Moreover, Crozier wrote, “The spread of the disease is ongoing and accelerating.” By Tuesday March 31st, nearly 1,300 sailors had been tested, and hundreds were testing negative, but 243 sailors had tested positive and 87 more were showing symptoms, according to the latest reports. So far, none are showing serious symptoms.

“If we do not act now, we are failing to take care of our most trusted asset—our sailors,” Capt Crozier wrote. At first, no one seemed to be listening, but after the Chronicle broke the story and it began circulating in the media—things changed. “I heard about the letter from Capt. Crozier [Tuesday] morning,” said Acting Secretary Modly in an interview with the Chronicle. “I know that our command organization has been aware of this for about 24 hours and we have been working actually the last 7 days to move those sailors off the ship and get them into accommodations in Guam. The problem is that Guam doesn’t have enough beds right now and we’re having to talk to the government there to see if we can get some hotel space, create tent-type facilities.”

He noted that the situation for the USS Theodore Roosevelt is “a little bit different and unique” in that it has aircraft and armaments on it, fire hazards, and “we have to run a nuclear power plant.” Crozier had proposed that approximately 10% of the crew remain on board to take care of the duties such as tending to the nuclear reactor.

As of April 1, the Navy plans to remove some 2,700 sailors to the hotel rooms government officials on Guam have secured for them. Secretary Modly made no mention of the care or treatment of infected sailors in his April 2nd statement, but offered this reassurance: "You can offer comfort to your fellow citizens who are struggling and fearful here at home by standing the watch, and working your way through this pandemic with courage and optimism and set the example for the nation. We have an obligation to ensure you have everything you need as fast as we can get it there, and you have my commitment that we will not let you down."

Updated April 2, 2020.

The commander of a US Navy aircraft carrier in the midst of a COVID-19 outbreak was swiftly fired by Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly following media coverage of the plight of more than 200 COVID-19 positive sailors on the USS Theodore Roosevelt.

In a statement released April 2, Modly announced the removal of Capt. Brett Crozier for writing a memo that was later leaked to the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper. According to Acting Secretary Modly, the memo was sent “outside the chain of command” and his action “made his Sailors, their families, and many in the public believe that his letter was the only reason help from our larger Navy family was forthcoming, which was hardly the case.”

On Monday, March 30, Capt. Crozier, commanding officer of the nuclear aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt, sent an urgent request for assistance to senior Navy officials: “[I]n combat we are willing to take certain risks that are not acceptable in peacetime. However, we are not at war, and therefore cannot allow a single Sailor to perish as a result of this pandemic unnecessarily. Decisive action is required now in order to comply with CDC and NAVADMIN 083/20 guidance and prevent tragic outcomes.”

Even as a number of cruise ships with ill and dying passengers were—are—waiting to be allowed to dock in Florida and elsewhere, the USS Theodore Roosevelt was also dealing with a COVID-19 outbreak onboard—and awaiting permission to let the crew of more than 4,000 on shore so they could quarantine safely.

Crozier pointed to “lessons learned” from the Diamond Princess—the only comparable situation at the time. He quoted from the abstract to an epidemiological research study: An index case on board the cruise ship was reported in late January; a month later, 619 of 3,700 passengers and crew had tested positive. Without any interventions, the abstract noted, between January 21st and February 19th an estimated 2,920 of the passengers would have been infected. Isolation and quarantine, it concluded, prevented 2,307 cases. Further, an early evacuation would have been associated with 76 infected persons.

The Diamond Princess, Crozier wrote, was able to more effectively isolate people due to a higher percentage of individual and compartmentalized accommodations. However, due to a warship’s “inherent limitations of space,” his crew could not comply with orders to practice social distancing. “With the exceptions of a handful of senior officer staterooms,” he wrote, “none of the berthing onboard a warship is appropriate for quarantine or isolation.” He also pointed to other obstacles: shared bathrooms, shared sleeping quarters, group mealtimes, and ladders and other surfaces touched and possibly contaminated as crew move around the ship.

Moreover, Crozier wrote, “The spread of the disease is ongoing and accelerating.” By Tuesday March 31st, nearly 1,300 sailors had been tested, and hundreds were testing negative, but 243 sailors had tested positive and 87 more were showing symptoms, according to the latest reports. So far, none are showing serious symptoms.

“If we do not act now, we are failing to take care of our most trusted asset—our sailors,” Capt Crozier wrote. At first, no one seemed to be listening, but after the Chronicle broke the story and it began circulating in the media—things changed. “I heard about the letter from Capt. Crozier [Tuesday] morning,” said Acting Secretary Modly in an interview with the Chronicle. “I know that our command organization has been aware of this for about 24 hours and we have been working actually the last 7 days to move those sailors off the ship and get them into accommodations in Guam. The problem is that Guam doesn’t have enough beds right now and we’re having to talk to the government there to see if we can get some hotel space, create tent-type facilities.”

He noted that the situation for the USS Theodore Roosevelt is “a little bit different and unique” in that it has aircraft and armaments on it, fire hazards, and “we have to run a nuclear power plant.” Crozier had proposed that approximately 10% of the crew remain on board to take care of the duties such as tending to the nuclear reactor.

As of April 1, the Navy plans to remove some 2,700 sailors to the hotel rooms government officials on Guam have secured for them. Secretary Modly made no mention of the care or treatment of infected sailors in his April 2nd statement, but offered this reassurance: "You can offer comfort to your fellow citizens who are struggling and fearful here at home by standing the watch, and working your way through this pandemic with courage and optimism and set the example for the nation. We have an obligation to ensure you have everything you need as fast as we can get it there, and you have my commitment that we will not let you down."

The message everywhere is “stay home!” But what if staying home threatens your mental health? Veterans are a doubly vulnerable group these days—vulnerable both to the COVID-19 infection and to the mental stress that self-isolation can inflict. To help relieve that pressure and, in particular, to reach veterans who might not otherwise seek counseling and mental health support, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has been shifting some outpatient care to telehealth and deploying Mobile Vet Center units to coronavirus-crisis areas.

The VA received some money to beef up its telehealth system from the $2 trillion CARES (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security) Act relief package passed and signed last week: $14.4 billion to expand telehealth services and another $2.15 billion to expand coronavirus-related services, including the purchase of mHealth devices.

Several of the provisions in the CARES Act directly address the needs of rural and underserved veterans. For instance, the Act authorizes the VA to expand telemental health services and enter into short-term agreements with telecommunications companies to provide temporary broadband services to veterans, a critical need among rural residents who may be physically isolated from mental healthcare. The act also allows federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics, 2 types of facilities that serve rural and underserved populations, to be designated as distant sites for telehealth.

Between 2002, when telemental health services were launched, and 2019, veterans have worked with a counselor nearly 3 million times. In 2017, the VA says, psychiatric hospitalizations dropped 31%. Veterans have said they prefer videoconferencing over in-person therapy because they can are more at ease at home.

Using video telehealth, veterans can connect with care teams from anywhere—a safer alternative to traveling to appointments—using the camera on a phone, computer, or Apple or Android devices. Veterans also can use My HealtheVet’s secure messaging feature for non-urgent health questions. VA mental health professionals use both synchronous and asynchronous care: The first to connect patients to providers through a communication link, usually videoconferencing, the second to send data to specialists.

The current pandemic puts a strain on both patients and providers, but the Mobile Vet Centers may help relieve some of that strain. An extension of the VA’s brick-and-mortar Vet Centers, the mobile units provide a range of services, including individual, group, marriage, and family counseling. They also can refer active duty service members, veterans, and their families to VA care or other care facilities.

The mobile units are staffed by Vet Center employees who volunteer to deploy in emergencies, such as hurricanes and wildfires. The first units responding to the COVID-19 pandemic were dispatched to New York City, San Francisco, New Orleans, and Los Angeles.

“In times like this, it’s important to stand shoulder to shoulder with our local communities, support their local needs, and [assure] them they are not alone in navigating this crisis,” said Brooklyn Vet Center Director Gabe Botero.

Although the VA’s top priority remains keeping veterans safe while also making sure they receive the mental and physical healthcare they need , it has been criticized recently for “pausing” the Mission Act, which allows some veterans to get healthcare outside VA centers. The concern was that seeking outside care could expose veterans to the virus and potentially tax private health resources.

Government spokespeople have said the VA is not stopping or pausing the law, but “ensuring the best medical interests of America’s veterans are met.”

The message everywhere is “stay home!” But what if staying home threatens your mental health? Veterans are a doubly vulnerable group these days—vulnerable both to the COVID-19 infection and to the mental stress that self-isolation can inflict. To help relieve that pressure and, in particular, to reach veterans who might not otherwise seek counseling and mental health support, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has been shifting some outpatient care to telehealth and deploying Mobile Vet Center units to coronavirus-crisis areas.

The VA received some money to beef up its telehealth system from the $2 trillion CARES (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security) Act relief package passed and signed last week: $14.4 billion to expand telehealth services and another $2.15 billion to expand coronavirus-related services, including the purchase of mHealth devices.

Several of the provisions in the CARES Act directly address the needs of rural and underserved veterans. For instance, the Act authorizes the VA to expand telemental health services and enter into short-term agreements with telecommunications companies to provide temporary broadband services to veterans, a critical need among rural residents who may be physically isolated from mental healthcare. The act also allows federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics, 2 types of facilities that serve rural and underserved populations, to be designated as distant sites for telehealth.

Between 2002, when telemental health services were launched, and 2019, veterans have worked with a counselor nearly 3 million times. In 2017, the VA says, psychiatric hospitalizations dropped 31%. Veterans have said they prefer videoconferencing over in-person therapy because they can are more at ease at home.

Using video telehealth, veterans can connect with care teams from anywhere—a safer alternative to traveling to appointments—using the camera on a phone, computer, or Apple or Android devices. Veterans also can use My HealtheVet’s secure messaging feature for non-urgent health questions. VA mental health professionals use both synchronous and asynchronous care: The first to connect patients to providers through a communication link, usually videoconferencing, the second to send data to specialists.

The current pandemic puts a strain on both patients and providers, but the Mobile Vet Centers may help relieve some of that strain. An extension of the VA’s brick-and-mortar Vet Centers, the mobile units provide a range of services, including individual, group, marriage, and family counseling. They also can refer active duty service members, veterans, and their families to VA care or other care facilities.

The mobile units are staffed by Vet Center employees who volunteer to deploy in emergencies, such as hurricanes and wildfires. The first units responding to the COVID-19 pandemic were dispatched to New York City, San Francisco, New Orleans, and Los Angeles.

“In times like this, it’s important to stand shoulder to shoulder with our local communities, support their local needs, and [assure] them they are not alone in navigating this crisis,” said Brooklyn Vet Center Director Gabe Botero.

Although the VA’s top priority remains keeping veterans safe while also making sure they receive the mental and physical healthcare they need , it has been criticized recently for “pausing” the Mission Act, which allows some veterans to get healthcare outside VA centers. The concern was that seeking outside care could expose veterans to the virus and potentially tax private health resources.

Government spokespeople have said the VA is not stopping or pausing the law, but “ensuring the best medical interests of America’s veterans are met.”

The message everywhere is “stay home!” But what if staying home threatens your mental health? Veterans are a doubly vulnerable group these days—vulnerable both to the COVID-19 infection and to the mental stress that self-isolation can inflict. To help relieve that pressure and, in particular, to reach veterans who might not otherwise seek counseling and mental health support, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has been shifting some outpatient care to telehealth and deploying Mobile Vet Center units to coronavirus-crisis areas.

The VA received some money to beef up its telehealth system from the $2 trillion CARES (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security) Act relief package passed and signed last week: $14.4 billion to expand telehealth services and another $2.15 billion to expand coronavirus-related services, including the purchase of mHealth devices.

Several of the provisions in the CARES Act directly address the needs of rural and underserved veterans. For instance, the Act authorizes the VA to expand telemental health services and enter into short-term agreements with telecommunications companies to provide temporary broadband services to veterans, a critical need among rural residents who may be physically isolated from mental healthcare. The act also allows federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics, 2 types of facilities that serve rural and underserved populations, to be designated as distant sites for telehealth.

Between 2002, when telemental health services were launched, and 2019, veterans have worked with a counselor nearly 3 million times. In 2017, the VA says, psychiatric hospitalizations dropped 31%. Veterans have said they prefer videoconferencing over in-person therapy because they can are more at ease at home.

Using video telehealth, veterans can connect with care teams from anywhere—a safer alternative to traveling to appointments—using the camera on a phone, computer, or Apple or Android devices. Veterans also can use My HealtheVet’s secure messaging feature for non-urgent health questions. VA mental health professionals use both synchronous and asynchronous care: The first to connect patients to providers through a communication link, usually videoconferencing, the second to send data to specialists.

The current pandemic puts a strain on both patients and providers, but the Mobile Vet Centers may help relieve some of that strain. An extension of the VA’s brick-and-mortar Vet Centers, the mobile units provide a range of services, including individual, group, marriage, and family counseling. They also can refer active duty service members, veterans, and their families to VA care or other care facilities.

The mobile units are staffed by Vet Center employees who volunteer to deploy in emergencies, such as hurricanes and wildfires. The first units responding to the COVID-19 pandemic were dispatched to New York City, San Francisco, New Orleans, and Los Angeles.

“In times like this, it’s important to stand shoulder to shoulder with our local communities, support their local needs, and [assure] them they are not alone in navigating this crisis,” said Brooklyn Vet Center Director Gabe Botero.

Although the VA’s top priority remains keeping veterans safe while also making sure they receive the mental and physical healthcare they need , it has been criticized recently for “pausing” the Mission Act, which allows some veterans to get healthcare outside VA centers. The concern was that seeking outside care could expose veterans to the virus and potentially tax private health resources.

Government spokespeople have said the VA is not stopping or pausing the law, but “ensuring the best medical interests of America’s veterans are met.”

US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary Robert Wilkie is finding out what it means to be on wartime footing against a virus. He is overseeing the VA’s internal response to COVID-19 while deciding how to fulfil the VA’s fourth mission: providing reinforcement for the nation’s healthcare system in a national emergency. Meanwhile, he’s facing hostilities on a third front: criticism of his efforts so far.

In late February, when lawmakers asked whether the VA needed more resources to fight COVID-19, Wilkie said no. He told NPR on March 19 that “we are poised for the onslaught.” But on March 13, 2020, the VA was being attacked for not releasing a comprehensive emergency response to the incipient pandemic. Wilkie countered, “Before there was a single confirmed case in the US,” he wrote in a recent op-ed piece for Military Times, “the VA was already conducting emergency preparedness exercises.”

In the NPR interview, Wilkie said the VA had undertaken “a very aggressive public health response at an early stage.” Now, the VA has added other measures. The VA, he said, was the first health system to stop people from entering its facilities without being questioned or tested, and the first to adopt the “hard decision” of a no-visitor rule for veterans in nursing homes. Every veteran who comes to a VA facility with flu-like symptoms is screened. Further, via tweets and blog posts, Wilkie is “inviting” retired medical personnel back to work to help deal with the pandemic.

The VA is also the “buttress force,” Wilkie says, for the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the US Department of Health and Human Services if they need medical professionals for crises. “We plan for that every day,” he says. “We are gaming out emergency preparedness scenarios and we stand ready when the President needs us to expand our mission.” But in The American Prospect, Suzanne Gordon and Jasper Craven, both fellows at the Veterans Healthcare Policy Institute, write that “one quiet action is ominous”—the VA website has deleted any mention of the department’s credo of caring for civilians in times of crisis.

According to Gordon and Craven, on Wednesday Wilkie “came out of the woodwork” to express the department’s readiness to help in the crisis. The VA has established 19 emergency operations centers across the country, Wilkie says, and has stopped elective surgeries to free up thousands of beds. He touts the agency’s flexibility, saying it’s prepared to move resources around the country as needed. “Some veterans hospitals have not been impacted [by the virus],” Wilkie said. “So, I’m not going to keep 500 respirators in the middle of a state that has one veteran with the infection, when I can use that in Seattle or New Orleans, or New York City.”

Wilkie says the VA has stockpiled equipment and its supply chain is stable. However, in the NPR interview, Mary Louise Kelly said the NPR VA correspondent had been hearing complaints about lack of gear, such as masks. When pressed on his claim that the VA had adequate protective supplies, Wilkie said those complaints “have not reached us.” In fact, he said, “I can tell you that the arrangements that we have made on both the masks side and also on the testing side—we’re in a very good place.”

Nonetheless, on March 16, the employee unions representing nearly 350,000 VA healthcare workers issued a joint statement that called on VHA management to “work with us to ensure the nation’s VA health facilities can safely handle COVID-19.” It’s time, said Everett Kelley, National President of the American Federation of Government Employees, “for the VA to invite our members to the table, instead of kicking them off the property, so we can finally work together on a solution….”

“Instead of relaxing standards and efforts,” the unions said, “like we have seen the CDC do [in allowing healthcare workers to reuse facemasks and rely on simple surgical facemasks], “we need to be stepping it up.”

It all takes money. After weeks of debate, the US Senate has just released details of the $2 trillion coronavirus aid package. The US Department of Defense (DoD) seems about to get $10.5 billion in emergency funding and the VA another $19.6 billion. The money includes funding for National Guard deployments to help state governments respond to emerging health needs, the expansion of military hospitals and mobile medical centers if needed, and help with production of medical supplies. Nearly $16 billion will be used for direct care specifically in response to veterans’ health needs, covering treatment for COVID-19 in VA hospitals, community urgent care clinics and emergency departments; overtime for clinical staff; and purchase of protective equipment, tests, and other supplies.

Despite having one of the best telehealth systems in the US, the VA has also come under fire for its telehealth preparations to meet the current pandemic-related demand. Former VA Under Secretary of Health Kenneth Kizer wrote in an op-ed for Military Times, “Regrettably, so far, there is no coordinated strategy for ramping up and optimizing the use of telehealth to combat the growing epidemic in the US.” The relief package proposes $3 billion for new telemedicine efforts, including staffing and equipping mobile treatment sites.

In mid-March, the VA had 3,000 coronavirus test kits but still had not used roughly 90%, an article in Mother Jones charged. At a White house press conference around that time, Wilkie was asked how many veterans of those who needed to be tested had been. “We believe we’ve caught most of them,” he replied.

But that was in the early days of the crisis.

With results from the 322 tests administered by Mar. 18, the VA had confirmed five positive cases, was tracking 33 presumptive cases, and acknowledged the first veteran death linked to COVID-19. As of Mar. 26, the VA had administered roughly 7,500 COVID-19 tests nationwide.

Secretary Wilkie has promised that the department’s first focus will always be caring for veterans. In an interview with Military Times, he said, “We don’t release any beds if veterans are needing them. The veterans still are primary. We are a [health] bridge for the larger community, but that’s only after veterans are taken care of.”

US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary Robert Wilkie is finding out what it means to be on wartime footing against a virus. He is overseeing the VA’s internal response to COVID-19 while deciding how to fulfil the VA’s fourth mission: providing reinforcement for the nation’s healthcare system in a national emergency. Meanwhile, he’s facing hostilities on a third front: criticism of his efforts so far.

In late February, when lawmakers asked whether the VA needed more resources to fight COVID-19, Wilkie said no. He told NPR on March 19 that “we are poised for the onslaught.” But on March 13, 2020, the VA was being attacked for not releasing a comprehensive emergency response to the incipient pandemic. Wilkie countered, “Before there was a single confirmed case in the US,” he wrote in a recent op-ed piece for Military Times, “the VA was already conducting emergency preparedness exercises.”

In the NPR interview, Wilkie said the VA had undertaken “a very aggressive public health response at an early stage.” Now, the VA has added other measures. The VA, he said, was the first health system to stop people from entering its facilities without being questioned or tested, and the first to adopt the “hard decision” of a no-visitor rule for veterans in nursing homes. Every veteran who comes to a VA facility with flu-like symptoms is screened. Further, via tweets and blog posts, Wilkie is “inviting” retired medical personnel back to work to help deal with the pandemic.

The VA is also the “buttress force,” Wilkie says, for the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the US Department of Health and Human Services if they need medical professionals for crises. “We plan for that every day,” he says. “We are gaming out emergency preparedness scenarios and we stand ready when the President needs us to expand our mission.” But in The American Prospect, Suzanne Gordon and Jasper Craven, both fellows at the Veterans Healthcare Policy Institute, write that “one quiet action is ominous”—the VA website has deleted any mention of the department’s credo of caring for civilians in times of crisis.

According to Gordon and Craven, on Wednesday Wilkie “came out of the woodwork” to express the department’s readiness to help in the crisis. The VA has established 19 emergency operations centers across the country, Wilkie says, and has stopped elective surgeries to free up thousands of beds. He touts the agency’s flexibility, saying it’s prepared to move resources around the country as needed. “Some veterans hospitals have not been impacted [by the virus],” Wilkie said. “So, I’m not going to keep 500 respirators in the middle of a state that has one veteran with the infection, when I can use that in Seattle or New Orleans, or New York City.”

Wilkie says the VA has stockpiled equipment and its supply chain is stable. However, in the NPR interview, Mary Louise Kelly said the NPR VA correspondent had been hearing complaints about lack of gear, such as masks. When pressed on his claim that the VA had adequate protective supplies, Wilkie said those complaints “have not reached us.” In fact, he said, “I can tell you that the arrangements that we have made on both the masks side and also on the testing side—we’re in a very good place.”

Nonetheless, on March 16, the employee unions representing nearly 350,000 VA healthcare workers issued a joint statement that called on VHA management to “work with us to ensure the nation’s VA health facilities can safely handle COVID-19.” It’s time, said Everett Kelley, National President of the American Federation of Government Employees, “for the VA to invite our members to the table, instead of kicking them off the property, so we can finally work together on a solution….”

“Instead of relaxing standards and efforts,” the unions said, “like we have seen the CDC do [in allowing healthcare workers to reuse facemasks and rely on simple surgical facemasks], “we need to be stepping it up.”

It all takes money. After weeks of debate, the US Senate has just released details of the $2 trillion coronavirus aid package. The US Department of Defense (DoD) seems about to get $10.5 billion in emergency funding and the VA another $19.6 billion. The money includes funding for National Guard deployments to help state governments respond to emerging health needs, the expansion of military hospitals and mobile medical centers if needed, and help with production of medical supplies. Nearly $16 billion will be used for direct care specifically in response to veterans’ health needs, covering treatment for COVID-19 in VA hospitals, community urgent care clinics and emergency departments; overtime for clinical staff; and purchase of protective equipment, tests, and other supplies.

Despite having one of the best telehealth systems in the US, the VA has also come under fire for its telehealth preparations to meet the current pandemic-related demand. Former VA Under Secretary of Health Kenneth Kizer wrote in an op-ed for Military Times, “Regrettably, so far, there is no coordinated strategy for ramping up and optimizing the use of telehealth to combat the growing epidemic in the US.” The relief package proposes $3 billion for new telemedicine efforts, including staffing and equipping mobile treatment sites.

In mid-March, the VA had 3,000 coronavirus test kits but still had not used roughly 90%, an article in Mother Jones charged. At a White house press conference around that time, Wilkie was asked how many veterans of those who needed to be tested had been. “We believe we’ve caught most of them,” he replied.

But that was in the early days of the crisis.

With results from the 322 tests administered by Mar. 18, the VA had confirmed five positive cases, was tracking 33 presumptive cases, and acknowledged the first veteran death linked to COVID-19. As of Mar. 26, the VA had administered roughly 7,500 COVID-19 tests nationwide.

Secretary Wilkie has promised that the department’s first focus will always be caring for veterans. In an interview with Military Times, he said, “We don’t release any beds if veterans are needing them. The veterans still are primary. We are a [health] bridge for the larger community, but that’s only after veterans are taken care of.”

US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary Robert Wilkie is finding out what it means to be on wartime footing against a virus. He is overseeing the VA’s internal response to COVID-19 while deciding how to fulfil the VA’s fourth mission: providing reinforcement for the nation’s healthcare system in a national emergency. Meanwhile, he’s facing hostilities on a third front: criticism of his efforts so far.

In late February, when lawmakers asked whether the VA needed more resources to fight COVID-19, Wilkie said no. He told NPR on March 19 that “we are poised for the onslaught.” But on March 13, 2020, the VA was being attacked for not releasing a comprehensive emergency response to the incipient pandemic. Wilkie countered, “Before there was a single confirmed case in the US,” he wrote in a recent op-ed piece for Military Times, “the VA was already conducting emergency preparedness exercises.”

In the NPR interview, Wilkie said the VA had undertaken “a very aggressive public health response at an early stage.” Now, the VA has added other measures. The VA, he said, was the first health system to stop people from entering its facilities without being questioned or tested, and the first to adopt the “hard decision” of a no-visitor rule for veterans in nursing homes. Every veteran who comes to a VA facility with flu-like symptoms is screened. Further, via tweets and blog posts, Wilkie is “inviting” retired medical personnel back to work to help deal with the pandemic.

The VA is also the “buttress force,” Wilkie says, for the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the US Department of Health and Human Services if they need medical professionals for crises. “We plan for that every day,” he says. “We are gaming out emergency preparedness scenarios and we stand ready when the President needs us to expand our mission.” But in The American Prospect, Suzanne Gordon and Jasper Craven, both fellows at the Veterans Healthcare Policy Institute, write that “one quiet action is ominous”—the VA website has deleted any mention of the department’s credo of caring for civilians in times of crisis.

According to Gordon and Craven, on Wednesday Wilkie “came out of the woodwork” to express the department’s readiness to help in the crisis. The VA has established 19 emergency operations centers across the country, Wilkie says, and has stopped elective surgeries to free up thousands of beds. He touts the agency’s flexibility, saying it’s prepared to move resources around the country as needed. “Some veterans hospitals have not been impacted [by the virus],” Wilkie said. “So, I’m not going to keep 500 respirators in the middle of a state that has one veteran with the infection, when I can use that in Seattle or New Orleans, or New York City.”

Wilkie says the VA has stockpiled equipment and its supply chain is stable. However, in the NPR interview, Mary Louise Kelly said the NPR VA correspondent had been hearing complaints about lack of gear, such as masks. When pressed on his claim that the VA had adequate protective supplies, Wilkie said those complaints “have not reached us.” In fact, he said, “I can tell you that the arrangements that we have made on both the masks side and also on the testing side—we’re in a very good place.”

Nonetheless, on March 16, the employee unions representing nearly 350,000 VA healthcare workers issued a joint statement that called on VHA management to “work with us to ensure the nation’s VA health facilities can safely handle COVID-19.” It’s time, said Everett Kelley, National President of the American Federation of Government Employees, “for the VA to invite our members to the table, instead of kicking them off the property, so we can finally work together on a solution….”

“Instead of relaxing standards and efforts,” the unions said, “like we have seen the CDC do [in allowing healthcare workers to reuse facemasks and rely on simple surgical facemasks], “we need to be stepping it up.”

It all takes money. After weeks of debate, the US Senate has just released details of the $2 trillion coronavirus aid package. The US Department of Defense (DoD) seems about to get $10.5 billion in emergency funding and the VA another $19.6 billion. The money includes funding for National Guard deployments to help state governments respond to emerging health needs, the expansion of military hospitals and mobile medical centers if needed, and help with production of medical supplies. Nearly $16 billion will be used for direct care specifically in response to veterans’ health needs, covering treatment for COVID-19 in VA hospitals, community urgent care clinics and emergency departments; overtime for clinical staff; and purchase of protective equipment, tests, and other supplies.

Despite having one of the best telehealth systems in the US, the VA has also come under fire for its telehealth preparations to meet the current pandemic-related demand. Former VA Under Secretary of Health Kenneth Kizer wrote in an op-ed for Military Times, “Regrettably, so far, there is no coordinated strategy for ramping up and optimizing the use of telehealth to combat the growing epidemic in the US.” The relief package proposes $3 billion for new telemedicine efforts, including staffing and equipping mobile treatment sites.

In mid-March, the VA had 3,000 coronavirus test kits but still had not used roughly 90%, an article in Mother Jones charged. At a White house press conference around that time, Wilkie was asked how many veterans of those who needed to be tested had been. “We believe we’ve caught most of them,” he replied.

But that was in the early days of the crisis.

With results from the 322 tests administered by Mar. 18, the VA had confirmed five positive cases, was tracking 33 presumptive cases, and acknowledged the first veteran death linked to COVID-19. As of Mar. 26, the VA had administered roughly 7,500 COVID-19 tests nationwide.

Secretary Wilkie has promised that the department’s first focus will always be caring for veterans. In an interview with Military Times, he said, “We don’t release any beds if veterans are needing them. The veterans still are primary. We are a [health] bridge for the larger community, but that’s only after veterans are taken care of.”