All-cause mortality among Danish nursing home residents before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide cohort study.

A substantial part of mortality during the COVID-19-pandemic occurred among nursing home residents which caused alarm in many countries. We investigate nursing home mortality in relation to the expected mortality prior to the pandemic. This nationwide register-based study included all 135,501 Danish nursing home residents between 2015 until October 6, 2021. All-cause mortality rates were calculated using a standardization method on sex and age distribution of 2020. Survival probability and lifetime lost for 180 days was calculated using Kaplan Meier estimates. Of 3,587 COVID-19 related deaths, 1137 (32%) occurred among nursing home residents. The yearly all-cause mortality rates per 100,000 person-years in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were 35,301 (95% CI: 34,671-35,943), 34,801 (95% CI: 34,180-35,432), and 35,708 (95% CI: 35,085-36,343), respectively. Slightly elevated mortality rates per 100,000 person-years were seen in 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 of 38,268 (95% CI: 37,620-38,929), 36,956 (95% CI: 36,323-37,600), 37,475 (95% CI: 36,838-38,122), and 38,536 (95% CI: 37,798-39,287), respectively. For SARS-CoV-2-infected nursing home residents, lifetime lost difference was 42 days (95% CI: 38-46) in 2020 versus non-infected in 2018. Among vaccinated in 2021, lifetime lost difference was 25 days (95% CI: 18-32) for SARS-CoV-2-infected versus non-infected. Even though a high proportion of COVID-19 fatalities took place in nursing homes and SARS-CoV-2-infection increased the risk of individual death, the annual mortality was only slightly elevated. For future epidemics or pandemics reporting numbers of fatal cases in relation to expected mortality is critical.

Consequences of COVID-19-related lockdowns and reopenings on emergency hospitalizations in pediatric patients in Denmark during 2020-2021.

There is a considerable burden of children being hospitalized due to infectious diseases worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic provided a unique opportunity to examine effects of worldwide efforts to control spread of infection. We aimed to investigate overall age-specific hospitalizations due to viral and bacterial infections and diseases triggered by respiratory tract infections during and after lockdown. This nationwide register-based observational study included children from 29 days to 17 years old hospitalized in all Danish pediatric emergency departments during the years 2015-2021. Main outcomes were ICD-10 diagnoses for infectious diseases and infection triggered illnesses. Fluctuations in hospitalization events were explored using figures with weekly events per 100,000. Total events followed a predictable pattern during 2015-2019. In 2020-2021, there was a drop in hospital encounters after lockdowns and surge after reopenings. In 2021, there was a surge of hospital encounters in the late summer due to respiratory syncytial virus infections and asthmatic bronchitis mostly in infants from 29 days to 2 years. For the infectious diseases, there was a dramatic decrease in events after lockdowns and immediate increase in cases that followed the same pattern of previous years after reopenings. Bacterial infections, like urinary tract infections, sepsis, and meningitis followed a steady pattern throughout all calendar-years. CONCLUSIONS: Nationwide efforts to minimize infectious disease spread like lockdowns have a preventative and period lasting effect but reopenings/reunions result in surges of infectious diseases. This might be due to children not getting immunized steadily thereby increasing the pool of possible hosts for potential viral infections. WHAT IS KNOWN: • There is a seasonal fluctuation in viral/respiratory infections in children with higher infection rates in the winter and lower rates in the summer. • RSV infection is a major source of concern. WHAT IS NEW: • Major lockdowns and reopenings disrupt the seasonal fluctuations which can result in high surges in infections that increases the burden of children emergency departments and the risk of serious complications.

Behavioral factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

OBJECTIVE: To study the association between behavioural factors and incidence rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: Case-control web-based questionnaire study. SETTING: Questionnaire data were collected in the Capital Region of Denmark in December 2020 when limited restrictions were in place, while the number of daily SARS-CoV-2 cases increased rapidly. PARTICIPANTS: 8913 cases of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with two groups of controls: (1) 34 063 individuals with a negative SARS-CoV-2 test from the same date (negative controls, NCs) and 2) 25 989 individuals who had never been tested for a SARS-CoV-2 infection (untested controls, UC). Controls were matched on sex, age, test date and municipality. EXPOSURE: Activities during the 14 days prior to being tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 or during the same period for matched controls and precautions taken during the entire pandemic. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence rate ratios (IRR). RESULTS: Response rate was 41.4% (n=93 121). Using public transportation, grocery shopping (IRR: NC: 0.52; UC: 0.63) and outdoor sports activities (NC: 0.75; UC: 0.96) were not associated with increased rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most precautions, for example, using hand sanitizer (NC: 0.79; UC: 0.98), physical distancing (NC: 0.79; UC: 0.82) and avoiding handshakes (NC: 0.74; UC: 0.77), were associated with a lower rate of infection. Activities associated with many close contacts, especially indoors, increased rate of infection. Except for working from home, all types of occupation were linked to increased rate of infection. CONCLUSIONS: In a community setting with moderate restrictions, activities such as using public transportation and grocery shopping with the relevant precautions were not associated with an increased rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Exposures and activities where safety measures are difficult to maintain might be important risk factors for infection. These findings may help public health authorities tailor their strategies for limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2.

Behavioral factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection

Objective To study the association between behavioural factors and incidence rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design Case–control web-based questionnaire study. Setting Questionnaire data were collected in the Capital Region of Denmark in December 2020 when limited restrictions were in place, while the number of daily SARS-CoV-2 cases increased rapidly. Participants 8913 cases of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with two groups of controls: (1) 34 063 individuals with a negative SARS-CoV-2 test from the same date (negative controls, NCs) and 2) 25 989 individuals who had never been tested for a SARS-CoV-2 infection (untested controls, UC). Controls were matched on sex, age, test date and municipality. Exposure Activities during the 14 days prior to being tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 or during the same period for matched controls and precautions taken during the entire pandemic. Main outcomes and measures SARS-CoV-2 infection incidence rate ratios (IRR). Results Response rate was 41.4% (n=93 121). Using public transportation, grocery shopping (IRR: NC: 0.52;UC: 0.63) and outdoor sports activities (NC: 0.75;UC: 0.96) were not associated with increased rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most precautions, for example, using hand sanitizer (NC: 0.79;UC: 0.98), physical distancing (NC: 0.79;UC: 0.82) and avoiding handshakes (NC: 0.74;UC: 0.77), were associated with a lower rate of infection. Activities associated with many close contacts, especially indoors, increased rate of infection. Except for working from home, all types of occupation were linked to increased rate of infection. Conclusions In a community setting with moderate restrictions, activities such as using public transportation and grocery shopping with the relevant precautions were not associated with an increased rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Exposures and activities where safety measures are difficult to maintain might be important risk factors for infection. These findings may help public health authorities tailor their strategies for limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2.

Household Exposure to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 and Association With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Severity: A Danish Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Households are high-risk settings for the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is likely associated with the infectious dose of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. We therefore aimed to assess the association between SARS-CoV-2 exposure within households and COVID-19 severity. METHODS: We performed a Danish, nationwide, register-based, cohort study including laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals from 22 February 2020 to 6 October 2020. Household exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was defined as having 1 individual test positive for SARS-CoV-2 within the household. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the association between "critical COVID-19" within and between households with and without secondary cases. RESULTS: From 15 063 multiperson households, 19 773 SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals were included; 11 632 were categorized as index cases without any secondary household cases; 3431 as index cases with secondary cases, that is, 22.8% of multiperson households; and 4710 as secondary cases. Critical COVID-19 occurred in 2.9% of index cases living with no secondary cases, 4.9% of index cases with secondary cases, and 1.3% of secondary cases. The adjusted hazard ratio for critical COVID-19 among index cases vs secondary cases within the same household was 2.50 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.88-3.34), 2.27 (95% CI, 1.77-2.93) for index cases in households with no secondary cases vs secondary cases, and 1.1 (95% CI, .93-1.30) for index cases with secondary cases vs index cases without secondary cases. CONCLUSIONS: We found no increased hazard ratio of critical COVID-19 among household members of infected SARS-CoV-2 index cases.

Severe mental illness is associated with increased mortality and severe course of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Psychiatric disorders have been associated with unfavourable outcome following respiratory infections. Whether this also applies to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been scarcely investigated. METHODS: Using the Danish administrative databases, we identified all patients with a positive real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction test for COVID-19 in Denmark up to and including 2 January 2021. Multivariable cox regression was used to calculate 30-day absolute risk and average risk ratio (ARR) for the composite end point of death from any cause and severe COVID-19 associated with psychiatric disorders, defined using both hospital diagnoses and redemption of psychotropic drugs. RESULTS: We included 144,321 patients with COVID-19. Compared with patients without psychiatric disorders, the standardized ARR of the composite outcome was significantly increased for patients with severe mental illness including schizophrenia spectrum disorders 2.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.79-3.07), bipolar disorder 2.11 (95% CI, 1.25-2.97), unipolar depression 1.70 (95% CI, 1.38-2.02), and for patients who redeemed psychotropic drugs 1.70 (95% CI, 1.48-1.92). No association was found for patients with other psychiatric disorders 1.13 (95% CI, 0.86-1.38). Similar results were seen with the outcomes of death or severe COVID-19. Among the different psychiatric subgroups, patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders had the highest 30-day absolute risk for the composite outcome 3.1% (95% CI, 2.3-3.9%), death 1.2% (95% CI, 0.4-2.0%) and severe COVID-19 2.7% (95% CI, 1.9-3.6%). CONCLUSION: Schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, unipolar depression and psychotropic drug redemption are associated with unfavourable outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

All-cause mortality and location of death in patients with established cardiovascular disease before, during, and after the COVID-19 lockdown: a Danish Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: On 13 March 2020, the Danish authorities imposed extensive nationwide lockdown measures to prevent the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and reallocated limited healthcare resources. We investigated mortality rates, overall and according to location, in patients with established cardiovascular disease before, during, and after these lockdown measures. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using Danish nationwide registries, we identified a dynamic cohort comprising all Danish citizens with cardiovascular disease (i.e. a history of ischaemic heart disease, ischaemic stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, or peripheral artery disease) alive on 2 January 2019 and 2020. The cohort was followed from 2 January 2019/2020 until death or 16/15 October 2019/2020. The cohort comprised 340 392 and 347 136 patients with cardiovascular disease in 2019 and 2020, respectively. The overall, in-hospital, and out-of-hospital mortality rate in 2020 before lockdown was significantly lower compared with the same period in 2019 [adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) CI 0.87-0.95; IRR 0.95, 95% CI 0.89-1.02; and IRR 0.87, 95% CI 0.83-0.93, respectively]. The overall mortality rate during and after lockdown was not significantly different compared with the same period in 2019 (IRR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-1.02). However, the in-hospital mortality rate was lower and out-of-hospital mortality rate higher during and after lockdown compared with the same period in 2019 (in-hospital, IRR 0.92, 95% CI 0.88-0.96; out-of-hospital, IRR 1.04, 95% CI1.01-1.08). These trends were consistent irrespective of sex and age. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with established cardiovascular disease, the in-hospital mortality rate was lower and out-of-hospital mortality rate higher during lockdown compared with the same period in the preceding year, irrespective of age and sex.

Consequences of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) lockdown on infection-related hospitalizations among the pediatric population in Denmark.

It remains unknown how Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) prevention measures implemented on March 12, 2020, have affected the rate of pediatric infection-related hospitalizations in Denmark. Therefore, we investigated the rate of pediatric infection-related hospitalizations during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a retrospective cohort design and included all Danish children < 18 years. Infection-related hospitalizations were assessed during study periods in 2020 vs. 2018/2019, and we computed incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using Poisson regression. In the 2020 study period, 3093 children were hospitalized with an infection, while the corresponding figures for 2018 and 2019 study periods were 4824 and 3830, respectively. When comparing the 2020 to the 2018/2019 study period prior to nationwide lockdown, we observed a decline in infection-related hospitalizations (12.68 (95% CI, 12.22-13.16) vs. 15.49 (95% CI, 15.12-15.86) per 1000 person-years). We further observed decreased IRRs, especially during the lockdown period (week 11: 0.64 (95% CI, 0.55-0.75); week 12: 0.26 (95% CI, 0.21-0.33); week 13: 0.13 (95% CI, 0.10-0.19)).Conclusion: The rate of pediatric infection-related hospitalizations in Denmark declined during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 compared to that in 2018/2019, with a 36% decline during initiation of the nationwide lockdown period. What is Known: • Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, several countries have implemented mitigation strategies such as lockdown of non-critical business functions. Most of these strategies have previously been proven effective on interruption of infection transmission. • It remains unclear how the mitigation strategies have affected the rate of pediatric infection-related hospitalizations. What is New: • Insight on how COVID-19 prevention measures have affected the frequency of infection-related hospitalization. • Valuable knowledge on how to act in potential future pandemics.

Risk of major cardiovascular events according to educational level before and after the initial COVID-19 public lockdown: a nationwide study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, decreasing rates of hospitalisations for cardiovascular disease raised concerns for undertreatment, particularly for vulnerable groups. We investigated how the initial COVID-19 public lockdown, impacted the risk of being hospitalised with a major cardiovascular event (MCE: myocardial infarction/stroke/heart failure) according to educational level. METHODS: We grouped all Danish residents according to educational attainment level (low, medium, high) and age (40-59, 60-69, ≥70 years). In each group, we calculated the age-standardised and sex standardised risk of MCE hospitalisation in the initial COVID-19 lockdown-period (13 March 2020-3 May 2020) and in the corresponding calendar period in 2019. We calculated age-standardised and sex-standardised risks to investigate whether the COVID-19 lockdown had a differential effect on MCE incidence according to educational level. RESULTS: In the period in 2019, 2700 Danish residents were hospitalised with MCE, compared with only 2290 during the lockdown. During lockdown, the risk of hospitalisation for MCE decreased among residents aged ≥70 with low education (risk difference (RD) -46.2 (-73.2; -19.2) per 100,000) or medium education (RD -23.2 (-50.8; 4.3) per 100 000), but not among residents with high education (RD 5.1 (-32.3; 42.5), per 100 000). The risk of hospitalisation for MCE did not decrease significantly for the younger age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 lockdown is associated with a reduced incidence for MCE, especially among low educated, elderly residents. This raises concern for undertreatment that without clinical awareness and action may widen the educational gap in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Severe outcomes of COVID-19 among patients with COPD and asthma.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with obstructive lung diseases are possibly at risk of developing severe outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the risk of severe outcomes of COVID-19 among patients with asthma and COPD. METHODS: We performed a nationwide cohort study of patients with COVID-19 from 1 February to 10 July 2020. All patients with COVID-19 registered in the Danish registers were included. Using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes and medication history, patients were divided into asthma, COPD or no asthma or COPD. Primary outcome was a combined outcome of severe COVID-19, intensive care or death. RESULTS: Out of 5104 patients with COVID-19 (median age 54.8 years (25-75th percentile 40.5 to 72.3); women, 53.0%), 354 had asthma and 432 COPD. The standardised absolute risk of the combined end-point was 21.2% (95% CI 18.8-23.6) in patients with COPD, 18.5% (95% CI 14.3-22.7) in patients with asthma and 17.2% (95% CI 16.1-18.3) in patients with no asthma or COPD. Patients with COPD had a slightly increased risk of the combined end-point compared with patients without asthma or COPD (risk difference 4.0%; 95% CI 1.3-6.6; p=0.003). In age standardised analyses, there were no differences between the disease groups. Low blood eosinophil counts (<0.3×109 cells·L-1) were associated with increased risk of severe outcomes among patients with COPD. CONCLUSION: Patients with COPD have a slightly increased risk of developing severe outcomes of COVID-19 compared with patients without obstructive lung diseases. However, in age-standardised analysis, the risk difference disappears.

Face masks for the prevention of COVID-19 - Rationale and design of the randomised controlled trial DANMASK-19.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), progresses globally, and means to reduce the transmission are needed. In the community, the use of face masks is increasing world-wide, but documentation for the efficacy of this remedy is lacking. This trial investigates whether the use of face masks in the community will reduce wearers' risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: This study will be a two-arm, unblinded, randomised controlled trial. We will include adults (>18 years of age) without prior confirmed COVID-19 or symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, who spend more than three hours per day outside the home with exposure to other people. A total of 6,000 participants are randomly assigned 1:1 to use face masks or not for a 30-day period during the pandemic. Participants will perform self-testing; quick test for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG)) (the Livzon lateral flow test) and oropharyngeal/nasal swabs for viral detection using polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The primary endpoint following the 30-day study period is the difference in the number of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals between the two study groups as assessed by a positive nasopharyngeal swap, a positive antibody test or a hospital-based diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: We will study whether a face mask protects the wearer of the mask against SARS-CoV-2 infection. The findings are expected to apply to the present pandemic and to future viral outbreaks and to provide evidence for authority recommendations across the world. FUNDING: This study was funded by Salling Fondene. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04337541.

Cardiovascular comorbidities as predictors for severe COVID-19 infection or death.

AIMS: Pre-existing cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) have been proposed to identify patients at higher risk of adverse coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes, but existing evidence is conflicting. Thus, it is unclear whether pre-existing CVDs are independently important predictors for severe COVID-19. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a nationwide Danish cohort of hospital-screened COVID-19 patients aged ≥40, we investigated if pre-existing CVDs predict the 30-day risk of (i) composite outcome of severe COVID-19 and (ii) all-cause mortality. We estimated 30-day risks using a Cox regression model including age, sex, each CVD comorbidity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-asthma, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. To illustrate CVD comorbidities' importance, we evaluated the predicted risks of death and severe infection, for each sex, along ages 40-85. In total, 4090 COVID-19 hospital-screened patients were observed as of 26 August 2020; 22.1% had ≥1 CVD, 23.7% had severe infection within 30 days and 12.6% died. Predicted risks of both outcomes at age 75 among men with single CVD comorbidities did not differ in clinically meaningful amounts compared with men with no comorbidities risks for the composite outcome of severe infection; women with heart failure (28.2%; 95% CI 21.1-37.0%) or atrial fibrillation (30.0%; 95% CI: 24.2-36.9%) showed modest increases compared with women with no comorbidities (24.0%; 95% CI: 21.4-26.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The results showing only modest effects of CVDs on increased risks of poor COVID-19 outcomes are important in allowing public health authorities and clinicians to provide more tailored guidance to cardiovascular patients, who have heretofore been grouped together as high risk due to their disease status.

Association Between Prescribed Ibuprofen and Severe COVID-19 Infection: A Nationwide Register-Based Cohort Study.

Recommendations regarding ibuprofen use in relation to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been conflicting. We examined the risk of severe COVID-19 between ibuprofen-prescribed and non-ibuprofen patients with COVID-19 in a nationwide register-based study of patients with COVID-19 in Denmark between the end of February 2020 and May 16, 2020. Patients with heart failure (n = 208), < 30 years (n = 575), and prescribed other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (n = 57) were excluded. Patients with ibuprofen prescription claims between January 1, 2020, and before COVID-19 diagnosis or April 30, 2020 (last available prescription) were compared with patients without ibuprofen prescription claims. Outcome was a 30-day composite of severe COVID-19 diagnosis with acute respiratory syndrome, intensive care unit admission, or death. Absolute risks and average risk ratios comparing outcome for ibuprofen vs. non-ibuprofen patients standardized to the age, sex, and comorbidity distribution of all patients were derived from multivariable Cox regression. Among 4,002 patients, 264 (6.6%) had ibuprofen prescription claims before COVID-19. Age, sex, and comorbidities were comparable between the two study groups. Standardized absolute risks of the composite outcome for ibuprofen-prescribed vs. non-ibuprofen patients were 16.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12.1-20.6) vs. 17.0% (95% CI 16.0-18.1), P = 0.74. The standardized average risk ratio for ibuprofen-prescribed vs. non-ibuprofen patients was 0.96 (95% CI 0.72-1.23). Standardized absolute risks of the composite outcome for patients with ibuprofen prescription claims > 14 days before COVID-19 vs. ≤ 14 days of COVID-19 were 17.1% (95% CI 12.3-22.0) vs. 14.3% (95% CI 7.1-23.1). In conclusion, in this nationwide study, there was no significant association between ibuprofen prescription claims and severe COVID-19.

National all-cause mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic: a Danish registry-based study.

Denmark implemented early widespread social distancing to reduce pressure on the healthcare system from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, with the aims to reduce mortality. Unintended consequences might be delays in treatment for other diseases and subsequent mortality. We examined national all-cause mortality comparing weeks 1-27 in 2020 and 2015-2019. This registry-based study used Danish national registry data until 5 July 2020. We examined all-cause mortality rates among all deaths recorded from 2015 to 2020 and among chronic conditions (cardiovascular (cardiac & circulatory), chronic pulmonary, chronic kidney disease, cancer, and diabetes), comparing each week in 2020 to weeks in 2015-2019. In 2020, there were 28,363 deaths in weeks 1-27 (30 December 2019-5 July 2020), the mean deaths in 2015-2019 were 28,630 deaths (standard deviation 784). Compared to previous years, the mortality rate in weeks 3-10 of 2020 was low, peaking in week 14 (17.6 per 100,000 persons in week 9, 19.9 per 100,000 in week 14). Comorbidity prevalence among deceased individuals was similar in 2020 and 2015-2019: 71.1% of all deceased had a prior cardiovascular diagnosis, 30.0% of all deceased had a prior cardiac diagnosis. There were 493 deaths with COVID-19 in weeks 11-27, (59.8% male), and 75.1% had a prior cardiovascular diagnosis. Weekly mortality rates for pre-existing chronic conditions peaked in week 14, and then declined. During the COVID-19 pandemic, due to timely lockdown measures, the mortality rate in Denmark has not increased compared to the mortality rates in the same period during 2015-2019.

Face masks for the prevention of COVID-19 - Rationale and design of the randomised controlled trial DANMASK-19

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), progresses globally, and means to reduce the transmission are needed. In the community, the use of face masks is increasing world-wide, but documentation for the efficacy of this remedy is lacking. This trial investigates whether the use of face masks in the community will reduce wearers' risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: This study will be a two-arm, unblinded, randomised controlled trial. We will include adults (>18 years of age) without prior confirmed COVID-19 or symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, who spend more than three hours per day outside the home with exposure to other people. A total of 6,000 participants are randomly assigned 1:1 to use face masks or not for a 30-day period during the pandemic. Participants will perform self-testing;quick test for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (immunoglobulin M (IgM) and immunoglobulin G (IgG)) (the Livzon lateral flow test) and oropharyngeal/nasal swabs for viral detection using polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The primary endpoint following the 30-day study period is the difference in the number of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals between the two study groups as assessed by a positive nasopharyngeal swap, a positive antibody test or a hospital-based diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: We will study whether a face mask protects the wearer of the mask against SARS-CoV-2 infection. The findings are expected to apply to the present pandemic and to future viral outbreaks and to provide evidence for authority recommendations across the world. FUNDING: This study was funded by Salling Fondene. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04337541.

Association Between Male Sex and Outcomes of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-A Danish Nationwide, Register-based Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Male sex has been associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. We examined the association between male sex and severe COVID-19 infection and if an increased risk remains after adjustment for age and comorbidities. METHODS: Nationwide register-based follow-up study of COVID-19 patients in Denmark until 16 May 2020. Average risk ratio comparing 30-day composite outcome of all-cause death, severe COVID-19 diagnosis or intensive care unit (ICU) admission for men versus women standardized to the age and comorbidity distribution of all patients were derived from multivariable Cox regression. Included covariates were age, hypertension, diagnoses including obesity, alcohol, sleep apnea, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, previous myocardial infarction (MI), ischemic heart disease (IHD), heart failure (HF), atrial fibrillation (AF), stroke, peripheral artery disease, cancer, liver, rheumatic, and chronic kidney disease (CKD). RESULTS: Of 4842 COVID-19 patients, 2281 (47.1%) were men. Median age was 57 [25%-75% 43-73] for men versus 52 [38-71] for women (P < .001); however, octogenarians had equal sex distribution. Alcohol diagnosis, diabetes, hypertension, sleep apnea, prior MI and IHD (all P < .001) as well as AF, stroke, and HF (all P = .01) were more often seen in men, and so was CKD (P = .03). Obesity diagnosis (P < .001) were more often seen in women. Other comorbidity differences were insignificant (P > .05). The fully adjusted average risk ratio was 1.63 [95% CI, 1.44-1.84]. CONCLUSIONS: Men with COVID-19 infection have >50% higher risk of all-cause death, severe COVID-19 infection, or ICU admission than women. The excess risk was not explained by age and comorbidities.