Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Swiss Med Wkly ; 151: w20475, 2021 02 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2249422

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19, which emerged in China in late 2019, rapidly spread across the world with several million victims in 213 countries. Switzerland was severely hit by the virus, with 43,000 confirmed cases as of 1 September 2020. AIM: In cooperation with the Federal Office of Public Health, we set up a surveillance database in February 2020 to monitor hospitalised patients with COVID-19, in addition to their mandatory reporting system. METHODS: Patients hospitalised for more than 24 hours with a positive polymerase chain-reaction test, from 20 Swiss hospitals, are included. Data were collected in a customised case report form based on World Health Organisation recommendations and adapted to local needs. Nosocomial infections were defined as infections for which the onset of symptoms was more than 5 days after the patient’s admission date. RESULTS: As of 1 September 2020, 3645 patients were included. Most patients were male (2168, 59.5%), and aged between 50 and 89 years (2778, 76.2%), with a median age of 68 (interquartile range 54–79). Community infections dominated with 3249 (89.0%) reports. Comorbidities were frequently reported, with hypertension (1481, 61.7%), cardiovascular diseases (948, 39.5%) and diabetes (660, 27.5%) being the most frequent in adults; respiratory diseases and asthma (4, 21.1%), haematological and oncological diseases (3, 15.8%) were the most frequent in children. Complications occurred in 2679 (73.4%) episodes, mostly respiratory diseases (2470, 93.2% in adults; 16, 55.2% in children), and renal (681, 25.7%) and cardiac (631, 23.8%) complications for adults. The second and third most frequent complications in children affected the digestive system and the liver (7, 24.1%). A targeted treatment was given in 1299 (35.6%) episodes, mostly with hydroxychloroquine (989, 76.1%). Intensive care units stays were reported in 578 (15.8%) episodes. A total of 527 (14.5%) deaths were registered, all among adults. CONCLUSION: The surveillance system has been successfully initiated and provides a robust set of data for Switzerland by including about 80% (compared with official statistics) of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 hospitalised patients, with similar age and comorbidity distributions. It adds detailed information on the epidemiology, risk factors and clinical course of these cases and, therefore, is a valuable addition to the existing mandatory reporting.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Population Surveillance , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , Child , Child, Preschool , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland/epidemiology , Young Adult
2.
Swiss Med Wkly ; 151: w30105, 2021 11 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1689912

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: When the periods of time during and after the first wave of the ongoing SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic in Europe are compared, the associated COVID-19 mortality seems to have decreased substantially. Various factors could explain this trend, including changes in demographic characteristics of infected persons and the improvement of case management. To date, no study has been performed to investigate the evolution of COVID-19 in-hospital mortality in Switzerland, while also accounting for risk factors. METHODS: We investigated the trends in COVID-19-related mortality (in-hospital and in-intermediate/intensive-care) over time in Switzerland, from February 2020 to June 2021, comparing in particular the first and the second wave. We used data from the COVID-19 Hospital-based Surveillance (CH-SUR) database. We performed survival analyses adjusting for well-known risk factors of COVID-19 mortality (age, sex and comorbidities) and accounting for competing risk. RESULTS: Our analysis included 16,984 patients recorded in CH-SUR, with 2201 reported deaths due to COVID-19 (13.0%). We found that overall in-hospital mortality was lower during the second wave of COVID-19 than in the first wave (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63- 0.78; p <0.001), a decrease apparently not explained by changes in demographic characteristics of patients. In contrast, mortality in intermediate and intensive care significantly increased in the second wave compared with the first wave (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05-1.49; p = 0.029), with significant changes in the course of hospitalisation between the first and the second wave. CONCLUSION: We found that, in Switzerland, COVID-19 mortality decreased among hospitalised persons, whereas it increased among patients admitted to intermediate or intensive care, when comparing the second wave to the first wave. We put our findings in perspective with changes over time in case management, treatment strategy, hospital burden and non-pharmaceutical interventions. Further analyses of the potential effect of virus variants and of vaccination on mortality would be crucial to have a complete overview of COVID-19 mortality trends throughout the different phases of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland/epidemiology
3.
Euro Surveill ; 27(1)2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1613508

ABSTRACT

BackgroundSince the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the disease has frequently been compared with seasonal influenza, but this comparison is based on little empirical data.AimThis study compares in-hospital outcomes for patients with community-acquired COVID-19 and patients with community-acquired influenza in Switzerland.MethodsThis retrospective multi-centre cohort study includes patients > 18 years admitted for COVID-19 or influenza A/B infection determined by RT-PCR. Primary and secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission for patients with COVID-19 or influenza. We used Cox regression (cause-specific and Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models) to account for time-dependency and competing events with inverse probability weighting to adjust for confounders.ResultsIn 2020, 2,843 patients with COVID-19 from 14 centres were included. Between 2018 and 2020, 1,381 patients with influenza from seven centres were included; 1,722 (61%) of the patients with COVID-19 and 666 (48%) of the patients with influenza were male (p < 0.001). The patients with COVID-19 were younger (median 67 years; interquartile range (IQR): 54-78) than the patients with influenza (median 74 years; IQR: 61-84) (p < 0.001). A larger percentage of patients with COVID-19 (12.8%) than patients with influenza (4.4%) died in hospital (p < 0.001). The final adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio for mortality was 3.01 (95% CI: 2.22-4.09; p < 0.001) for COVID-19 compared with influenza and 2.44 (95% CI: 2.00-3.00, p < 0.001) for ICU admission.ConclusionCommunity-acquired COVID-19 was associated with worse outcomes compared with community-acquired influenza, as the hazards of ICU admission and in-hospital death were about two-fold to three-fold higher.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , Cohort Studies , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units , Male , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland/epidemiology
4.
Swiss Med Wkly ; 151: w20547, 2021 07 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1332302

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As clinical signs of COVID-19 differ widely among individuals, from mild to severe, the definition of risk groups has important consequences for recommendations to the public, control measures and patient management, and needs to be reviewed regularly. AIM: The aim of this study was to explore risk factors for in-hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission for hospitalised COVID-19 patients during the first epidemic wave in Switzerland, as an example of a country that coped well during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: This study included all (n = 3590) adult polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed hospitalised patients in 17 hospitals from the hospital-based surveillance of COVID-19 (CH-Sur) by 1 September 2020. We calculated univariable and multivariable (adjusted) (1) proportional hazards (Fine and Gray) survival regression models and (2) logistic regression models for in-hospital mortality and admission to ICU, to evaluate the most common comorbidities as potential risk factors. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: We found that old age was the strongest factor for in-hospital mortality after having adjusted for gender and the considered comorbidities (hazard ratio [HR] 2.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.33−2.59 and HR 5.6 95% CI 5.23−6 for ages 65 and 80 years, respectively). In addition, male gender remained an important risk factor in the multivariable models (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.41−1.53). Of all comorbidities, renal disease, oncological pathologies, chronic respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease (but not hypertension) and dementia were also risk factors for in-hospital mortality. With respect to ICU admission risk, the pattern was different, as patients with higher chances of survival might have been admitted more often to ICU. Male gender (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.58−2.31), hypertension (OR  1.3, 95% CI 1.07−1.59) and age 55–79 years (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.06−1.26) are risk factors for ICU admission. Patients aged 80+ years, as well as patients with dementia or with liver disease were admitted less often to ICU. CONCLUSION: We conclude that increasing age is the most important risk factor for in-hospital mortality of hospitalised COVID-19 patients in Switzerland, along with male gender and followed by the presence of comorbidities such as renal diseases, chronic respiratory or cardiovascular disease, oncological malignancies and dementia. Male gender, hypertension and age between 55 and 79 years are, however, risk factors for ICU admission. Mortality and ICU admission need to be considered as separate outcomes when investigating risk factors for pandemic control measures and for hospital resources planning.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Comorbidity , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland/epidemiology
5.
Endocrine ; 70(3): 454-460, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-737716

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The length of time a critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patient remains infectious and should therefore be isolated remains unknown. This prospective study was undertaken in critically ill patients to evaluate the reliability of single negative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in lower tracheal aspirates (LTA) in predicting a second negative test and to analyze clinical factors potentially influencing the viral shedding. METHODS: From April 9, 2020 onwards, intubated COVID-19 patients treated in the intensive care unit were systematically evaluated for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR of nasopharyngeal swabs and LTA. The time to negativity was defined as the time between the onset of symptoms and the viral clearance in LTA. In order to identify risk factors for prolonged viral shedding, we used univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Forty-eight intubated SARS-CoV-2 patients were enrolled. Overall, we observed that the association of the first negative RT-PCR with a second negative result was 96.7%. Median viral shedding was 25 (IQR: 21.5-28) days since symptoms' onset. In the univariate Cox model analysis, type 2 diabetes mellitus was associated with a prolonged viral RNA shedding (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.06-3.11, p = 0.04). In the multivariate Cox model analysis, type 2 diabetes was associated with a prolonged viral RNA shedding (HR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.11-0.89, p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: Intubated patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus may have prolonged SARS-CoV-2 shedding. In critically ill COVID-19 patients, one negative LTA should be sufficient to assess and exclude infectivity.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/physiology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Critical Illness , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/virology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Respiratory System/virology , Virus Shedding , Aged , Betacoronavirus/genetics , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 Vaccines , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Reproducibility of Results , Respiratory System/pathology , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/standards , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Specimen Handling/methods , Specimen Handling/standards , Switzerland/epidemiology , Time Factors
6.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 9(1): 100, 2020 07 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-657352

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission by aerosols, to provide evidence on the rational use of masks, and to discuss additional measures important for the protection of healthcare workers from COVID-19. METHODS: Literature review and expert opinion. SHORT CONCLUSION: SARS-CoV-2, the pathogen causing COVID-19, is considered to be transmitted via droplets rather than aerosols, but droplets with strong directional airflow support may spread further than 2 m. High rates of COVID-19 infections in healthcare-workers (HCWs) have been reported from several countries. Respirators such as filtering face piece (FFP) 2 masks were designed to protect HCWs, while surgical masks were originally intended to protect patients (e.g., during surgery). Nevertheless, high quality standard surgical masks (type II/IIR according to European Norm EN 14683) appear to be as effective as FFP2 masks in preventing droplet-associated viral infections of HCWs as reported from influenza or SARS. So far, no head-to-head trials with these masks have been published for COVID-19. Neither mask type completely prevents transmission, which may be due to inappropriate handling and alternative transmission pathways. Therefore, compliance with a bundle of infection control measures including thorough hand hygiene is key. During high-risk procedures, both droplets and aerosols may be produced, reason why respirators are indicated for these interventions.


Subject(s)
Aerosols/analysis , Betacoronavirus/physiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Air Microbiology , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Health Personnel , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Protective Devices , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL