Increased prevalence of autoimmune thyroid disease after COVID-19: A single-center, prospective study.

Introduction: Thyroid dysfunctions associated with SARS-CoV-2 acute infection have been extensively described since the beginning of COVID-19 pandemics. Conversely, few data are available on the occurrence of thyroid autoimmunity after COVID-19 resolution. We assessed the prevalence of autoimmune thyroid disease (ATD) and thyroid dysfunctions in COVID-19 survivors three months after hospital admission. Design and methods: Single-center, prospective, observational, cohort study performed at ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy. 599 COVID-19 survivors were prospectively evaluated for thyroid function and autoimmunity thyroperoxidase antibodies (TPOAb), thyroglobulin antibodies (TgAb). When a positive antibody concentration was detected, thyroid ultrasound was performed. Multiple logistic regression model was used to estimate the association between autoimmunity and demographic characteristics, respiratory support, and comorbidities. Autoimmunity results were compared to a cohort of 498 controls referred to our Institution for non-thyroid diseases before the pandemic onset. A sensitivity analysis comparing 330 COVID-19 patients with 330 age and sex-matched controls was performed. Results: Univariate and multivariate analysis found that female sex was positively associated (OR 2.01, SE 0.48, p = 0.003), and type 2 diabetes (T2DM) was negatively associated (OR 0.36, SE 0.16, p = 0.025) with thyroid autoimmunity; hospitalization, ICU admission, respiratory support, or COVID-19 treatment were not associated with thyroid autoimmunity (p > 0.05). TPOAb prevalence was greater in COVID-19 survivors than in controls: 15.7% vs 7.7%, p = 0.002. Ultrasonographic features of thyroiditis were present in 94.9% of the evaluated patients with positive antibodies. TSH was within the normal range in 95% of patients. Conclusions: Autoimmune thyroid disease prevalence in COVID-19 survivors was doubled as compared to age and sex-matched controls, suggesting a role of SARS-CoV-2 in eliciting thyroid autoimmunity.

One-year mortality in COVID-19 is associated with patients' comorbidities rather than pneumonia severity.

BACKGROUND: In patients with pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome who survived hospitalization, one-year mortality can affect up to one third of discharged patients. Therefore, significant long-term mortality after COVID-19 respiratory failure could be expected. The primary outcome of the present study was one-year all-cause mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Observational study of COVID-19 patients hospitalized at Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital (Bergamo, Italy), during the first pandemic wave. RESULTS: A total of 1326 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized. Overall one-year mortality was 33.6% (N 446/1326), with the majority of deaths occurring during hospitalization (N=412, 92.4%). Thirty-four patients amongst the 914 discharged (3.7%) subsequentely died within one year. A third of these patients died for advanced cancer, while death without a cause other than COVID-19 was uncommon (8.8% of the overall post-discharge mortality). In-hospital late mortality (i.e. after 28 days of admission) interested a population with a lower age, and fewer comorbidities, more frequentely admitted in ICU. Independent predictors of post-discharge mortality were age over 65 years (HR 3.19; 95% CI 1.28-7.96, p-value=0.013), presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (HR 2.52; 95% CI 1.09-5.83, p-value=0.031) or proxy of cardiovascular disease (HR 4.93; 95% CI 1.45-16.75, p-value=0.010), and presence of active cancer (HR 3.64; 95% CI 1.50-8.84, p-value=0.004), but not pneumonia severity. CONCLUSIONS: One-year post-discharge mortality depends on underlying patients' comorbidities rather than COVID-19 pneumonia severity per se. Awareness among physicians of predictors of post-discharge mortality might be helpful in structuring a follow-up program for discharged patients.

The First 110,593 COVID-19 Patients Hospitalised in Lombardy: A Regionwide Analysis of Case Characteristics, Risk Factors and Clinical Outcomes.

Objectives: To describe the monthly distribution of COVID-19 hospitalisations, deaths and case-fatality rates (CFR) in Lombardy (Italy) throughout 2020. Methods: We analysed de-identified hospitalisation data comprising all COVID-19-related admissions from 1 February 2020 to 31 December 2020. The overall survival (OS) from time of first hospitalisation was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. We estimated monthly CFRs and performed Cox regression models to measure the effects of potential predictors on OS. Results: Hospitalisation and death peaks occurred in March and November 2020. Patients aged ≥70 years had an up to 180 times higher risk of dying compared to younger patients [70-80: HR 58.10 (39.14-86.22); 80-90: 106.68 (71.01-160.27); ≥90: 180.96 (118.80-275.64)]. Risk of death was higher in patients with one or more comorbidities [1: HR 1.27 (95% CI 1.20-1.35); 2: 1.44 (1.33-1.55); ≥3: 1.73 (1.58-1.90)] and in those with specific conditions (hypertension, diabetes). Conclusion: Our data sheds light on the Italian pandemic scenario, uncovering mechanisms and gaps at regional health system level and, on a larger scale, adding to the body of knowledge needed to inform effective health service planning, delivery, and preparedness in times of crisis.

COVID-19 lockdown impact on familial relationships and mental health in a large representative sample of Italian adults.

PURPOSE: Benefits of national-level stay-at-home order imposed in Italy to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission need to be carefully weighed against its impact on citizens' health. In a country with a strong familial culture and where welfare relies on households, confinement drastically decreased support provided by elder relatives, which may have resulted in mental health worsening. METHODS: A web-based cross-sectional study (LOST in Italy) was conducted on a representative sample of Italian adults during lockdown (27th of April-3rd of May 2020). We asked 3156 subjects to report on reduced help in housework and childcare from retired parents to assess the impact of confinement on mental health, through validated scales before and during lockdown. RESULTS: Overall, 1484 (47.0%) subjects reported reduced housework help from parents, and 769 (64.0%, of the 1202 subjects with children) diminished babysitting support. Subjects reporting reduced housework help had worsened sleep quality (multivariate odds ratio, OR = 1.74, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.49-2.03) and quantity (OR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.28-1.76), depressive (OR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.14-1.53) and anxiety symptoms (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.32-1.78), compared to those reporting unreduced help. Worsening in sleep quality (OR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.76-3.05), and quantity (OR = 1.80, 95% CI 1.36-2.37), depressive (OR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.39-2.31) and anxiety symptoms (OR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.48-2.46) was also associated with reduced babysitting help. Mental health outcomes were worse in subjects with poorer housing and teleworking during lockdown. CONCLUSION: Confinement came along with reduced familial support from parents, negatively impacting household members' mental health. Our findings might inform evidence-based family and welfare policies to promote population health within and beyond pandemic times.

After Action Reviews of COVID-19 response: Case study of a large tertiary care hospital in Italy.

BACKGROUND: After-Action Reviews (AARs) are management tools used to evaluate the response to public health emergencies at the national and subnational level. Aim of this study is to apply available AAR models to assess and critically appraise COVID-19 response of San Raffaele Scientific Institute, a large university hospital in Milan, Italy. METHODS: We designed an AAR based on the key-informant interview format, following the methodology proposed by the 2019 World Health Organization Guidance for AAR. After systematic assessment of the hospital reorganization, we conducted 36 semi-structured interviews to professionals with executive, clinical, technical and administrative roles. We designed an ad-hoc questionnaire exploring four areas: (i) staff management; (ii) logistics and supplies; (iii) COVID-19 diagnosis and clinical management; (iv) communication. RESULTS: Overall, the hospital response was evaluated as effective and sufficiently prompt. Participants stressed the relevance of: (i) strong governance and coordination; (ii) readiness and availability of healthcare personnel; (iii) definition of a model of care based on a multidisciplinary approach. Challenges were reported for communication management and staff training. CONCLUSIONS: This study is one of the first applications of the AAR to the COVID-19 response in hospital settings, which can be successfully adapted or scaled up to other settings in order to implement preparedness strategies for future public health emergencies.