Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of risk factors in patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease.

Background: Effective control of risk factors in patients with ASCVD is important to reduce recurrent cardiovascular events. However, many ASCVD patients do not have their risk factors controlled, and this may have worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated risk factor control among 24,760 ASCVD patients who had at least 1 outpatient encounter both pre-pandemic and during the first year of the pandemic. Risk factors were uncontrolled if the blood pressure (BP) ≥ 130/80 mm Hg, LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL, HgbA1c ≥ 7 for diabetic patients, and patients were current smokers. Results: During the pandemic, many patients had their risk factors unmonitored. BP control worsened (BP ≥ 130/80 mmHg, 64.2 vs 65.7%; p = 0.01), while lipid management improved with more patients on a high-intensity statin (38.9 vs 43.9%; p<0.001) and more achieving an LDL-C < 70 mg/dL, less patients were smoking (7.4 vs 6.7%; p<0.001), and diabetic control was unchanged pre vs during the pandemic. Black (OR 1.53 [1.02-2.31]) and younger aged patients (OR 1.008 [1.001-1.015]) were significantly more likely to have missing or uncontrolled risk factors during the pandemic. Conclusions: During the pandemic risk factors were more likely to be unmonitored. While measured blood pressure control worsened, lipid control and smoking improved. Although some cardiovascular risk factor control improved during the COVID-19 pandemic, overall control of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with ASCVD was suboptimal, especially in Black and younger patients. This puts many ASCVD patients at increased risk of a recurrent cardiovascular event.

External validation of the COVID-19 4C mortality score in an urban United States cohort.

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients at risk for mortality from COVID-19 is crucial to triage, clinical decision-making, and the allocation of scarce hospital resources. The 4C Mortality Score effectively predicts COVID-19 mortality, but it has not been validated in a United States (U.S.) population. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the 4C Mortality Score accurately predicts COVID-19 mortality in an urban U.S. adult inpatient population. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients admitted to a single-center, tertiary care hospital (Philadelphia, PA) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR from 3/01/2020 to 6/06/2020. Variables were extracted through a combination of automated export and manual chart review. The outcome of interest was mortality during hospital admission or within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: This study included 426 patients; mean age was 64.4 years, 43.4% were female, and 54.5% self-identified as Black or African American. All-cause mortality was observed in 71 patients (16.7%). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of the 4C Mortality Score was 0.85 (95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians may use the 4C Mortality Score in an urban, majority Black, U.S. inpatient population. The derivation and validation cohorts were treated in the pre-vaccine era so the 4C Score may over-predict mortality in current patient populations. With stubbornly high inpatient mortality rates, however, the 4C Score remains one of the best tools available to date to inform thoughtful triage and treatment allocation.

Nurses' pandemic lives: A mixed-methods study of experiences during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The US healthcare settings and staff have been stretched to capacity by the COVID-19 pandemic. While COVID-19 continues to threaten global healthcare delivery systems and populations, its impact on nursing has been profound. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to document nurses' immediate reactions, major stressors, effective measures to reduce stress, coping strategies, and motivators as they provided care during COVID-19. DESIGN: Mixed-methods, cross sectional design. Participants responded to objective and open-ended questions on the COVID-19 Nurses' Survey. PARTICIPANTS: The survey, was sent to nurses employed in health care settings during the pandemic; 110 nurses participated. RESULTS: Immediate reactions of respondents were nervousness and call of duty; major stressors were uncertainty, inflicting the virus on family, lack of personal protective equipment (PPE), and protocol inconsistencies. Effective measures to reduce stress identified were financial incentives and mental health support. Most frequently used coping strategies were limiting televised news about the virus, talking with family and friends, and information, Motivators to participate in future care included having adequate PPE and sense of duty. Bivariate analysis of outcomes by age group, education, work setting, and marital status was performed. Nurse respondents with higher advanced degrees had significantly less fear than those with BSN-only degrees (p < .05).Of respondents who were married/living with a partner, 85.9% listing "uncertainty about when the pandemic will be under control" as a major stressor (p < .05), while 62.8% of those who were single/divorced/widowed (p = .015) did so. Further, 75% of respondents working in critical care listed "mental health services" as important (p = .054). Four major qualitative themes emerged: What is going on here?; How much worse can this get?; What do I do now?; What motivates me to do future work? CONCLUSION: The study found nurses were motivated by ethical duty to care for patients with COVID-19 despite risk to self and family, leaving nurses vulnerable to moral distress and burnout. This research articulates the need for psychological support, self- care initiatives, adequate protection, information, and process improvements in the healthcare systems to reduce the risk of moral distress, injury and burnout among nurses.