ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: As the pandemic continues, different vaccine protocols have been implemented to maintain the protection of vaccines and to provide protection against new variants. The aim of this study was to assess hospitalized patients' vaccination status and document the efficacy of boosters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The patients that were hospitalized due to COVID-19 were enrolled from 28 hospitals in Turkey for five months from September 2021. 5,331 confirmed COVID-19 patients from collaborating centers were randomly enrolled to understand/estimate the distribution of vaccination status in hospitalized patients and to compare the efficacy of vaccination/booster protocols. RESULTS: 2,779 men and 2,552 women of which 2,408 (45.2%) were admitted to Intensive Care Units participated in this study. It was found that the highest risk reduction for all age groups was found in groups that received 4 doses. Four doses of vaccination for every 3.7 people under 50 years of age, for every 5.7 people in the 50-64 age group, and for every 4.3 people over 65 years of age will prevent 1 patient from being admitted to intensive care. Regardless of the type of vaccine, it was found that the risk of ICU hospitalization decreased in those who were vaccinated compared to those who were not vaccinated. Regardless of the type of vaccine, the ICU risk was found to decrease 1.25-fold in those who received 1 or 2 doses of vaccine, 1.18-fold in those who received 3 doses, and 3.26-fold in those who received 4 doses. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that the addition of a fourth dose is more effective in preventing intensive unit care even in disadvantaged groups.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Male , Humans , Female , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitalization , Intensive Care Units , Hospitals , Critical CareABSTRACT
Objective: To evaluate long-term effects of COVID-19, and to determine the risk factors in long-COVID in a cohort of the Turkish Thoracic Society (TTS)-TURCOVID multicenter registry. Method(s): Thirteen centers participated with 831 patients;504 patients were enrolled after exclusions. The study was designed in three-steps: (1) Phone questionnaire;(2) retrospective evaluation of the medical records;(3) face-to-face visit. Result(s): In the first step, 93.5% of the patients were hospitalized;61.7% had a history of pneumonia at the time of diagnosis. A total of 27.1% reported clinical symptoms at the end of the first year. Dyspnea (17.00%), fatigue (6.30%), and weakness (5.00%) were the most prevalent long-term symptoms. The incidence of long-term symptoms was increased by 2.91 fold (95% CI 1.04-8.13, P=0.041) in the presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and by 1.84 fold (95% CI 1.10-3.10, P=0.021) in the presence of pneumonia at initial diagnosis, 3.92 fold (95% Cl 2.29-6.72, P=0.001) of dyspnea and 1.69 fold (95% Cl 1.02-2.80, P=0.040) fatigue persists in the early-post-treatment period and 2.88 fold (95% Cl 1.52-5.46, P=0.001) in the presence of emergency service admission in the post COVID period. In step 2, retrospective analysis of 231 patients revealed that 1.4% of the chest X-rays had not significantly improved at the end of the first year, while computed tomography (CT) scan detected fibrosis in 3.4%. In step 3, 138 (27.4%) patients admitted to face-to-face visit at the end of first year;at least one symptom persisted in 49.27% patients. The most common symptoms were dyspnea (27.60%), psychiatric symptoms (18.10%), and fatigue (17.40%). Thorax CT revealed fibrosis in 2.4% patients. Conclusion(s): COVID-19 symptoms can last for extended lengths of time, and severity of the disease as well as the presence of comorbidities might contribute to increased risk. Long-term clinical issues should be regularly evaluated after COVID-19. Copyright © 2022 Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine Produced by Wolters Kluwer Medknow.
ABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) could emerge not only as viral pneumonia but also as a cardiovascular disease. Thromboprophylaxis has been recommended by the current guidelines, especially COVID-19 patients who are hospitalized. On the other hand, these drugs might cause serious bleeding complications. Hereby, we aimed to report three cases with spontaneous rectus sheath hematoma (RSH) developed after being administered thromboprophylaxis for severe COVID-19 pneumonia. In this case series, we draw attention to the rare, but mortal complication of the COVID-19 thromboprophylaxis regimen.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical features and outcomes of patients who were admitted with a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but who were not confirmed with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of all patients admitted to two tertiary care centers between March 15 and May 15, 2020, with a diagnosis of COVID-19. From a common database prepared for COVID-19, we retrieved the relevant data and compared the clinical findings and outcomes of PCR-positive patients with those of PCR-negative cases who had been diagnosed on the basis of typical clinical and radiographic findings. RESULTS: A total of 349 patients were included in the analysis, of which 126 (36.1%) were PCR-negative. PCR-negative patients were younger (54.6 ± 20.8 vs. 60.8 ± 18.9 years, P = .009) but were similar to PCR-positive patients in terms of demographics, comorbidities, and presenting symptoms. They had higher lymphocyte counts (1519 ± 868 vs. 1331 ± 737/mm3, P = .02) and less frequently presented with bilateral radiographic findings (68.3% vs. 79.4%, P = .046) than PCR-positive patients. Besides, they had less severe disease and better clinical outcomes regarding admission to the intensive care unit (9.6% vs. 20.6%, P = .023), oxygen therapy (21.4% vs. 43.5%, P < .001), ventilatory support (3.2% vs. 11.2%, P = .03) and length of hospital stay (5.0 ± 5.0 vs. 9.7 ± 5.9 days, P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that about one-third of the COVID-19 patients are PCR-negative and diagnosed based on clinicaand radiographic findings. These patients have a more favorable clinical course, shorter hospital stays, and are less frequently admitteto the intensive care unit.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Early recognition of the severe illness is critical in coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) to provide best care and optimize the use of limited resources. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the predictive properties of common community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) severity scores and COVID-19 specific indices. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort, COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a teaching hospital between 18 March-20 May 2020 were included. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics related to severity and mortality were measured and CURB-65, PSI, A-DROP, CALL, and COVID-GRAM scores were calculated as defined previously in the literature. Progression to severe disease and in-hospital/overall mortality during the follow-up of the patients were determined from electronic records. Kaplan-Meier, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazard regression model was used. The discrimination capability of pneumonia severity indices was evaluated by receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-eight patients were included in the study. Sixty-two patients (20.8%) presented with severe COVID-19 while thirty-one (10.4%) developed severe COVID-19 at any time from the admission. In-hospital mortality was 39 (13.1%) while the overall mortality was 44 (14.8%). The mortality in low-risk groups that were identified to manage outside the hospital was 0 in CALL Class A, 1.67% in PSI low risk, and 2.68% in CURB-65 low-risk. However, the AUCs for the mortality prediction in COVID-19 were 0.875, 0.873, 0.859, 0.855, and 0.828 for A-DROP, PSI, CURB-65, COVID-GRAM, and CALL scores respectively. The AUCs for the prediction of progression to severe disease was 0.739, 0.711, 0,697, 0.673, and 0.668 for CURB-65, CALL, PSI, COVID-GRAM, A-DROP respectively. The hazard ratios (HR) for the tested pneumonia severity indices demonstrated that A-DROP and CURB-65 scores had the strongest association with mortality, and PSI, and COVID-GRAM scores predicted mortality independent from age and comorbidity. CONCLUSION: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) scores can predict in COVID-19. The indices proposed specifically to COVID-19 work less than nonspecific scoring systems surprisingly. The CALL score may be used to decide outpatient management in COVID-19.