The association between prolonged SARS-CoV-2 symptoms and work outcomes (preprint)

While the early effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the United States labor market are well-established, less is known about the long-term impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection and Long COVID on employment. To address this gap, we analyzed self-reported data from a prospective, national cohort study to estimate the effects of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms at three months post-infection on missed workdays and return to work. The analysis included 2,939 adults in the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE) study who tested positive for their initial SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of enrollment, were employed before the pandemic, and completed a baseline and three-month electronic survey. At three months post-infection, 40.8% of participants reported at least one SARS-CoV-2 symptom and 9.6% of participants reported five or more SARS-CoV-2 symptoms. When asked about missed work due to their SARS-CoV-2 infection at three months, 7.1% of participants reported missing >=10 workdays and 13.9% of participants reported not returning to work since their infection. At three months, participants with >=5 symptoms had a higher adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of missing >=10 workdays (2.96, 95% CI 1.81-4.83) and not returning to work (2.44, 95% CI 1.58-3.76) compared to those with no symptoms. Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 symptoms were common, affecting 4-in-10 participants at three-months post-infection, and were associated with increased odds of work loss, most pronounced among adults with >=5 symptoms at three months. Despite the end of the Federal COVID-19 Public Health Emergency and efforts to "return to normal", policymakers must consider the clinical and economic implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on peoples employment status and work absenteeism, particularly as data characterizing the numerous health and well-being impacts of Long COVID continue to emerge. Improved understanding of risk factors for lost work time may guide efforts to support people in returning to work.

Routine Saliva Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in Children: Partnering with Childcare Centers in the Greater New Haven Community (preprint)

Background: While considerable attention was placed on SARS-CoV-2 testing and surveillance programs in the K-12 setting, younger age groups in childcare centers were largely overlooked. Childcare facilities are vital to communities, allowing parents/guardians to remain at work and providing safe environments for both children and staff. Therefore, early in the COVID-19 pandemic, we established a PCR-based COVID-19 surveillance program in childcare facilities, testing children and staff with the goal of collecting actionable public health data and aiding communities in the progressive resumption of standard operations and ways of life. In this study we describe the development of a weekly saliva testing program and provide early results from our experience implementing this in childcare centers. Methods: We enrolled children (aged 6 months to 7 years) and staff at 8 childcare facilities and trained participants in saliva collection using video chat technology. Weekly surveys were sent out to assess exposures, symptoms, and vaccination status changes. Participants submitted weekly saliva samples at school. Samples were transported to a partnering clinical laboratory for RT-PCR testing using SalivaDirect and results were uploaded to each participant's online patient portal within 24 hours. Results: This study fostered a cooperative partnership with participating childcare centers, parents/guardians, and staff with the goal of mitigating COVID-19 transmission in childcare centers. Age-related challenges in saliva collection were overcome by working with parents/guardians to conceptualize new collection strategies and by offering parents/guardians continued virtual guidance and support. Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 screening and routine testing programs have focused less on the childcare population, resulting in knowledge gaps in this critical age group, especially as many are still ineligible for vaccination. SalivaDirect testing for SARS-CoV-2 provides a feasible method of asymptomatic screening and symptomatic testing for children and childcare center staff. Given the relative aversion to nasal swabs in the childcare age group, especially as a routine surveillance tool, an at-home saliva collection method provides an attractive alternative. Results can be shared rapidly electronically through participants' private medical chart portals, and video chat technology allows for discussion and instruction between investigators and participants.

Characteristics of Patients Referred to a Cardiovascular Disease Clinic for Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (preprint)

There is limited literature on the cardiovascular manifestations of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). We aimed to describe the characteristics, diagnostic evaluations, and cardiac diagnoses in patients referred to a cardiovascular disease clinic designed for patients with PASC from May 2020 to September 2021. Of 126 patients, average age was 46 years (range 19-81 years), 43 (34%) were male. Patients presented on average five months after COVID-19 diagnosis. 30 (24%) patients were hospitalized for acute COVID-19. Severity of acute COVID-19 was mild in 37%, moderate in 41%, severe in 11%, and critical in 9%. Patients were also followed for PASC by pulmonology (53%), neurology (33%), otolaryngology (11%), and rheumatology (7%). Forty-three patients (34%) did not have significant comorbidities. The most common symptoms were dyspnea (52%), chest pain/pressure (48%), palpitations (44%), and fatigue (42%), commonly associated with exertion or exercise intolerance. The following cardiovascular diagnoses were identified: nonischemic cardiomyopathy (5%); new ischemia (3%); coronary vasospasm (2%); new atrial fibrillation (2%), new supraventricular tachycardia (2%); myocardial involvement (15%) by cardiac MRI, characterized by late gadolinium enhancement (LGE; 60%) or inflammation (48%). The remaining 97 patients (77%) exhibited common symptoms of fatigue, dyspnea on exertion, tachycardia, or chest pain, which we termed cardiovascular PASC syndrome. Three of these people met criteria for postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome. Lower severity of acute COVID-19 was a significant predictor of cardiovascular PASC syndrome. In this cohort of patients referred to cardiology for PASC, 23% had a new diagnosis, but most displayed a pattern of symptoms associated with exercise intolerance.

Association of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers with the Risk of Hospitalization and Death in Hypertensive Patients with Coronavirus Disease-19 (preprint)

BackgroundWhether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) Inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) mitigate or exacerbate SARS-CoV-2 infection remains uncertain. In a national study, we evaluated the association of ACE inhibitors and ARB with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) hospitalization and mortality among individuals with hypertension. MethodsAmong Medicare Advantage and commercially insured individuals, we identified 2,263 people with hypertension, receiving [≥]1 antihypertensive agents, and who had a positive outpatient SARS-CoV-2 test (outpatient cohort). In a propensity score-matched analysis, we determined the association of ACE inhibitors and ARBs with the risk of hospitalization for COVID-19. In a second study of 7,933 individuals with hypertension who were hospitalized with COVID-19 (inpatient cohort), we tested the association of these medications with in-hospital mortality. We stratified all our assessments by insurance groups. ResultsAmong individuals in the outpatient and inpatient cohorts, 31.9% and 29.8%, respectively, used ACE inhibitors and 32.3% and 28.1% used ARBs. In the outpatient study, over a median 30.0 (19.0 - 40.0) days after testing positive, 12.7% were hospitalized for COVID-19. In propensity score-matched analyses, neither ACE inhibitors (HR, 0.77 [0.53, 1.13], P = 0.18), nor ARBs (HR, 0.88 [0.61, 1.26], P = 0.48), were significantly associated with risk of hospitalization. In analyses stratified by insurance group, ACE inhibitors, but not ARBs, were associated with a significant lower risk of hospitalization in the Medicare group (HR, 0.61 [0.41, 0.93], P = 0.02), but not the commercially insured group (HR: 2.14 [0.82, 5.60], P = 0.12; P-interaction 0.09). In the inpatient study, 14.2% died, 59.5% survived to discharge, and 26.3% had an ongoing hospitalization. In propensity score-matched analyses, neither use of ACE inhibitor (0.97 [0.81, 1.16]; P = 0.74) nor ARB (1.15 [0.95, 1.38]; P = 0.15) was associated with risk of in-hospital mortality, in total or in the stratified analyses. ConclusionsThe use of ACE inhibitors and ARBs was not associated with the risk of hospitalization or mortality among those infected with SARS-CoV-2. However, there was a nearly 40% lower risk of hospitalization with the use of ACE inhibitors in the Medicare population. This finding merits a clinical trial to evaluate the potential role of ACE inhibitors in reducing the risk of hospitalization among older individuals, who are at an elevated risk of adverse outcomes with the infection.