Establishing an ad hoc COVID-19 mortality surveillance during the first epidemic wave in Belgium, 1 March to 21 June 2020.

BackgroundCOVID-19-related mortality in Belgium has drawn attention for two reasons: its high level, and a good completeness in reporting of deaths. An ad hoc surveillance was established to register COVID-19 death numbers in hospitals, long-term care facilities (LTCF) and the community. Belgium adopted broad inclusion criteria for the COVID-19 death notifications, also including possible cases, resulting in a robust correlation between COVID-19 and all-cause mortality.AimTo document and assess the COVID-19 mortality surveillance in Belgium.MethodsWe described the content and data flows of the registration and we assessed the situation as of 21 June 2020, 103 days after the first death attributable to COVID-19 in Belgium. We calculated the participation rate, the notification delay, the percentage of error detected, and the results of additional investigations.ResultsThe participation rate was 100% for hospitals and 83% for nursing homes. Of all deaths, 85% were recorded within 2 calendar days: 11% within the same day, 41% after 1 day and 33% after 2 days, with a quicker notification in hospitals than in LTCF. Corrections of detected errors reduced the death toll by 5%.ConclusionBelgium implemented a rather complete surveillance of COVID-19 mortality, on account of a rapid investment of the hospitals and LTCF. LTCF could build on past experience of previous surveys and surveillance activities. The adoption of an extended definition of 'COVID-19-related deaths' in a context of limited testing capacity has provided timely information about the severity of the epidemic.

Hip Fractures in the Elderly During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Latin-American Perspective With a Minimum 90-Day Follow-Up.

INTRODUCTION: Hip fracture patients have been severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the sub acute effects of a concomitant SARS-CoV-2 infection and the outcomes in highly exposed developing countries are still unknown. Our objective is to describe the morbidity and mortality of elderly patients admitted for a hip fracture during the COVID-19 pandemic in Chile, with a minimum 90-day follow-up. Also, to elucidate predictors for mortality and to compare mortality results with the pre-pandemic era. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multicentric retrospective review of patients admitted for a fragility hip fracture in 3 hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic, and during the same time in 2019. All clinical information and images were recorded, and patients were followed for a minimum of 90-days. Morbidity and mortality were the primary outcomes. Uni/multivariable models were performed to elucidate predictors for mortality utilizing the Weibull's regression. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-one cases were included. From the 2020 cohort (162 patients), 24 (15%) had a concomitant SARS-CoV-2 infection. Fourteen patients (58%) tested positive after admission. The COVID-19(+) group had a higher risk of in-hospital, 30-day, and 90-day mortality (p < 0.001). They also had a prolonged hospital stay and presented with more complications and readmissions (p < 0.05). Only COVID-19(+) status and older age were independent predictors for mortality with a HR = 6.5 (p = < 0.001) and 1.09 (p = 0.001), respectively. The 2020 cohort had twice the risk of mortality with a HR = 2.04 (p = 0.002) compared to the 2019 cohort. However, comparing only the COVID-19 (-) patients, there was no difference in mortality risk, with a HR = 1.30 (p = 0.343). DISCUSSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected healthcare systems and elderly patients. CONCLUSIONS: Hip fracture patients with a concomitant SARS-CoV-2 virus infection were associated with increased morbidity and mortality throughout the first 3 months. COVID-19 status and older age were significant predictors for mortality. Efforts should be directed into nosocomial infection reduction and prompt surgical management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Rapid establishment of a national surveillance of COVID-19 hospitalizations in Belgium.

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 epidemic, caused by a novel coronavirus, it was of great importance to rapidly collect as much accurate information as possible in order to characterize the public health threat and support the health authorities in its management. Hospital-based surveillance is paramount to monitor the severity of a disease in the population. METHODS: Two separate surveillance systems, a Surge Capacity survey and a Clinical survey, were set up to collect complementary data on COVID-19 from Belgium's hospitals. The Surge Capacity survey collects aggregated data to monitor the hospital capacity through occupancy rates of beds and medical devices, and to follow a set of key epidemiological indicators over time. Participation is mandatory and the daily data collection includes prevalence and incidence figures on the number of COVID-19 patients in the hospital. The Clinical survey is strongly recommended by health authorities, focusses on specific patient characteristics and relies on individual patient data provided by the hospitals at admission and discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This national double-level hospital surveillance was implemented very rapidly after the first COVID-19 patients were hospitalized and revealed to be crucial to monitor hospital capacity over time and to better understand the disease in terms of risk groups and outcomes. The two approaches are complementary and serve different needs.