CAPRL Scoring System for Prediction of 30-day Mortality in 949 Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Wuhan, China: A Retrospective, Observational Study

Background:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a serious and even lethal respiratory illness. The mortality of critically ill patients with COVID-19, especially short term mortality, is considerable. It is crucial and urgent to develop risk models that can predict the mortality risks of patients with COVID-19 at an early stage, which is helpful to guide clinicians in making appropriate decisions and optimizing the allocation of hospital resoureces.Methods:In this retrospective observational study, we enrolled 949 adult patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 admitted to Tongji Hospital in Wuhan between January 28 and February 12, 2020. Demographic, clinical and laboratory data were collected and analyzed. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to calculate hazard ratios and 95% confidence interval for assessing the risk factors for 30-day mortality.Results:The 30-day mortality was 11.8% (112 of 949 patients). Forty-nine point nine percent (474) patients had one or more comorbidities, with hypertension being the most common (359 [37.8%] patients), followed by diabetes (169 [17.8%] patients) and coronary heart disease (89 [9.4%] patients). Age above 50 years, respiratory rate above 30 beats per minute, white blood cell count of more than10 × 109/L, neutrophil count of more than 7 × 109/L, lymphocyte count of less than 0.8 × 109/L, platelet count of less than 100 × 109/L, lactate dehydrogenase of more than 400 U/L and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein of more than 50 mg/L were independent risk factors associated with 30-day mortality in patients with COVID-19. A predictive CAPRL score was proposed integrating independent risk factors. The 30-day mortality were 0% (0 of 156), 1.8% (8 of 434), 12.9% (26 of 201), 43.0% (55 of 128), and 76.7% (23 of 30) for patients with 0, 1, 2, 3, ≥4 points, respectively.Conclusions:We designed an easy-to-use clinically predictive tool for assessing 30-day mortality risk of COVID-19. It can accurately stratify hospitalized patients with COVID-19 into relevant risk categories and could provide guidance to make further clinical decisions. © 2021 The Chinese Medical Association, Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

The value of PCT, IL-6, and CRP in the early diagnosis and evaluation of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to assess the value of inflammatory factors procalcitonin (PCT), interleukin 6 (IL-6), and C-reactive protein (CRP) in the early diagnosis and evaluation of novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of 140 patients with pneumonia in our hospital, including 70 who had COVID-19 and 70 who had community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), were statistically analyzed. The levels of PCT, IL-6, and CRP were measured and statistically analyzed to determine the differences between the two groups. The differences in the COVID-19 group were analyzed after subgrouping into the ordinary type, severe type, and critical type. RESULTS: The PCT and CRP levels in the COVID-19 group were statistically lower than those in the CAP group (p < 0.05), but IL-6 was not statistically different between the two groups (p > 0.05). Statistically significant differences existed in IL-6 and CRP when comparing the COVID-19 subgroups of the critical type, severe type, and ordinary type (p < 0.05). However, there was no clinical meaning in the evaluation of the difference in PCT levels among the three subgroups with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: PCT and CRP could be used as indicators in the differentiation between COVID-19 and CAP, but IL-6 was of little significance in the differentiation. The higher the IL-6 and CRP, the more severe the condition of COVID-19 might be.

[Mental health survey of medical staff in a tertiary infectious disease hospital for COVID-19].

Objective: To investigate the mental health of clinical first-line medical staff in COVID-19 epidemic and provide theoretical basis for psychological intervention. Methods: The mental health status of the first-line medical staff was investigated by Self-rating Anxiety Scale(SAS) and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Self- rating Scale (PTSD-SS). From February 7 to 14, 2020, 246 medical staff participated in the treatment of COVID-19 were investigated using cluster sampling, and received 230 responses, with a recovery rate of 93.5%. Results: The incidence of anxiety in medical staff was 23.04% (53/230) , and the score of SAS was(42.91±10.89). Among them, the incidence of severe anxiety, moderate anxiety and mild anxiety were 2.17%(5/230) , 4.78%(11/230) and 16.09%(37/230) , respectively. The incidence of anxiety in female medical staff was higher than that in male [25.67%(48/187) vs 11.63%(5/43) , Z=-2.008, P=0.045], the score of SAS in female medical staff was higher than that in male [(43.78±11.12) vs (39.14±9.01) , t=-2.548, P=0.012]. The incidence of anxiety in nurses was higher than that in doctors[26.88% (43/160) vs 14.29% (10/70) , Z=-2.066, P=0.039], and the score of SAS in nurses was higher than that in doctors [ (44.84±10.42) vs (38.50±10.72) , t=-4.207, P<0.001]. The incidence of stress disorder in medical staff was 27.39% (63/230) , and the score of PTSD-SS was (42.92±17.88) . The score of PTSD-SS in female medical staff was higher than that in male[ (44.30±18.42) vs (36.91±13.95) , t=-2.472, P=0.014]. Conclusion: In COVID-19 epidemic , the incidence of anxiety and stress disorder is high among medical staff. Medical institutions should strengthen the training of psychological skills of medical staff. Special attention should be paid to the mental health of female nurses.

[Clinical consideration and management of coronavirus disease 2019].

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in Wuhan city, Hubei province in December 2019 and the epidemic so rapidly happened within the whole country and abroad, raising serious problems and urgent concerns, such as: how to control most effectively human-to-human transmission? When does infection rate rise to its peak? What will eventually be the number of infected patients? How to make early diagnosis? What effective antiviral drugs are available? How to use the existing drugs to achieve the best effect? Can available drugs effectively improve the survival rate of critical patients? In view of the above questions, this article now puts forwards the corresponding suggestions and considerations from the perspective of clinical infectious diseases physician.