Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
Can J Anaesth ; 69(11): 1399-1404, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2085600

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been proven effective at preventing poor outcomes from COVID-19; however, voluntary vaccination rates have been suboptimal. We assessed the potential avoidable intensive care unit (ICU) resource use and associated costs had unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 been fully vaccinated. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study of persons aged 12 yr or greater in Alberta (2021 population ~ 4.4 million) admitted to any ICU with COVID-19 from 6 September 2021 to 4 January 2022. We used publicly available aggregate data on COVID-19 infections, vaccination status, and health services use. Intensive care unit admissions, bed-days, lengths of stay, and costs were estimated for patients with COVID-19 and stratified by vaccination status. RESULTS: In total, 1,053 patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 were unvaccinated, 42 were partially vaccinated, and 173 were fully vaccinated (cumulative incidence 230.6, 30.8, and 5.5 patients/100,000 population, respectively). Cumulative incidence rate ratios of ICU admission were 42.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.7 to 44.9) for unvaccinated patients and 5.6 (95% CI, 4.1 to 7.6) for partially vaccinated patients when compared with fully vaccinated patients. During the study period, 1,028 avoidable ICU admissions and 13,015 bed-days were recorded for unvaccinated patients and the total avoidable costs were CAD 61.3 million. The largest opportunity to avoid ICU bed-days and costs was in unvaccinated patients aged 50 to 69 yr. CONCLUSIONS: Unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 had substantially greater rates of ICU admissions, ICU bed-days, and ICU-related costs than vaccinated patients did. This increased resource use would have been potentially avoidable had these unvaccinated patients been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.


RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les vaccins contre le SRAS-CoV-2 se sont avérés efficaces pour prévenir les devenirs défavorables associés à la COVID-19; toutefois, les taux de vaccination volontaire ont été sous-optimaux. Nous avons évalué l'utilisation potentiellement évitable des ressources des unités de soins intensifs (USI) et les coûts associés si les patients non vaccinés ou partiellement vaccinés qui ont dû être hospitalisés pour la COVID-19 avaient été complètement vaccinés. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de cohorte rétrospective basée sur la population de personnes âgées de 12 ans ou plus en Alberta (population de 2021 ~ 4,4 millions) admises dans une unité de soins intensifs et atteintes de COVID-19 du 6 septembre 2021 au 4 janvier 2022. Nous avons utilisé des données agrégées accessibles au public sur les infections à la COVID-19, le statut vaccinal et l'utilisation des services de santé. Les admissions aux soins intensifs, les journées-patients, les durées de séjour et les coûts ont été estimés pour les patients atteints de la COVID-19 et stratifiés selon le statut vaccinal. RéSULTATS: Au total, 1053 patients admis à l'USI souffrant de la COVID-19 n'étaient pas vaccinés, 42 étaient partiellement vaccinés et 173 étaient complètement vaccinés (incidence cumulative 230,6, 30,8 et 5,5 patients / 100 000 habitants, respectivement). Les taux d'incidence cumulés des admissions aux soins intensifs étaient de 42,2 (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 39,7 à 44,9) pour les patients non vaccinés et de 5,6 (IC 95 %, 4,1 à 7,6) pour les patients partiellement vaccinés par rapport aux patients entièrement vaccinés. Au cours de la période à l'étude, 1028 admissions évitables aux soins intensifs et 13 015 journées-patients ont été enregistrées pour les patients non vaccinés, et les coûts totaux évitables étaient de 61,3 millions de dollars canadiens. L'économie potentielle la plus importante en matière de journées-patients et de coûts en soins intensifs touchait les patients non vaccinés âgés de 50 à 69 ans. CONCLUSION: Les patients non vaccinés atteints de COVID-19 ont affiché des taux beaucoup plus élevés d'admissions à l'USI, de journées-patients à l'USI et de coûts liés à l'USI que les patients vaccinés. Cette utilisation accrue des ressources aurait été potentiellement évitable si ces patients non vaccinés avaient été vaccinés contre le SRAS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19 Vaccines , SARS-CoV-2 , Intensive Care Units
2.
Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie ; : 1-6, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1957800

ABSTRACT

Purpose SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been proven effective at preventing poor outcomes from COVID-19;however, voluntary vaccination rates have been suboptimal. We assessed the potential avoidable intensive care unit (ICU) resource use and associated costs had unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 been fully vaccinated. Methods We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study of persons aged 12 yr or greater in Alberta (2021 population ~ 4.4 million) admitted to any ICU with COVID-19 from 6 September 2021 to 4 January 2022. We used publicly available aggregate data on COVID-19 infections, vaccination status, and health services use. Intensive care unit admissions, bed-days, lengths of stay, and costs were estimated for patients with COVID-19 and stratified by vaccination status. Results In total, 1,053 patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 were unvaccinated, 42 were partially vaccinated, and 173 were fully vaccinated (cumulative incidence 230.6, 30.8, and 5.5 patients/100,000 population, respectively). Cumulative incidence rate ratios of ICU admission were 42.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.7 to 44.9) for unvaccinated patients and 5.6 (95% CI, 4.1 to 7.6) for partially vaccinated patients when compared with fully vaccinated patients. During the study period, 1,028 avoidable ICU admissions and 13,015 bed-days were recorded for unvaccinated patients and the total avoidable costs were CAD 61.3 million. The largest opportunity to avoid ICU bed-days and costs was in unvaccinated patients aged 50 to 69 yr. Conclusions Unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 had substantially greater rates of ICU admissions, ICU bed-days, and ICU-related costs than vaccinated patients did. This increased resource use would have been potentially avoidable had these unvaccinated patients been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12630-022-02299-w.

3.
PLoS One ; 17(7): e0269783, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1938438

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Bluetooth-enabled smartphone apps have been developed and implemented in different sites globally to help overcome capacity limitations of traditional interview-based COVID-19 contact tracing. Two apps are currently available in Canada: ABTraceTogether exclusively in Alberta and COVID Alert in nine other provinces and territories. This study aims to examine factors associated with downloading of these apps to inform targeted promotion and marketing to increase app uptake. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey with adult participants (≥18 years old) from an online national panel. Participants were asked if they had downloaded an app and, if applicable, reasons for not downloading. Logistic regression was used to identify sociodemographic factors and trusted information sources associated with downloading and reasons for not downloading. RESULTS: Of the included 4,503 respondents (36% response rate), 1,394 (31%) had downloaded an app. Demographic and socioeconomic factors positively associated with app download were: 1) being female, 2) higher household income, 3) higher education level attained, and 4) more liberal political views. The odds of downloading an app were higher for participants who trusted health-related information sources, and lower for those who trusted internet searches, family and friend, or Facebook. The most cited reasons for not downloading were related to data security concerns and perceived lack of benefit from the apps. INTERPRETATION: These findings identify sociodemographic segments with the lowest app uptake, reasons for not downloading and trusted information sources to inform targeted promotion and marketing strategies to improve uptake of apps to facilitate contact tracing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mobile Applications , Adolescent , Adult , Alberta , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Contact Tracing , Cross-Sectional Studies , Disease Notification , Female , Humans , Male
4.
BMJ Open ; 12(2): e059711, 2022 Feb 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1807416

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Sleep-time blood pressure correlates more strongly with adverse cardiovascular events than does daytime blood pressure. The BedMed trial evaluates whether bedtime antihypertensive administration, as compared with conventional morning use, reduces major adverse cardiovascular events. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: DesignProspective randomised, open-label, blinded end-point trial.ParticipantsHypertensive primary care patients using blood pressure lowering medication and free from glaucoma.SettingCommunity primary care providers in 5 Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario) are mailing invitations to their eligible patients. Social media campaigns (Google, Facebook) are additionally running in the same provinces.InterventionConsenting participants are allocated via central randomisation to bedtime vs morning use of all antihypertensives.Follow-up(1) Telephone or email questionnaire at 1 week, 6 weeks, 6 months and every 6 months thereafter, and (2) accessing linked governmental healthcare databases tracking hospital and community medical services.Primary outcomeComposite of all-cause death, or hospitalisation for myocardial infarction/acute-coronary syndrome, stroke or congestive heart failure.Secondary outcomesEach primary outcome element on its own, all-cause hospitalisation or emergency department visit, long-term care admission, non-vertebral fracture, new glaucoma diagnosis, 18-month cognitive decline from baseline (via Short Blessed Test).Select other outcomesSelf-reported nocturia burden at 6 weeks and 6 months (no, minor or major burden), 1-year self-reported overall health score (EQ-5D-5L), self-reported falls, total cost of care (acute and community over study duration) and mean sleep-time systolic blood pressure after 6 months (via 24-hour monitor in a subset of 302 sequential participants).Primary outcome analysisCox proportional hazards survival analysis.Sample sizeThe trial will continue until a projected 254 primary outcome events have occurred.Current statusEnrolment ongoing (3227 randomised to date). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: BedMed has ethics approval from six research ethics review boards and will publish results in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02990663.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Glaucoma , Alberta , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases/drug therapy , Glaucoma/chemically induced , Humans , Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic , Prospective Studies , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Research Design , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
5.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(12): e30424, 2021 12 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1591681

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are concerns that vaccine hesitancy may impede COVID-19 vaccine rollout and prevent the achievement of herd immunity. Vaccine hesitancy is a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite their availability. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify which people are more and less likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine and factors associated with vaccine hesitancy to inform public health messaging. METHODS: A Canadian cross-sectional survey was conducted in Canada in October and November 2020, prior to the regulatory approval of the COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy was measured by respondents answering the question "what would you do if a COVID-19 vaccine were available to you?" Negative binomial regression was used to identify the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. Cluster analysis was performed to identify distinct clusters based on intention to take a COVID-19 vaccine, beliefs about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines, and adherence to nonpharmaceutical interventions. RESULTS: Of 4498 participants, 2876 (63.9%) reported COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy was significantly associated with (1) younger age (18-39 years), (2) lower education, and (3) non-Liberal political leaning. Participants that reported vaccine hesitancy were less likely to believe that a COVID-19 vaccine would end the pandemic or that the benefits of a COVID-19 vaccine outweighed the risks. Individuals with vaccine hesitancy had higher prevalence of being concerned about vaccine side effects, lower prevalence of being influenced by peers or health care professionals, and lower prevalence of trust in government institutions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings can be used to inform targeted public health messaging to combat vaccine hesitancy as COVID-19 vaccine administration continues. Messaging related to preventing COVID among friends and family, highlighting the benefits, emphasizing safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination, and ensuring that health care workers are knowledgeable and supported in their vaccination counselling may be effective for vaccine-hesitant populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , Attitude , Canada , Cluster Analysis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination Hesitancy , Young Adult
6.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 21751, 2021 11 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504251

ABSTRACT

Adoption of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) remains critical to curtail the spread of COVID-19. Using self-reported adherence to NPIs in Canada, assessed through a national cross-sectional survey of 4498 respondents, we aimed to identify and characterize non-adopters of NPIs, evaluating their attitudes and behaviours to understand barriers and facilitators of adoption. A cluster analysis was used to group adopters separately from non-adopters of NPIs. Associations with sociodemographic factors, attitudes towards COVID-19 and the public health response were assessed using logistic regression models comparing non-adopters to adopters. Of the 4498 respondents, 994 (22%) were clustered as non-adopters. Sociodemographic factors significantly associated with the non-adoption cluster were: (1) being male, (2) age 18-34 years, (3) Albertans, (4) lower education level and (5) higher conservative political leaning. Participants who expressed low concern for COVID-19 and distrust towards several institutions had greater odds of being non-adopters. This information characterizes individuals at greatest odds for non-adoption of NPIs to inform targeted marketing interventions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Alberta/epidemiology , Attitude to Health , COVID-19/psychology , Canada/epidemiology , Cluster Analysis , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Educational Status , Female , Health Literacy , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Physical Distancing , Politics , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
7.
PLoS One ; 16(6): e0252441, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1249578

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As a result of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), there have been widespread changes in healthcare access. We conducted a retrospective population-based study in Alberta, Canada (population 4.4 million), where there have been approximately 1550 hospital admissions for COVID-19, to determine the impact of COVID-19 on hospital admissions and emergency department (ED visits), following initiation of a public health emergency act on March 15, 2020. METHODS: We used multivariable negative binomial regression models to compare daily numbers of medical/surgical hospital admissions via the ED between March 16-September 23, 2019 (pre COVID-19) and March 16-September 23, 2020 (post COVID-19 public health measures). We compared the most frequent diagnoses for hospital admissions pre/post COVID-19 public health measures. A similar analysis was completed for numbers of daily ED visits for any reason with a particular focus on ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSC). FINDINGS: There was a significant reduction in both daily medical (incident rate ratio (IRR) 0.86, p<0.001) and surgical (IRR 0.82, p<0.001) admissions through the ED in Alberta post COVID-19 public health measures. There was a significant decline in daily ED visits (IRR 0.65, p<0.001) including ACSC (IRR 0.75, p<0.001). The most common medical/surgical diagnoses for hospital admissions did not vary substantially pre and post COVID-19 public health measures, though there was a significant reduction in admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and a significant increase in admissions for mental and behavioral disorders due to use of alcohol. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a relatively low volume of COVID-19 hospital admissions in Alberta, there was an extensive impact on our healthcare system with fewer admissions to hospital and ED visits. This work generates hypotheses around causes for reduced hospital admissions and ED visits which warrant further investigation. As most publicly funded health systems struggle with health-system capacity routinely, understanding how these reductions can be safely sustained will be critical.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Alcoholism/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Canada/epidemiology , Female , Government Regulation , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Physical Distancing , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
8.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 765, 2021 04 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1197345

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Public support of public health measures including physical distancing, masking, staying home while sick, avoiding crowded indoor spaces and contact tracing/exposure notification applications remains critical for reducing spread of COVID-19. The aim of our work was to understand current behaviours and attitudes towards public health measures as well as barriers individuals face in following public health measures. We also sought to identify attitudes persons have regarding a COVID-19 vaccine and reasons why they may not accept a vaccine. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in August 2020, in Alberta, Canada in persons 18 years and older. This survey evaluated current behaviours, barriers and attitudes towards public health measures and a COVID-19 vaccine. Cluster analysis was used to identify key patterns that summarize data variations among observations. RESULTS: Of the 60 total respondents, the majority of persons were always or often physically distancing (73%), masking (65%) and staying home while sick (67%). Bars/pubs/lounges or nightclubs were visited rarely or never by 63% of respondents. Persons identified staying home while sick to provide the highest benefit (83%) in reducing spread of COVID-19. There were a large proportion of persons who had not downloaded or used a contact tracing/exposure notification app (77%) and who would not receive a COVID-19 vaccine when available (20%) or were unsure (12%). Reporting health authorities as most trusted sources of health information was associated with greater percentage of potential uptake of vaccine but not related to contact tracing app download and use. Individuals with lower concern of getting and spreading COVID-19 showed the least uptake of public health measures except for avoiding public places such as bars. Lower concern regarding COVID-19 was also associated with more negative responses to taking a potential COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSION: These results suggest informational frames and themes focusing on individual risks, highlighting concern for COVID-19 and targeting improving trust for health authorities may be most effective in increasing public health measures. With the ultimate goal of preventing spread of COVID-19, understanding persons' attitudes towards both public health measures and a COVID-19 vaccine remains critical to addressing barriers and implementing targeted interventions and messaging to improve uptake.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Adolescent , Adult , Alberta , COVID-19 Vaccines , Communication , Contact Tracing , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , Vaccination/psychology , Young Adult
9.
CMAJ Open ; 8(4): E887-E894, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1000597

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among asymptomatic patients admitted to hospital has implications for personal protective equipment use, testing strategy and confidence in the safety of acute care services. Our aim was to estimate the positivity rate of reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing among people admitted to hospital without symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Alberta, Canada. METHODS: Between Apr. 9 and May 24, 2020, we screened for COVID-19 symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection in all consecutive adult patients (≥ 18 yr) admitted via emergency department to 3 Alberta hospitals. We summarized the parameters of the epidemic curve and assessed the performance of symptom screening versus RT-PCR results on nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab samples. RESULTS: The study period encompassed Alberta's initial epidemic curve, with peak active cases per 100 000 of 71.4 (0.07%) on Apr. 30, 2020, and 14.7 and 14.6 at the beginning (Apr. 9, 2020) and end (May 24, 2020), respectively. Testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection (64.9% throat and 35.1% nasopharyngeal swabs) was done on 3375 adults (mean age 51, standard deviation 21, yr; 51.5% men). None of the asymptomatic patients (n = 1814) tested positive, and 71 of those with symptoms tested positive (n = 1561; 4.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6%-5.7%). Sensitivity of symptom screening (v. RT-PCR) was 100% (95% CI 95%-100%), and specificity was 55% (95% CI 53%-57%). Posttest probabilities for prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection ranging from 1.5 to 14 times the peak prevalence of active cases during the study did not change when we assumed lower sensitivity (92%). INTERPRETATION: In a region with low disease prevalence where protocolized symptom assessment was in place during the admission process, we did not identify people admitted to hospital without COVID-19 symptoms who were RT-PCR positive. There may not be additive benefit to universal testing of asymptomatic patients on hospital admission in a setting of low pretest probability and strong public health containment.


Subject(s)
Asymptomatic Diseases/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/standards , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Mass Screening/methods , Quality Improvement , Alberta/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , Comorbidity , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL