Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Main subject
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Am J Prev Cardiol ; 14: 100499, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2309191

ABSTRACT

Background: Effective control of risk factors in patients with ASCVD is important to reduce recurrent cardiovascular events. However, many ASCVD patients do not have their risk factors controlled, and this may have worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated risk factor control among 24,760 ASCVD patients who had at least 1 outpatient encounter both pre-pandemic and during the first year of the pandemic. Risk factors were uncontrolled if the blood pressure (BP) ≥ 130/80 mm Hg, LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL, HgbA1c ≥ 7 for diabetic patients, and patients were current smokers. Results: During the pandemic, many patients had their risk factors unmonitored. BP control worsened (BP ≥ 130/80 mmHg, 64.2 vs 65.7%; p = 0.01), while lipid management improved with more patients on a high-intensity statin (38.9 vs 43.9%; p<0.001) and more achieving an LDL-C < 70 mg/dL, less patients were smoking (7.4 vs 6.7%; p<0.001), and diabetic control was unchanged pre vs during the pandemic. Black (OR 1.53 [1.02-2.31]) and younger aged patients (OR 1.008 [1.001-1.015]) were significantly more likely to have missing or uncontrolled risk factors during the pandemic. Conclusions: During the pandemic risk factors were more likely to be unmonitored. While measured blood pressure control worsened, lipid control and smoking improved. Although some cardiovascular risk factor control improved during the COVID-19 pandemic, overall control of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with ASCVD was suboptimal, especially in Black and younger patients. This puts many ASCVD patients at increased risk of a recurrent cardiovascular event.

2.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) ; 81:1734-1734, 2023.
Article in English | CINAHL | ID: covidwho-2265540
3.
Am J Med Sci ; 364(4): 409-413, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1814047

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients at risk for mortality from COVID-19 is crucial to triage, clinical decision-making, and the allocation of scarce hospital resources. The 4C Mortality Score effectively predicts COVID-19 mortality, but it has not been validated in a United States (U.S.) population. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the 4C Mortality Score accurately predicts COVID-19 mortality in an urban U.S. adult inpatient population. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients admitted to a single-center, tertiary care hospital (Philadelphia, PA) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR from 3/01/2020 to 6/06/2020. Variables were extracted through a combination of automated export and manual chart review. The outcome of interest was mortality during hospital admission or within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: This study included 426 patients; mean age was 64.4 years, 43.4% were female, and 54.5% self-identified as Black or African American. All-cause mortality was observed in 71 patients (16.7%). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of the 4C Mortality Score was 0.85 (95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians may use the 4C Mortality Score in an urban, majority Black, U.S. inpatient population. The derivation and validation cohorts were treated in the pre-vaccine era so the 4C Score may over-predict mortality in current patient populations. With stubbornly high inpatient mortality rates, however, the 4C Score remains one of the best tools available to date to inform thoughtful triage and treatment allocation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL