Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 51
Filter
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2023 Mar 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2328027

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are frequently prescribed unnecessarily in outpatients with COVID-19. We sought to evaluate factors associated with antibiotic prescribing in those with SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: We performed a population-wide cohort study of outpatients 66 years or older with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 from January 1st 2020 to December 31st 2021 in Ontario, Canada. We determined rates of antibiotic prescribing within 1-week before (pre-diagnosis) and 1-week after (post-diagnosis) reporting of the positive SARS-CoV-2 result, compared to a self-controlled period (baseline). We evaluated predictors of prescribing, including a primary series COVID-19 vaccination, in univariate and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: We identified 13,529 eligible nursing home residents and 50,885 eligible community dwelling adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of the nursing home and community residents, 3,020 (22%) and 6,372 (13%) received at least one antibiotic prescription within 1 week of a SARS-CoV-2 positive result, respectively. Antibiotic prescribing in nursing home and community residents occurred at 15.0 and 10.5 prescriptions per 1000 person-days pre-diagnosis and 20.9 and 9.8 per 1000 person-days post-diagnosis, higher than the baseline rates of 4.3 and 2.5 prescriptions per 1000 person-days. COVID-19 vaccination was associated with reduced prescribing in nursing home and community residents, with adjusted post-diagnosis IRRs of 0.7 (95%CI 0.4-1) and 0.3 (95%CI 0.3-0.4) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prescribing was high and with little or no decline following SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, though was reduced in COVID-19 vaccinated individuals, highlighting the importance of vaccination and antibiotic stewardship in older adults with COVID-19.

2.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 2022 Sep 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2261580

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: Obesity affects 40% of US adults, is associated with a pro-inflammatory state, and presents a significant risk factor for the development of severe COVID-19. To date, there is limited information on how obesity might affect immune cell responses in SARS-CoV-2 infection. OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of obesity on respiratory tract immunity in COVID-19 across human lifespan. METHODS: We analysed single cell transcriptomes from bronchiolar lavage in three ventilated adult cohorts with (n=24) or without COVID-19 (n=9), from nasal immune cells in children with (n=14) or without COVID-19 (n=19), and from peripheral blood mononuclear cells in an independent adult COVID-19 cohort (n=42), comparing obese (Ob) and non-obese subjects (N-Ob). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Surprisingly, we found that adult Ob subjects had attenuated lung immune/inflammatory responses in SARS-CoV-2 infection, with decreased expression of interferon (IFN)α, IFNγ and tumour necrosis factor (TNF) alpha response gene signatures in almost all lung epithelial and immune cell subsets, and lower expression of IFNG and TNF in specific lung immune cells. Peripheral blood immune cells in an independent adult cohort showed a similar, but less marked, reduction in type I IFN and IFNγ response genes, as well as decreased serum IFNα in Ob patients with SARS-CoV-2. Nasal immune cells from Ob children with COVID-19 also showed reduced enrichment of IFNα and IFNγ response genes. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show blunted tissue immune responses in Ob COVID-19 patients, with implications for treatment stratification, supporting the specific application of inhaled recombinant type I IFNs in this vulnerable subset. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

3.
Lancet Digit Health ; 4(10): e748-e756, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2257629

ABSTRACT

Routine health care and research have been profoundly influenced by digital-health technologies. These technologies range from primary data collection in electronic health records (EHRs) and administrative claims to web-based artificial-intelligence-driven analyses. There has been increased use of such health technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic, driven in part by the availability of these data. In some cases, this has resulted in profound and potentially long-lasting positive effects on medical research and routine health-care delivery. In other cases, high profile shortcomings have been evident, potentially attenuating the effect of-or representing a decreased appetite for-digital-health transformation. In this Series paper, we provide an overview of how facets of health technologies in routinely collected medical data (including EHRs and digital data sharing) have been used for COVID-19 research and tracking, and how these technologies might influence future pandemics and health-care research. We explore the strengths and weaknesses of digital-health research during the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss how learnings from COVID-19 might translate into new approaches in a post-pandemic era.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Artificial Intelligence , COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care , Digital Technology , Humans
4.
Eur Respir J ; 2022 Nov 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2232006
5.
Nat Med ; 29(1): 219-225, 2023 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2185962

ABSTRACT

How the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected prevention and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is not fully understood. In this study, we used medication data as a proxy for CVD management using routinely collected, de-identified, individual-level data comprising 1.32 billion records of community-dispensed CVD medications from England, Scotland and Wales between April 2018 and July 2021. Here we describe monthly counts of prevalent and incident medications dispensed, as well as percentage changes compared to the previous year, for several CVD-related indications, focusing on hypertension, hypercholesterolemia and diabetes. We observed a decline in the dispensing of antihypertensive medications between March 2020 and July 2021, with 491,306 fewer individuals initiating treatment than expected. This decline was predicted to result in 13,662 additional CVD events, including 2,281 cases of myocardial infarction and 3,474 cases of stroke, should individuals remain untreated over their lifecourse. Incident use of lipid-lowering medications decreased by 16,744 patients per month during the first half of 2021 as compared to 2019. By contrast, incident use of medications to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus, other than insulin, increased by approximately 623 patients per month for the same time period. In light of these results, methods to identify and treat individuals who have missed treatment for CVD risk factors and remain undiagnosed are urgently required to avoid large numbers of excess future CVD events, an indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiovascular Diseases , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Hypertension , Humans , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hypertension/complications , Hypertension/drug therapy , Hypertension/epidemiology , Risk Factors
6.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(4): 417-426, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2185059

ABSTRACT

Antibiotics are among the most common medications prescribed in nursing homes. The annual prevalence of antibiotic use in residents of nursing homes ranges from 47% to 79%, and more than half of antibiotic courses initiated in nursing-home settings are unnecessary or prescribed inappropriately (wrong drug, dose, or duration). Inappropriate antibiotic use is associated with a variety of negative consequences including Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), adverse drug effects, drug-drug interactions, and antimicrobial resistance. In response to this problem, public health authorities have called for efforts to improve the quality of antibiotic prescribing in nursing homes.


Subject(s)
Clostridium Infections , Nursing Homes , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Clostridium Infections/drug therapy , Humans , Reproducibility of Results
7.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; : 100393, 2022 Nov 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2120377

ABSTRACT

Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) causes more than a million deaths globally per year due to infections incurable with currently available antibiotics. Failing to effectively address AMR will have significant negative consequences for Canadians and the Canadian economy. Canada is behind on allocation of required funding and nationally coordinated AMR mitigation strategies relative to other high-income countries. A Pan-Canadian AMR action plan and development of a new governance model is pending. Recent AMR-specific funding commitments are significant but fall short while distribution of funds indicate a siloed approach. Canada could initiate progress towards AMR mitigation through incorporation within the scope of budget allocations intended for COVID-19 recovery and mitigation efforts. We discuss the following components for inclusion: development of infectious disease diagnostics and therapeutics; antimicrobial stewardship interventions in long-term care and Indigenous communities; environmental monitoring of AMR; comprehensive antimicrobial use, and AMR surveillance; and support for capacity-building in low and middle-income countries.

8.
Intensive Care Med ; 48(11): 1617-1620, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2094589
9.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 319, 2022 10 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2079528

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to describe the epidemiology and outcomes of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HABSIs) between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 critically ill patients. METHODS: We used data from the Eurobact II study, a prospective observational multicontinental cohort study on HABSI treated in ICU. For the current analysis, we selected centers that included both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 critically ill patients. We performed descriptive statistics between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 in terms of patients' characteristics, source of infection and microorganism distribution. We studied the association between COVID-19 status and mortality using multivariable fragility Cox models. RESULTS: A total of 53 centers from 19 countries over the 5 continents were eligible. Overall, 829 patients (median age 65 years [IQR 55; 74]; male, n = 538 [64.9%]) were treated for a HABSI. Included patients comprised 252 (30.4%) COVID-19 and 577 (69.6%) non-COVID-19 patients. The time interval between hospital admission and HABSI was similar between both groups. Respiratory sources (40.1 vs. 26.0%, p < 0.0001) and primary HABSI (25.4% vs. 17.2%, p = 0.006) were more frequent in COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 patients had more often enterococcal (20.5% vs. 9%) and Acinetobacter spp. (18.8% vs. 13.6%) HABSIs. Bacteremic COVID-19 patients had an increased mortality hazard ratio (HR) versus non-COVID-19 patients (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.49-2.45). CONCLUSIONS: We showed that the epidemiology of HABSI differed between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Enterococcal HABSI predominated in COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 patients with HABSI had elevated risk of mortality. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.org number NCT03937245 . Registered 3 May 2019.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Sepsis , Aged , Humans , Male , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units , Sepsis/epidemiology
11.
The Lancet. Digital health ; 4(10):e748-e756, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2033899

ABSTRACT

Routine health care and research have been profoundly influenced by digital-health technologies. These technologies range from primary data collection in electronic health records (EHRs) and administrative claims to web-based artificial-intelligence-driven analyses. There has been increased use of such health technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic, driven in part by the availability of these data. In some cases, this has resulted in profound and potentially long-lasting positive effects on medical research and routine health-care delivery. In other cases, high profile shortcomings have been evident, potentially attenuating the effect of—or representing a decreased appetite for—digital-health transformation. In this Series paper, we provide an overview of how facets of health technologies in routinely collected medical data (including EHRs and digital data sharing) have been used for COVID-19 research and tracking, and how these technologies might influence future pandemics and health-care research. We explore the strengths and weaknesses of digital-health research during the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss how learnings from COVID-19 might translate into new approaches in a post-pandemic era.

12.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(1): e97-e101, 2022 08 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2017776

ABSTRACT

Airborne severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was detected in a coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) ward before activation of HEPA-air filtration but not during filter operation; SARS-CoV-2 was again detected following filter deactivation. Airborne SARS-CoV-2 was infrequently detected in a COVID-19 intensive care unit. Bioaerosol was also effectively filtered.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitals , Humans
13.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 236, 2022 Aug 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2002213

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presented major challenges for critical care facilities worldwide. Infections which develop alongside or subsequent to viral pneumonitis are a challenge under sporadic and pandemic conditions; however, data have suggested that patterns of these differ between COVID-19 and other viral pneumonitides. This secondary analysis aimed to explore patterns of co-infection and intensive care unit-acquired infections (ICU-AI) and the relationship to use of corticosteroids in a large, international cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This is a multicenter, international, observational study, including adult patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis admitted to ICUs at the peak of wave one of COVID-19 (February 15th to May 15th, 2020). Data collected included investigator-assessed co-infection at ICU admission, infection acquired in ICU, infection with multi-drug resistant organisms (MDRO) and antibiotic use. Frequencies were compared by Pearson's Chi-squared and continuous variables by Mann-Whitney U test. Propensity score matching for variables associated with ICU-acquired infection was undertaken using R library MatchIT using the "full" matching method. RESULTS: Data were available from 4994 patients. Bacterial co-infection at admission was detected in 716 patients (14%), whilst 85% of patients received antibiotics at that stage. ICU-AI developed in 2715 (54%). The most common ICU-AI was bacterial pneumonia (44% of infections), whilst 9% of patients developed fungal pneumonia; 25% of infections involved MDRO. Patients developing infections in ICU had greater antimicrobial exposure than those without such infections. Incident density (ICU-AI per 1000 ICU days) was in considerable excess of reports from pre-pandemic surveillance. Corticosteroid use was heterogenous between ICUs. In univariate analysis, 58% of patients receiving corticosteroids and 43% of those not receiving steroids developed ICU-AI. Adjusting for potential confounders in the propensity-matched cohort, 71% of patients receiving corticosteroids developed ICU-AI vs 52% of those not receiving corticosteroids. Duration of corticosteroid therapy was also associated with development of ICU-AI and infection with an MDRO. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe COVID-19 in the first wave, co-infection at admission to ICU was relatively rare but antibiotic use was in substantial excess to that indication. ICU-AI were common and were significantly associated with use of corticosteroids. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04836065 (retrospectively registered April 8th 2021).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coinfection , Pneumonia, Bacterial , Pneumonia, Viral , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Coinfection/drug therapy , Coinfection/epidemiology , Critical Illness , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Bacterial/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology
14.
Antibiotics (Basel) ; 11(8)2022 Jul 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1957211

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic affected access to care, and the associated public health measures influenced the transmission of other infectious diseases. The pandemic has dramatically changed antibiotic prescribing in the community. We aimed to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting control measures on oral antibiotic prescribing in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) in Alberta and Ontario, Canada using linked administrative data. Antibiotic prescription data were collected for LTCF residents 65 years and older in Alberta and Ontario from 1 January 2017 until 31 December 2020. Weekly prescription rates per 1000 residents, stratified by age, sex, antibiotic class, and selected individual agents, were calculated. Interrupted time series analyses using SARIMA models were performed to test for changes in antibiotic prescription rates after the start of the pandemic (1 March 2020). The average annual cohort size was 18,489 for Alberta and 96,614 for Ontario. A significant decrease in overall weekly prescription rates after the start of the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic was found in Alberta, but not in Ontario. Furthermore, a significant decrease in prescription rates was observed for antibiotics mainly used to treat respiratory tract infections: amoxicillin in both provinces (Alberta: -0.6 per 1000 LTCF residents decrease in weekly prescription rate, p = 0.006; Ontario: -0.8, p < 0.001); and doxycycline (-0.2, p = 0.005) and penicillin (-0.04, p = 0.014) in Ontario. In Ontario, azithromycin was prescribed at a significantly higher rate after the start of the pandemic (0.7 per 1000 LTCF residents increase in weekly prescription rate, p = 0.011). A decrease in prescription rates for antibiotics that are largely used to treat respiratory tract infections is in keeping with the lower observed rates for respiratory infections resulting from pandemic control measures. The results should be considered in the contexts of different LTCF systems and provincial public health responses to the pandemic.

15.
Int J Popul Data Sci ; 5(4): 1715, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1893601

ABSTRACT

Background: Population-level information on dispensed medication provides insight on the distribution of treated morbidities, particularly if linked to other population-scale data at an individual-level. Objective: To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on dispensing patterns of medications. Methods: Retrospective observational study using population-scale, individual-level dispensing records in Wales, UK. Total dispensed drug items for the population between 1 st January 2016 and 31 st December 2019 (3-years, pre-COVID-19) were compared to 2020 with follow up until 27 th July 2021 (COVID-19 period). We compared trends across all years and British National Formulary (BNF) chapters and highlighted the trends in three major chapters for 2019-21: 1-Cardiovascular system (CVD); 2-Central Nervous System (CNS); 3-Immunological & Vaccine. We developed an interactive dashboard to enable monitoring of changes as the pandemic evolves. Result: Amongst all BNF chapters, 73,410,543 items were dispensed in 2020 compared to 74,121,180 items in 2019 demonstrating -0.96% relative decrease in 2020. Comparison of monthly patterns showed average difference (D) of -59,220 and average Relative Change (RC) of -0.74% between the number of dispensed items in 2020 and 2019. Maximum RC was observed in March 2020 (D = +1,224,909 and RC = +20.62), followed by second peak in June 2020 (D = +257,920, RC = +4.50%). A third peak was observed in September 2020 (D = +264,138, RC = +4.35%). Large increases in March 2020 were observed for CVD and CNS medications across all age groups. The Immunological and Vaccine products dropped to very low levels across all age groups and all months (including the March dispensing peak). Conclusions: Reconfiguration of routine clinical services during COVID-19 led to substantial changes in community pharmacy drug dispensing. This change may contribute to a long-term burden of COVID-19, raising the importance of a comprehensive and timely monitoring of changes for evaluation of the potential impact on clinical care and outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Cardiovascular Diseases , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , Wales/epidemiology
16.
Lancet (London, England) ; 399(10337):1775-1775, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1823186
17.
J Am Coll Clin Pharm ; 5(7): 707-715, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1763243

ABSTRACT

Resilience is having the ability to respond to adversity proactively and resourcefully. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic's profound impact on antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) requires clinicians to call on their own resilience to manage the demands of the pandemic and the disruption of ASP activities. This article provides examples of ASP resilience from pharmacists and physicians from seven countries with different resources and approaches to ASP-The United States, The United Kingdom, Canada, Nigeria, Lebanon, South Africa, and Colombia. The lessons learned pertain to providing ASP clinical services in the context of a global pandemic, developing new ASP paradigms in the face of COVID-19, leveraging technology to extend the reach of ASP, and conducting international collaborative ASP research remotely. This article serves as an example of how resilience and global collaboration is sustaining our ASPs by sharing new "how to" do antimicrobial stewardship practices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

18.
J Assoc Med Microbiol Infect Dis Can ; 7(1): 14-22, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1753323

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Empirical antibiotics are not recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: In this retrospective study, patients admitted to Toronto General Hospital's general internal medicine from the emergency department for COVID-19 between March 1 and August 31, 2020 were compared with those admitted for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in 2020 and 2019 in the same months. The primary outcome was antibiotics use pattern: prevalence and concordance with COVID-19 or CAP guidelines. The secondary outcome was antibiotic consumption in days of therapy (DOT)/100 patient-days. We extracted data from electronic medical records. We used logistic regression to model the association between disease and receipt of antibiotics, linear regression to compare DOT. RESULTS: The COVID-19, CAP 2020, and CAP 2019 groups had 67, 73, and 120 patients, respectively. Median age was 71 years; 58.5% were male. Prevalence of antibiotic use was 70.2%, 97.3%, and 90.8% for COVID-19, CAP 2020, and CAP 2019, respectively. Compared with CAP 2019, the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for receiving antibiotics was 0.23 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.53, p = 0.001) and 3.42 (95% CI 0.73 to 15.95, p = 0.117) for COVID-19 and CAP 2020, respectively. Among patients receiving antibiotics within 48 hours of admission, compared with CAP 2019, the aOR for guideline-concordant combination regimens was 2.28 (95% CI 1.08 to 4.83, p = 0.031) for COVID-19, and 1.06 (95% CI 0.55 to 2.05, p = 0.856) for CAP 2020. Difference in mean DOT/100 patient-days was -24.29 (p = 0.009) comparing COVID-19 with CAP 2019, and +28.56 (p = 0.003) comparing CAP 2020 with CAP 2019. CONCLUSIONS: There are opportunities for antimicrobial stewardship to address unnecessary antibiotic use.


HISTORIQUE: L'antibiothérapie empirique n'est pas recommandée pour le traitement de la maladie à coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). MÉTHODOLOGIE: Dans cette étude rétrospective, les chercheurs ont comparé les patients atteints de COVID-19 hospitalisés au département de médecine interne générale du Toronto General Hospital entre le 1er mars et le 31 août 2020 après être passés par l'urgence à ceux hospitalisés à cause d'une pneumonie d'origine communautaire (POC) au cours des mêmes mois en 2020 et 2019 (POC-20 et POC-19). Le résultat primaire était le schéma d'utilisation des antibiotiques, c'est-à-dire la prévalence et le respect des lignes directrices sur la COVID-19 ou la POC. Le résultat secondaire correspondait à la consommation d'antibiotiques pendant les jours de traitement (JdT)/100 jours-patients. Les chercheurs ont puisé les données dans les dossiers médicaux électroniques. Ils se sont servi de la régression logistique pour modéliser l'association entre la maladie et la réception des antibiotiques, et de la régression linéaire pour comparer les JdT. RÉSULTATS: Le groupe COVID-19, le groupe POC-20 et le groupe POC-19 étaient composés de 67, 73 et 120 patients, respectivement. Ils avaient un âge médian de 71 ans, et 58,5 % étaient de sexe masculin. La prévalence d'utilisation d'antibiotiques s'élevait à 70,2 %, 97,3 % et 90,8 % dans les groupes COVID-19, POC-20 et POC-19, respectivement. Par rapport au groupe POC-19, le rapport de cotes rajusté (RCr) relatif à la réception d'antibiotiques s'élevait à 0,23 (IC à 95 %, 0,10 à 0,53, p = 0,001) et 3,42 (IC à 95 %, 0,73 à 15,95, p = 0,117) dans les groupes COVID-19 et POC-20, respectivement. Chez les patients qui avaient reçu des antibiotiques dans les 48 heures suivant leur hospitalisation par rapport au POC-19, le RCr relatif à la posologie d'association conforme aux lignes directrices était de 2,28 (IC à 95 %, 1,08 à 4,83, p = 0,031) et de 1,06 (IC à 95 %, 0,55 à 2,05, p = 0,856) dans le groupe POC-20. La différence quant au nombre moyen de JdT/100 jours-patients correspondait à ­24,29 (p = 0,009) lorsqu'on comparait le groupe COVID-19 au groupe POC-19, et à +28,56 (p = 0,003) lorsqu'on comparait le groupe POC-20 au groupe POC-19. CONCLUSIONS: L'utilisation inutile d'antibiotiques pourrait très bien être prise en charge par la gérance des antimicrobiens.

19.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 9(3): ofac008, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1684769

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several outpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapies have reduced hospitalization in randomized controlled trials. The choice of therapy may depend on drug efficacy, toxicity, pricing, availability, and available infrastructure. To facilitate comparative decision-making, we evaluated the efficacy of each treatment in clinical trials and estimated the cost per hospitalization prevented. METHODS: Wherever possible, we obtained relative risk for hospitalization from published randomized controlled trials. Otherwise, we extracted data from press releases, conference abstracts, government submissions, or preprints. If there was >1 study, the results were meta-analyzed. Using relative risk, we estimated the number needed to treat (NNT), assuming a baseline hospitalization risk of 5%, and compared the cost per hospitalization prevented with the estimate for an average Medicare COVID-19 hospitalization ($21 752). Drug pricing was estimated from GoodRx, from government purchases, or manufacturer estimates. Administrative and societal costs were not included. Results will be updated online as new studies emerge and/or final numbers become available. RESULTS: At a 5% risk of hospitalization, the estimated NNT was 80 for fluvoxamine, 91 for colchicine, 72 for inhaled corticosteroids, 24 for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 50 for molnupiravir, 28 for remdesivir, 25 for sotrovimab, 29 for casirivimab/imdevimab, and 29 for bamlanivimab/etesevimab. For drug cost per hospitalization prevented, colchicine, fluvoxamine, inhaled corticosteroids, and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were below the Medicare estimated hospitalization cost. CONCLUSIONS: Many countries are fortunate to have access to several effective outpatient therapies to prevent COVID-19 hospitalization. Given differences in efficacy, toxicity, cost, and administration complexity, this assessment serves as one means to frame treatment selection.

20.
Trials ; 23(1): 62, 2022 Jan 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1643174

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has presented unique challenges for rapidly designing, initiating, and delivering therapeutic clinical trials. PRINCIPLE (Platform Randomised Trial of Treatments in the Community for Epidemic and Pandemic Illnesses) is the UK national platform investigating repurposed therapies for COVID-19 treatment of older people in the community at high risk of complications. Standard methods of patient recruitment were failing to meet the required pace and scale of enrolment. This paper describes the development and appraisal of a near real-time, data-driven, ethical approach for enhancing recruitment in community care by contacting people with a recent COVID-19 positive test result from the central NHS Test and Trace service within approximately 24-48 h of their test result. METHODS: A multi-disciplinary team was formed to solve the technical, ethical, public perception, logistical and information governance issues required to provide a near-real time (approximately within 24-48 h of receiving a positive test) feed of potential trial participants from test result data to the research team. PRINCIPLE was also given unique access to the Summary Care Record (SCR) to ensure safe prescribing, and to enable the trial team to quickly and safely bring consented patients into the trial. A survey of the public was used to understand public perceptions of the use of test data for this proposed methodology. RESULTS: Prior to establishing the data service, PRINCIPLE registered on average 87 participants per week. This increased by up to 87 additional people registered per week from the test data, contributing to an increase from 1013 recruits to PRINCIPLE at the start of October 2020 to 2802 recruits by 20 December 2020. Whilst procedural caveats were identified by the public consultation, out of 2639 people contacted by PRINCIPLE following a positive test result, no one raised a concern about being approached. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes a novel approach to using near-real time NHS operational data to recruit community-based patients within a few days of presentation with acute illness. This approach increased recruitment and reduced time between positive test and randomisation, allowing more rapid evaluation of treatments and increased safety for participants. End-to-end public and patient involvement in the design of the approach provided evidence to inform information governance decisions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PRINCIPLE is funded by UK Research and Innovation and the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health Research. EudraCT number: 2020-001209-22 . 26/03/2020 ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN86534580 . 20/03/2020 REC number: 20/SC/058 IRAS number: 281958.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Aged , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Selection , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL