Facility-based directly observed therapy (DOT) for tuberculosis during COVID-19: A community perspective.

Facility-based directly observed therapy (DOT) has been the standard for treating people with TB since the early 1990s. As the commitment to promote a people-centred model of care for TB grows, the use of facility-based DOT has been questioned as issues of freedom, privacy, and human rights have been raised. The disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing lockdown measures have fast-tracked the need to find alternative methods to provide treatment to people with TB. In this study, we present quantitative and qualitative findings from a global community-based survey on the challenges of administering facility-based DOT during a pandemic as well as potential alternatives. Our results found that decreased access to transportation, the fear of COVID-19, stigmatization due to overlapping symptoms, and punitive measures against quarantine violations have made it difficult for persons with TB to receive treatment at facilities, particularly in low-resource settings. Potential replacements included greater focus on community-based DOT, home delivery of treatment, multi-month dispensing, and video DOT strategies. Our study highlights the need for TB programs to re-evaluate their approach to providing treatment to people with TB, and that these changes must be made in consultation with people affected by TB and TB survivors to provide a true people-centred model of care.

Predictors of severity and mortality among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Rhode Island.

BACKGROUND: In order for healthcare systems to prepare for future waves of COVID-19, an in-depth understanding of clinical predictors is essential for efficient triage of hospitalized patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 259 patients admitted to our hospitals in Rhode Island to examine differences in baseline characteristics (demographics and comorbidities) as well as presenting symptoms, signs, labs, and imaging findings that predicted disease progression and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Patients with severe COVID-19 were more likely to be older (p = 0.02), Black (47.2% vs. 32.0%, p = 0.04), admitted from a nursing facility (33.0% vs. 17.9%, p = 0.006), have diabetes (53.9% vs. 30.4%, p<0.001), or have COPD (15.4% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.02). In multivariate regression, Black race (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-3.9) and diabetes (aOR 2.2, 95%CI: 1.3-3.9) were independent predictors of severe disease, while older age (aOR 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.07), admission from a nursing facility (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.1-6.7), and hematological co-morbidities predicted mortality (aOR 3.4, 95% CI 1.1-10.0). In the first 24 hours, respiratory symptoms (aOR 7.0, 95% CI: 1.4-34.1), hypoxia (aOR 19.9, 95% CI: 2.6-152.5), and hypotension (aOR 2.7, 95% CI) predicted progression to severe disease, while tachypnea (aOR 8.7, 95% CI: 1.1-71.7) and hypotension (aOR 9.0, 95% CI: 3.1-26.1) were associated with increased in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Certain patient characteristics and clinical features can help clinicians with early identification and triage of high-risk patients during subsequent waves of COVID-19.

Characteristics and outcomes of Hispanic/Latinx patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) requiring hospitalization in Rhode Island: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Explore potential racial/ethnic differences, describe general clinical characteristic, and severe outcomes (intensive care unit [ICU] admission, mechanical ventilation [intubation], and death) between Hispanic/Latinx (hereafter: Hispanics or Latinx community) and non-Hispanic patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: Retrospective cohort of 326 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 through April 19, 2020. Sociodemographic and hospital course data were collected and analyzed. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was implemented to examine associations. RESULTS: Compared with non-Hispanic Whites (NHW), Hispanics were younger (53 years, median age) and had higher rates of Medicaid and less commercial/HMO/PPO coverage (P < .001). Similarly, in the age sub-grouped multivariate analysis for outcomes, Hispanics ≥65-year-old were 2.66 times more likely to be admitted to ICU (95% CI: 1.07-6.61; P = .03), and 3.67 times more likely to get intubated (95% CI: 1.29-10.36; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized Hispanic patients of ≥65-year-old with COVID-19 were more likely to have higher risk of more severe outcomes (ICU admission and intubation) compared with NHW. Hispanic patient's social determinants of health and underlying medical conditions may explain the heightened risk for severe outcomes. Further studies are necessary to more accurately identify and address health disparities in Hispanics and other vulnerable populations amidst COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Single-Center Experience and Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are considered high-risk for morbidity and mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, some studies did not show worse outcomes compared to non-transplant patients and there is little data about immunosuppressant drug levels and secondary infections in KTR with COVID-19. Herein, we describe our single-center experience with COVID-19 in KTR. METHODS: We captured KTR diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 1, 2020 and May 18, 2020. After exclusion of KTR on hemodialysis and off immunosuppression, we compared the clinical course of COVID-19 between hospitalized KTR and non-transplant patients, matched by age and sex (controls). RESULTS: Eleven KTR were hospitalized and matched with 44 controls. One KTR and 4 controls died (case fatality rate: 9.1%). There were no significant differences in length of stay or clinical outcomes between KTR and controls. Tacrolimus or sirolimus levels were >10 ng/mL in 6 out of 9 KTR (67%). Bacterial infections were more frequent in KTR (36.3%), compared with controls (6.8%, P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: In our small case series, unlike earlier reports from the pandemic epicenters, the clinical outcomes of KTR with COVID-19 were comparable to those of non-transplant patients. Calcineurin or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTOR) levels were high. Bacterial infections were more common in KTR, compared with controls.

Validation of pneumonia prognostic scores in a statewide cohort of hospitalised patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to externally validate the predictive performance of two recently developed COVID-19-specific prognostic tools, the COVID-GRAM and CALL scores, and prior prognostic scores for community-acquired pneumonia (CURB-65), viral pneumonia (MuBLSTA) and H1N1 influenza pneumonia (Influenza risk score) in a contemporary US cohort. METHODS: We included 257 hospitalised patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia from three teaching hospitals in Rhode Island. We extracted data from within the first 24 hours of admission. Variables were excluded if values were missing in >20% of cases, otherwise, missing values were imputed. One hundred and fifteen patients with complete data after imputation were used for the primary analysis. Sensitivity analysis was performed after the exclusion of one variable (LDH) in the complete dataset (n = 257). Primary and secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and critical illness (mechanical ventilation or death), respectively. RESULTS: Only the areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (RO-AUC) of COVID-GRAM (RO-AUC = 0.775, 95% CI 0.525-0.915) for in-hospital death, and CURB65 for in-hospital death (RO-AUC = 0.842, 95% CI 0.674-0.932) or critical illness (RO-AUC = 0.766, 95% CI 0.584-0.884) were significantly better than random. Sensitivity analysis yielded similar trends. Calibration plots showed better agreement between the estimated and observed probability of in-hospital death for CURB65, compared with COVID-GRAM. The negative predictive value (NPV) of CURB65 ≥2 was 97.2% for in-hospital death and 88.1% for critical illness. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-GRAM score demonstrated acceptable predictive performance for in-hospital death. The CURB65 score had better prognostic utility for in-hospital death and critical illness. The high NPV of CURB65 values ≥2 may be useful in triaging and allocation of resources.

Hydroxychloroquine use in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: An observational matched cohort study.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin) in hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We utilized a hospital based prospective data registry. The primary end point was to assess the impact of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin, on outcome, length of hospitalization, and time to clinical improvement. We utilized treatment effects with inverse-probability-weighting and Cox proportional hazards models. All analyses accounted for age, gender, race, severity on admission, days from symptoms onset and chronic comorbidities. RESULTS: 36 patients received hydroxychloroquine and were age- and sex-matched to 72 patients with COVID-19 who received supportive care. Compared to supportive care, the use of HCQ did not shorten the time to clinical improvement (+0.23 days; 95% CI: -1.8-2.3 days) nor did it shorten the duration of hospital stay (+0.91 days; 95% CI: -1.1-2.9 days). Additionally, HCQ did not decrease the risk of COVID-19 in-hospital death (aHR 1.67; 95% CI: 0.29-9.36). Finally, we observed a slight QTc prolongation from a baseline of 444 ± 26 ms to 464 ± 32 ms (mean±SD) among patients receiving hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin. CONCLUSION: This study did not yield benefits from hydroxychloroquine use in patients with COVID-19 and monitoring for adverse events is warranted. Nevertheless, the treatment was safely studied under the guidance of an antimicrobial stewardship program.

Remdesivir Use Compared With Supportive Care in Hospitalized Patients With Severe COVID-19: A Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration issued an Emergency Use Authorization for remdesivir use in patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: We utilized data from 2 quaternary acute care hospitals. The outcomes of interest were the impact of remdesivir on in-hospital death by day 28 and time to recovery, clinical improvement, and discharge. We utilized Cox proportional hazards models and stratified log-rank tests. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four patients were included in the study. The median age was 59 years; 67.0% were male; 17/125 patients (13.6%) who received supportive care and 7/99 patients (7.1%) who received remdesivir died. The unadjusted risk for 28-day in-hospital death was lower for patients who received remdesivir compared with patients who received supportive care (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.16-1.08). Although this trend remained the same after adjusting for age, sex, race, and oxygen requirements on admission (adjusted HR [aHR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.19-1.28), as well as chronic comorbidities and use of corticosteroids (aHR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.16-1.23), it did not reach statistical significance. The use of remdesivir was not associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) or liver test abnormalities. Although not statistically significant, the rate ratios for time to recovery, clinical improvement, and discharge were higher in women and black or African American patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on remdesivir had lower, albeit not significant, all-cause in-hospital mortality, and the use of remdesivir did not increase the risk for AKI. Promising signals from this study need to be confirmed by future placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials.