Objective Olfactory Findings in Hospitalized Severe COVID-19 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: We investigate the prevalence of the self-reported and objective sudden loss of smell (SLS) in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Severe COVID-19 patients with self-reported SLS were recruited at hospitalization discharge. Epidemiological and clinical data were collected. The Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) was used to evaluate rhinological complaints. Subjective olfactory and gustatory functions were assessed with the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHNES). Objective SLS was evaluated using psychophysical tests. Potential associations between olfactory evaluation and the clinical outcomes (duration of hospitalization; admission biology; one month serology (IgG), and chest computed tomography findings) were studied. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients completed the study (25 females). Subjectively, eighteen (38.3%) individuals self-reported subjective partial or total SLS. Among them, only three and four were anosmic and hyposmic, respectively (38.9%). Considering the objective evaluation in the entire cohort, the prevalence of SLS was 21.3%. Elderly patients and those with diabetes had lower objective olfactory evaluation results than young and non-diabetic individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of SLS in severe COVID-19 patients appears to be lower than previously estimated in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 forms. Future comparative studies are needed to explore the predictive value of SLS for COVID-19 severity.

Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in Hospital Environment: Working in a COVID-19 Ward Is a Risk Factor for Infection.

Aims. Health care workers (HCWs) are at risk of acquiring the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection (SARS-CoV-2). The aim of the study is to determine the SARS-CoV-2 positivity rates during the first epidemiologic peak among HCWs of a south Belgian hospital and to identify risks factors for infection. Methods. All hospital staff who worked during the first epidemiological peak were asked to answer a questionnaire regarding demographical data, function, type of working unit, type of contact with patients, eventual symptomatology, and the positivity of reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing or immunoassay. Results. A total of 235 questionnaires were collected; 90 (38%) HCWs tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from either RT-PCR or immunoassay testing. The positivity rate of HCWs between wards was statistically different (p = 0.004) and was higher in COVID-19 wards than Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and Emergency Department (ED). A total of 114 (49%) HCWs presented SARS-CoV-2-compatible symptomatology; 79 (88%) were positive on either RT-PCR or immunoassay testing; 74 (37%) HCWs were unable to work during the studied period; 5 were hospitalized. No deaths were reported. Multivariate logistic regression modeling showed that having symptoms was highly associated with test positivity (OR 23.3, CI 11.1, 53.1, p-value < 0.001). Working in a COVID-19 ward against working in ICU or ED was also predictive of positivity among HCWs (OR 3.25, CI 1.50, 7.28, p-value = 0.003). Discussion and Conclusions. This study shows a higher positivity rate compared to already reported positivity rates among HCWs. Reported differences in positivity rates depend on many factors, such as local crisis intensity, screening strategy, training in use of self-protective equipment, and study selection bias. HCWs working in COVID-19 wards, in comparison to ED and ICU, seemed at greater risk of being infected in this study. This could be explained by the disparity of HCWs' experience in handling self-protective equipment and knowledge in infection prevention. Hence, care should be taken in proper training for less-experienced HCWs during hospital epidemics. The latter could increase HCWs' protection and consequently decrease work absenteeism, ensuring enhanced continuity of patient care during hospital crisis. Rapid quarantine of symptomatic HCWs could reduce contamination rates, as having symptoms was highly associated with test positivity in this study.

Mortality Rate and Predictors Among Patients with COVID-19 Related Acute Respiratory Failure Requiring Mechanical Ventilation: a Retrospective Single Centre Study.

AIM: The objective of the study was to assess mortality rates in COVID-19 patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who also requiring mechanical ventilation. The predictors of mortality in this cohort were analysed, and the clinical characteristics recorded. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A single centre retrospective study was conducted on all COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit of the Epicura Hospital Center, Province of Hainaut, Belgium, between March 1st and April 30th 2020. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were included in the study of which thirty-four were male, and fifteen were female. The mean (SD) age was 68.8 (10.6) and 69.5 (12.6) for males and females, respectively. The median time to death after the onset of symptoms was eighteen days. The median time to death, after hospital admission was nine days. By the end of the thirty days follow-up, twenty-seven patients (55%) had died, and twenty-two (45%) had survived. Non-survivors, as compared to those who survived, were similar in gender, prescribed medications, COVID-19 symptoms, with similar laboratory test results. They were significantly older (p = 0.007), with a higher co-morbidity burden (p = 0.026) and underwent significantly less tra-cheostomy (p < 0.001). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, no parameter significantly predicted mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This study reported a mortality rate of 55% in critically ill COVID-19 patients with ARDS who also required mechanical ventilation. The results corroborate previous findings that older and more comorbid patients represent the population at most risk of a poor outcome in this setting.

Predictive Accuracy of COVID-19 World Health Organization (WHO) Severity Classification and Comparison with a Bayesian-Method-Based Severity Score (EPI-SCORE).

Assess the predictive accuracy of the WHO COVID-19 severity classification on COVID-19 hospitalized patients. The secondary aim was to compare its predictive power with a new prediction model, named COVID-19 EPI-SCORE, based on a Bayesian network analysis. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a population of 295 COVID-19 RT-PCR positive patients hospitalized at Epicura Hospital Center, Belgium, admitted between March 1st and April 30th, 2020. Results: Our cohort's median age was 73 (62-83) years, and the female proportion was 43%. All patients were classified following WHO severity classification at admission. In total, 125 (42.4%) were classified as Moderate, 69 (23.4%) as Severe, and 101 (34.2%) as Critical. Death proportions through these three classes were 11.2%, 33.3%, and 67.3%, respectively, and the proportions of critically ill patients (dead or needed Invasive Mechanical Ventilation) were 11.2%, 34.8%, and 83.2%, respectively. A Bayesian network analysis was used to create a model to analyze predictive accuracy of the WHO severity classification and to create the EPI-SCORE. The six variables that have been automatically selected by our machine learning algorithm were the WHO severity classification, acute kidney injury, age, Lactate Dehydrogenase Levels (LDH), lymphocytes and activated prothrombin time (aPTT). Receiver Operation Characteristic (ROC) curve indexes hereby obtained were 83.8% and 91% for the models based on WHO classification only and our EPI-SCORE, respectively. Conclusions: Our study shows that the WHO severity classification is reliable in predicting a severe outcome among COVID-19 patients. The addition to this classification of a few clinical and laboratory variables as per our COVID-19 EPI-SCORE has demonstrated to significantly increase its accuracy.

Hydroxychloroquine in a G6PD-Deficient Patient with COVID-19 Complicated by Haemolytic Anaemia: Culprit or Innocent Bystander?

Hydroxychloroquine has been used worldwide as a first-line treatment for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Little is known about COVID-19 and its effects on patients with congenital red blood cell disorders. We report a case of haemolytic anaemia in a 32-year-old patient and a fortuitous highlighting of G6PD deficiency. We reviewed the literature to assess the risk of hydroxychloroquine use in this context. LEARNING POINTS: A rapid drop in haemoglobin in COVID-19 patients should alert physicians to test for haemolytic anaemia and enzymopathies.Our review of the literature shows that use of hydroxychloroquine is safe in G6PD-deficient patients.

Clinical and epidemiological characteristics of 1420 European patients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: The clinical presentation of European patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 infection is still unknown. OBJECTIVE: To study the clinical presentation of COVID-19 in Europe. METHODS: Patients with positive diagnosis of COVID-19 were recruited from 18 European hospitals. Epidemiological and clinical data were obtained through a standardized questionnaire. Bayesian analysis was used for analysing the relationship between outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1,420 patients completed the study (962 females, 30.7% of healthcare workers). The mean age of patients was 39.17 ± 12.09 years. The most common symptoms were headache (70.3%), loss of smell (70.2%), nasal obstruction (67.8%), cough (63.2%), asthenia (63.3%), myalgia (62.5%), rhinorrhea (60.1%), gustatory dysfunction (54.2%) and sore throat (52.9%). Fever was reported by 45.4%. The mean duration of COVID-19 symptoms of mild-to-moderate cured patients was 11.5 ± 5.7 days. The prevalence of symptoms significantly varied according to age and sex. Young patients more frequently had ear, nose and throat complaints, whereas elderly individuals often presented fever, fatigue and loss of appetite. Loss of smell, headache, nasal obstruction and fatigue were more prevalent in female patients. The loss of smell was a key symptom of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients and was not associated with nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea. Loss of smell persisted at least 7 days after the disease in 37.5% of cured patients. CONCLUSION: The clinical presentation of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 substantially varies according to the age and the sex characteristics of patients. Olfactory dysfunction seems to be an important underestimated symptom of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 that needs to be recognized as such by the WHO.