Characteristics and Outcomes by Ceiling of Care of Subjects Hospitalized with COVID-19 During Four Waves of the Pandemic in a Metropolitan Area: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: The profiles of patients with COVID-19 have been widely studied, but little is known about differences in baseline characteristics and in outcomes between subjects with a ceiling of care assigned at hospital admission and subjects without a ceiling of care. The aim of this study is to compare, by ceiling of care, clinical features and outcomes of hospitalized subjects during four waves of COVID-19 in a metropolitan area in Catalonia. METHODS: Observational study conducted during the first (March-April 2020), second (October-November 2020), third (January-February 2021), and fourth wave (July-August 2021) of COVID-19 in five centers of Catalonia. All subjects were adults (> 18 years old) hospitalized with a proven SARS-CoV-2 infection and with therapeutic ceiling of care assessed by the attending physician at hospital admission. RESULTS: A total of 5813 subjects were analyzed. Subjects with a ceiling of care were mainly older (difference in median age of 20 years), with more comorbidities (Charlson index 3 points higher) and with fewer clinical signs at baseline than patients without a ceiling of care. Some features of their clinical profiles changed among waves. There were differences in treatments received during hospital admission across waves, but not between subjects with and without a ceiling of care. Subjects with a ceiling of care had a death incidence more than four times the death incidence of subjects a without a ceiling of care (risk ratio (RR) ranging from 3.5 in the first wave to almost 6 in the third and fourth). Incidence of severe pneumonia and complications for subjects with a ceiling of care was around 1.5 times the incidence in subjects without a ceiling of care. DISCUSSION: Analysis of hospitalized subjects with SARS-CoV-2 infection should be stratified according to therapeutic ceiling of care to avoid bias and outcome misestimation.

Frequency of Positive Results for SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Symptomatic Pediatric Patients Treated in the Emergency Department of a Regional Hospital

Objectives: Since 11 March 2020, when the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 pandemic, trials have found that the pediatric population is the least affected, and most positive cases are asymptomatic or have mild symptoms such as fever and cough. Aims: The main objective of this study was to describe the percentage of positive tests among children who presented to the emergency department for symptoms compatible with SARS-CoV-2. Additional objectives were to identify clinical screening criteria to identify candidates to perform a polymerase chain reaction or antigen screening test. Patients/Methods: The study had a mixed cross-sectional and case-control design. Data were obtained from the electronic medical records of the emergency service of Hospital Sant Camil, Sant Pere de Ribes (Spain), from May 2020 to September 2021. Patients included had symptoms compatible with COVID-19 and a positive polymerase chain reaction or antigen SARS-CoV-2 screening test. Results: The study included 1508 patients with a mean age of 4.5 years (SD 4.2): 670 of whom were female (44.4%). The percentage of children with a positive polymerase chain reaction or antigen test was 3.51%. For the secondary objectives, some rules were created to create groups in which all patients tested negative: (1) Patients with abdominal pain, who did not present with diarrhea or fatigue, (2) Patients with asthma or allergies, (3) patients older than 3.5 years, with asthenia but without abdominal pain, and (4) patients younger than 3.5 years with abdominal pain and rash. Conclusion: The frequency of children who tested positive for COVID-19 was low among those with a clinical suspicion tested in the emergency room. Some combinations of symptoms and personal history were without exception associated with a negative polymerase chain reaction result for SARS-CoV-2 and could therefore help rule out the disease.

Immunomodulatory therapy, risk factors and outcomes of hospital-acquired bloodstream infection in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: a Spanish case-control matched multicentre study (BACTCOVID).

OBJECTIVES: The effect of the use of immunomodulatory drugs on the risk of developing hospital-acquired bloodstream infection (BSI) in patients with COVID-19 has not been specifically assessed. We aim to identify risk factors for, and outcomes of, BSI among hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: We performed a severity matched case-control study (1:1 ratio) nested in a large multicentre prospective cohort of hospitalized adults with COVID-19. Cases with BSI were identified from the cohort database. Controls were matched for age, sex and acute respiratory distress syndrome. A Cox proportional hazard ratio model was performed. RESULTS: Of 2005 patients, 100 (4.98%) presented 142 episodes of BSI, mainly caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci, Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Polymicrobial infection accounted for 23 episodes. The median time from admission to the first episode of BSI was 15 days (IQR 9-20), and the most frequent source was catheter-related infection. The characteristics of patients with and without BSI were similar, including the use of tocilizumab, corticosteroids, and combinations. In the multivariate analysis, the use of these immunomodulatory drugs was not associated with an increased risk of BSI. A Cox proportional hazard ratio (HR) model showed that after adjusting for the time factor, BSI was associated with a higher in-hospital mortality risk (HR 2.59; 1.65-4.07; p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Hospital-acquired BSI in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia was uncommon and the use of immunomodulatory drugs was not associated with its development. When adjusting for the time factor, BSI was associated with a higher mortality risk.

COVID-19: Clinical Presentation and Prognostic Factors of Severe Disease and Mortality in the Oldest-Old Population: A Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: The oldest-old population (80 years or older) has the highest lethality from COVID-19. There is little information on the clinical presentation and specific prognostic factors for this group. This trial evaluated the clinical presentation and prognostic factors of severe disease and mortality in the oldest-old population. METHODS: This is an ambispective cohort study of oldest-old patients hospitalized for respiratory infection associated with COVID-19 and with a positive test by RT-PCR. The clinical presentation and the factors associated with severe disease and mortality were evaluated (logistic regression). All patients were followed up until discharge or death. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients (59.2% female) were included. The most frequent symptoms were fever (68.9%), dyspnoea (60.2%), and cough (39.8%), and 11.7% presented confusion. Fifty-nine patients (57.3%) presented severe disease, and 59 died, with 43 patients (41.7%) presenting both of these. In the multivariate analysis, female sex (odds ratio [OR] 0.31, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.13-0.73, p 0.0074) and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.21-5.37, p 0.0139) were associated with severe disease, and serum sodium was associated with mortality (OR 3.12, 95% CI 1.18-8.26, p 0.0222). No chronic disease or pharmacological treatment was associated with worse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The typical presenting symptoms of respiratory infection in COVID-19 are less frequent in the oldest-old population. Male sex and LDH level are associated with severe disease, and the serum sodium level is associated with mortality in this population.

Matched cohort study on the efficacy of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Tocilizumab has been proposed as a treatment for the new disease COVID-19, however, there is not enough scientific evidence to support this treatment. The objective of this study is to analyze whether the use of tocilizumab is associated with respiratory improvement and a shorter time to discharge in patients with COVID-19 and lung involvement. METHODS: Observational study on a cohort of 418 patients, admitted to three county hospitals in Catalonia (Spain). Patients admitted consecutively were included and followed until discharge or up to 30 days of admission. A sub-cohort of patients treated with tocilizumab and a sub-cohort of control patients were identified, matched by a large number of risk factors and clinical variables. Sub-cohorts were also matched by the number of other treatments for COVID-19 that patients received. Increment in SAFI (inspired oxygen fraction / saturation) 48 h after the start of treatment, and time to discharge, were the primary outcomes. Mortality, which was a secondary outcome, was analyzed in the total cohort, by using logistic regression models, adjusted by confounders. RESULTS: There were 96 patients treated with tocilizumab. Of them, 22 patients could be matched with an equivalent number of control patients. The increment in SAFI from baseline to 48 h of treatment, was not significantly different between groups (tocilizumab: -0.04; control: 0.09; p = 0.636). Also, no difference in time to discharge was found between the two sub-cohorts (logrank test: p = 0.472). The logistic regression models, did not show an effect of tocilizumab on mortality (OR 0.99; p = 0.990). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find a clinical benefit associated with the use tocilizumab, in terms of respiratory function at 48 h of treatment, or time to discharge.

Association between high-dose steroid therapy, respiratory function, and time to discharge in patients with COVID-19: Cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether there is an association between the use glucocorticoids at high doses, and the evolution of saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen (SAFI) or time to discharge, in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: This was an observational study on a cohort of 418 patients admitted to three regional hospitals in Catalonia, Spain. As primary outcomes, we studied the evolution of SAFI in the first 48 h of treatment and the time to discharge. The results were compared between patients treated and untreated with glucocorticoids (methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg/day o dexamethasone 20-40 mg/day) through sub-cohort analyses matched for multiple clinical and prognostic factors, as well as through Cox multivariate models adjusted for prognostic factors. The simultaneous use of different treatments for COVID-19 was taken into account, both in sub-cohorts matching and in COX regression. RESULTS: There were 187 patients treated with glucocorticoids; of these, 25 patients could be matched with an equivalent number of control patients. In the analysis of these matched sub-cohorts, no significant difference was observed in time to discharge (log-rank: p = 0.291) or the increment in SAFI at 48 h of treatment (glucocorticoides: -0.04; controls: +0.37; p = 0.095). Multivariate models using Cox regression showed a significantly longer time to discharge in patients treated with glucocorticoids (hazard ratio: 7.26; 95% IC: 3.30-15.95). CONCLUSIONS: We have not found improvement in respiratory function or time until discharge, associated with the use of glucocorticoids at high doses.

OBJETIVO: Analizar si existe asociación entre el uso de glucocorticoides a dosis altas y la evolución de la SAFI (saturación/fracción inspirada de oxígeno) o el tiempo hasta el alta, en pacientes hospitalizados por COVID-19. MÉTODOS: Estudio observacional sobre una cohorte de 418 pacientes ingresados en 3 hospitales comarcales de Cataluña (España). Como resultados primarios se estudiaron la evolución de la SAFI en las primeras 48 h de tratamiento y el tiempo hasta el alta. Los resultados se compararon entre pacientes tratados y no tratados con glucocorticoides (metilprednisolona 1-2 mg/kg/día o dexametasona 20-40 mg/día), mediante el análisis de subcohortes emparejadas por múltiples factores clínicos y pronósticos, así como mediante modelos multivariantes de Cox, ajustados por diversos factores pronósticos. El uso simultáneo de diferentes tratamientos para la COVID-19 fue tenido en cuenta, tanto en el emparejamiento de subcohortes como en la regresión de Cox. RESULTADOS: Hubo 187 pacientes con glucocorticoides; de ellos, 25 pacientes pudieron ser emparejados con un número equivalente de pacientes control. En las subcohortes emparejadas, no se apreció diferencia en el tiempo hasta el alta (log-rank: p = 0,291), ni en el cambio en la SAFI a las 48 h desde la basal (glucocorticoides: −0,04; controles: +0,37; p = 0,095). Los modelos multivariantes mediante regresión de Cox mostraron un tiempo hasta el alta significativamente más largo en pacientes tratados con glucocorticoides (hazard ratio: 7,26; IC 95%: 3,30-15,95). CONCLUSIONES: No hemos encontrado mejoría en la función respiratoria o tiempo hasta el alta, asociado al uso de glucocorticoides a dosis altas.

[Association between high-dose steroid therapy, respiratory function, and time to discharge in patients with COVID-19: Cohort study]. / Asociación entre el tratamiento esteroideo a dosis alta, la función respiratoria y el tiempo hasta el alta en pacientes con COVID-19: Estudio de cohortes.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether there is an association between the use glucocorticoids at high doses, and the evolution of saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen (SAFI) or time to discharge, in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: This was an observational study on a cohort of 418 patients admitted to three regional hospitals in Catalonia, Spain. As primary outcomes, we studied the evolution of SAFI in the first 48hours of treatment and the time to discharge. The results were compared between patients treated and untreated with glucocorticoids (methylprednisolone 1-2mg/kg/day o dexamethasone 20-40mg/day) through sub-cohort analyses matched for multiple clinical and prognostic factors, as well as through Cox multivariate models adjusted for prognostic factors. The simultaneous use of different treatments for COVID-19 was taken into account, both in sub-cohorts matching and in Cox regression. RESULTS: There were 187 patients treated with glucocorticoids; of these, 25 patients could be matched with an equivalent number of control patients. In the analysis of these matched sub-cohorts, no significant difference was observed in time to discharge (log-rank: p=0.291) or the increment in SAFI at 48hours of treatment (glucocorticoides: -0.04; controls: +0.37; p=0.095). Multivariate models using Cox regression showed a significantly longer time to discharge in patients treated with glucocorticoids (hazard ratio: 7.26; 95% IC: 3.30-15.95). CONCLUSIONS: We have not found improvement in respiratory function or time until discharge, associated with the use of glucocorticoids at high doses.

Association between COVID-19 prognosis and disease presentation, comorbidities and chronic treatment of hospitalized patients.

IMPORTANCE: The rapid pandemic expansion of the disease caused by the new SARS-CoV-2 virus has compromised health systems worldwide. Knowledge of prognostic factors in affected patients can help optimize care. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyze the relationship between the prognosis of COVID-19 and the form of presentation of the disease, the previous pathologies of patients and their chronic treatments. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND LOCATIONS: This was an observational study on a cohort of 418 patients admitted to three regional hospitals in Catalonia (Spain). As primary outcomes, severe disease (need for oxygen therapy via nonrebreather mask or mechanical ventilation) and death were studied. Multivariate binary logistic regression models were performed to study the association between the different factors and the results. RESULTS: Advanced age, male sex and obesity were independent markers of poor prognosis. The most frequent presenting symptom was fever, while dyspnea was associated with severe disease and the presence of cough with greater survival. Low oxygen saturation in the emergency room, elevated CRP in the emergency room and initial radiological involvement were all related to worse prognosis. The presence of eosinophilia (% of eosinophils) was an independent marker of less severe disease. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified the most robust markers of poor prognosis for COVID-19. These results can help to correctly stratify patients at the beginning of hospitalization based on the risk of developing severe disease.

Observational study of azithromycin in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The rapid spread of the disease caused by the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus has led to the use of multiple therapeutic agents whose efficacy has not been previously demonstrated. The objective of this study was to analyze whether there is an association between the use of azithromycin and the evolution of the pulmonary disease or the time to discharge, in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: This was an observational study on a cohort of 418 patients admitted to three regional hospitals in Catalonia, Spain. As primary outcomes, we studied the evolution of SAFI ratio (oxygen saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen) in the first 48 hours of treatment and the time to discharge. The results were compared between patients treated and untreated with the study drug through subcohort analyses matched for multiple clinical and prognostic factors, as well as through analysis of non-matched subcohorts, using Cox multivariate models adjusted for prognostic factors. RESULTS: There were 239 patients treated with azithromycin. Of these, 29 patients treated with azithromycin could be matched with an equivalent number of control patients. In the analysis of these matched subcohorts, SAFI at 48h had no significant changes associated to the use of azithromycin, though azithromycin treatment was associated with a longer time to discharge (10.0 days vs 6.7 days; log rank: p = 0.039). However, in the unmatched cohorts, the increased hospital stay associated to azithromycin use, was no significant after adjustment using Multivariate Cox regression models: hazard ratio 1.45 (IC95%: 0.88-2.41; p = 0.150). This study is limited by its small sample size and its observational nature; despite the strong pairing of the matched subcohorts and the adjustment of the Cox regression for multiple factors, the results may be affected by residual confusion. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find a clinical benefit associated with the use of azithromycin, in terms of lung function 48 hours after treatment or length of hospital stay.