ABSTRACT
(1) Background: COVID-19 infection is responsible for the ongoing pandemic and acute cerebrovascular disease (CVD) has been observed in COVID-19 patients. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective, observational study of hospitalized adult patients admitted to our hospital with SARS-CoV-2 and acute cerebrovascular disease. All clinical data were reviewed including epidemiology, clinical features, laboratory data, neuroradiological findings, hospital management and course from 32 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 management with acute cerebrovascular disease. (3) Results: Acute CVD with COVID-19 was associated with higher NIH stroke scale on discharge compared to non-COVID-19 CVDs. Seizures complicated the hospital course in 16% of COVID-19 patients with CVD. The majority of the acute CVDs were ischemic (81%) in nature followed by hemorrhagic (22%). Acute CVD with COVID-19 resulted in average hospital stays greater than twice that of the control group (13 days in COVID-19, 5 days in control). Acute CVD with COVID-19 patients had worse clinical outcomes with 31% patient deaths and 6% discharged to hospice. In the control group, 6% of patients died. (4) Conclusions: Acute CVD associated with COVID-19 tends to be more complicated with unique and adverse clinical phenotype, longer hospital admissions, and worse clinical outcomes.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To study prevalence of infection in essential workers of Madrid City Council by occupation, related characteristics, use of protective devices, risk perception, and main concerns about COVID-19 during lockdown. METHODS: A total of 30 231 workers were PCR tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Information was collected on COVID-19-related symptoms, risk factors, preventive equipment, and risk perception. The crude prevalence was calculated for infection, use of protective devices, perceived risk and main concerns. Additionally, adjusted prevalence and prevalence ratios (PR) were estimated for these variables using logistic regression models with age, gender, occupation, epidemiological week and laboratory as confounding factors. RESULTS: Overall prevalence of infection was 3.2% (95% CI 3.0% to 3.4%), being higher among policemen (4.4%) and bus drivers (4.2%), but lower among emergency healthcare personnel, firefighters, food market workers and burial services (<2%). Lower excess risk was observed in workers reporting occupational contact with COVID-19 cases only (PR=1.42; 95% CI 1.18 to 1.71) compared with household exposure only (PR=2.75; 95% CI 2.32 to 3.25). Infection was more frequent in symptomatic workers (PR=1.28; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.48), although 42% of detected infections were asymptomatic. Use of facial masks (78.7%) and disinfectants (86.3%) was common and associated with lower infection prevalence (PRmasks=0.68; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.79; PRdisinfectants=0.75; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.91). Over 50% of workers felt being at high risk of infection and worried about infecting others, yet only 2% considered quitting their work. CONCLUSIONS: This surveillance system allowed for detecting and isolating SARS-CoV-2 cases among essential workers, identifying characteristics related to infection and use of protective devices, and revealing specific needs for work-safety information and psychological support.