Estimated US Pediatric Hospitalizations and School Absenteeism Associated With Accelerated COVID-19 Bivalent Booster Vaccination.

Importance: Adverse outcomes of COVID-19 in the pediatric population include disease and hospitalization, leading to school absenteeism. Booster vaccination for eligible individuals across all ages may promote health and school attendance. Objective: To assess whether accelerating COVID-19 bivalent booster vaccination uptake across the general population would be associated with reduced pediatric hospitalizations and school absenteeism. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this decision analytical model, a simulation model of COVID-19 transmission was fitted to reported incidence data from October 1, 2020, to September 30, 2022, with outcomes simulated from October 1, 2022, to March 31, 2023. The transmission model included the entire age-stratified US population, and the outcome model included children younger than 18 years. Interventions: Simulated scenarios of accelerated bivalent COVID-19 booster campaigns to achieve uptake that was either one-half of or similar to the age-specific uptake observed for 2020 to 2021 seasonal influenza vaccination in the eligible population across all age groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were estimated hospitalizations, intensive care unit admissions, and isolation days of symptomatic infection averted among children aged 0 to 17 years and estimated days of school absenteeism averted among children aged 5 to 17 years under the accelerated bivalent booster campaign simulated scenarios. Results: Among children aged 5 to 17 years, a COVID-19 bivalent booster campaign achieving age-specific coverage similar to influenza vaccination could have averted an estimated 5 448 694 (95% credible interval [CrI], 4 936 933-5 957 507) days of school absenteeism due to COVID-19 illness. In addition, the booster campaign could have prevented an estimated 10 019 (95% CrI, 8756-11 278) hospitalizations among the pediatric population aged 0 to 17 years, of which 2645 (95% CrI, 2152-3147) were estimated to require intensive care. A less ambitious booster campaign with only 50% of the age-specific uptake of influenza vaccination among eligible individuals could have averted an estimated 2 875 926 (95% CrI, 2 524 351-3 332 783) days of school absenteeism among children aged 5 to 17 years and an estimated 5791 (95% CrI, 4391-6932) hospitalizations among children aged 0 to 17 years, of which 1397 (95% CrI, 846-1948) were estimated to require intensive care. Conclusions and Relevance: In this decision analytical model, increased uptake of bivalent booster vaccination among eligible age groups was associated with decreased hospitalizations and school absenteeism in the pediatric population. These findings suggest that although COVID-19 prevention strategies often focus on older populations, the benefits of booster campaigns for children may be substantial.

Underserved population acceptance of combination influenza-COVID-19 booster vaccines.

Recent data indicates increasing hesitancy towards both COVID-19 and influenza vaccination. We studied attitudes towards COVID-19 booster, influenza, and combination influenza-COVID-19 booster vaccines in a nationally representative sample of US adults between May and June 2021 (n = 12,887). We used pre-qualification quotes to ensure adequate sample sizes for minority populations. Overall vaccine acceptance was 45% for a COVID-19 booster alone, 58% for an influenza vaccine alone, and 50% for a combination vaccine. Logistic regression showed lower acceptance among female, Black/African American, Native American/American Indian, and rural respondents. Higher acceptance was found among those with college and post-graduate degrees. Despite these differences, our results suggest that a combination vaccine may provide a convenient method of dual vaccination that may increase COVID-19 vaccination coverage.

Some characteristics of hyperglycaemic crisis differ between patients with and without COVID-19 at a safety-net hospital in a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare patients with DKA, hyperglycaemic hyperosmolar syndrome (HHS), or mixed DKA-HHS and COVID-19 [COVID (+)] to COVID-19-negative (-) [COVID (-)] patients with DKA/HHS from a low-income, racially/ethnically diverse catchment area. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with patients admitted to an urban academic medical center between 1 March and 30 July 2020. Eligible patients met lab criteria for either DKA or HHS. Mixed DKA-HHS was defined as meeting all criteria for either DKA or HHS with at least 1 criterion for the other diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 82 participants were stratified by COVID-19 status and type of hyperglycaemic crisis [26 COVID (+) and 56 COVID (-)]. A majority were either Black or Hispanic. Compared with COVID (-) patients, COVID (+) patients were older, more Hispanic and more likely to have type 2 diabetes (T2D, 73% vs 48%, p < .01). COVID(+) patients had a higher mean pH (7.25 ± 0.10 vs 7.16 ± 0.16, p < .01) and lower anion gap (18.7 ± 5.7 vs 22.7 ± 6.9, p = .01) than COVID (-) patients. COVID (+) patients were given less intravenous fluids in the first 24 h (2.8 ± 1.9 vs 4.2 ± 2.4 L, p = .01) and were more likely to receive glucocorticoids (95% vs. 11%, p < .01). COVID (+) patients may have taken longer to resolve their hyperglycaemic crisis (53.3 ± 64.8 vs 28.8 ± 27.5 h, p = .09) and may have experienced more hypoglycaemia <3.9 mmol/L (35% vs 19%, p = .09). COVID (+) patients had a higher length of hospital stay (LOS, 14.8 ± 14.9 vs 6.5 ± 6.0 days, p = .01) and in-hospital mortality (27% vs 7%, p = .02). DISCUSSION: Compared with COVID (-) patients, COVID (+) patients with DKA/HHS are more likely to have T2D. Despite less severe metabolic acidosis, COVID (+) patients may require more time to resolve the hyperglycaemic crisis and experience more hypoglycaemia while suffering greater LOS and risk of mortality. Larger studies are needed to examine whether differences in management between COVID (+) and (-) patients affect outcomes with DKA/HHS.

Predicting and Preventing Acute Care Re-Utilization by Patients with Diabetes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute care re-utilization, i.e., hospital readmission and post-discharge Emergency Department (ED) use, is a significant driver of healthcare costs and a marker for healthcare quality. Diabetes is a major contributor to acute care re-utilization and associated costs. The goals of this paper are to (1) review the epidemiology of readmissions among patients with diabetes, (2) describe models that predict readmission risk, and (3) address various strategies for reducing the risk of acute care re-utilization. RECENT FINDINGS: Hospital readmissions and ED visits by diabetes patients are common and costly. Major risk factors for readmission include sociodemographics, comorbidities, insulin use, hospital length of stay (LOS), and history of readmissions, most of which are non-modifiable. Several models for predicting the risk of readmission among diabetes patients have been developed, two of which have reasonable accuracy in external validation. In retrospective studies and mostly small randomized controlled trials (RCTs), interventions such as inpatient diabetes education, inpatient diabetes management services, transition of care support, and outpatient follow-up are generally associated with a reduction in the risk of acute care re-utilization. Data on readmission risk and readmission risk reduction interventions are limited or lacking among patients with diabetes hospitalized for COVID-19. The evidence supporting post-discharge follow-up by telephone is equivocal and also limited. Acute care re-utilization of patients with diabetes presents an important opportunity to improve healthcare quality and reduce costs. Currently available predictive models are useful for identifying higher risk patients but could be improved. Machine learning models, which are becoming more common, have the potential to generate more accurate acute care re-utilization risk predictions. Tools embedded in electronic health record systems are needed to translate readmission risk prediction models into clinical practice. Several risk reduction interventions hold promise but require testing in multi-site RCTs to prove their generalizability, scalability, and effectiveness.

A Comparison of Hyperglycemic Crises in Patients with and without COVID-19

Hyperglycemic crises, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and hyperosmolar hyperglycemic state (HHS), are being increasingly reported in patients with COVID-19. To date, studies have not directly compared hyperglycemic crises in patients with and without COVID-19. In this retrospective cross-sectional study, 55 patients admitted to an urban academic medical center since 3/1/2020 meeting laboratory criteria for DKA, HHS, or mixed DKA/HHS were grouped by COVID-19 status per RT-PCR testing and compared (see table). Data were collected by electronic and manual chart abstraction. Diabetes type was adjudicated by an endocrinologist. The whole cohort (mean age 55 ± 17 years) was 53% male, 55% black, 13% white, and 20% Hispanic. There were similar proportions of DKA, HHS, and mixed cases between patients with and without COVID. Compared to those without COVID, patients with COVID had lower anion gap, higher pH and beta-hydroxybutyrate, were more likely to have type 2 diabetes (T2D, 76% vs. 53%) and less likely to have T1D (8% vs. 33%), were 4-times more likely to receive glucocorticoids (88% vs. 20%), had nearly double the length of stay (LOS, 14.1 ± 14.9 vs. 7.4 ± 7.0, p=0.03) and 4-fold higher odds of mortality (OR 4.42 [0.81-24.28], p=0.09). These data suggest there are differences in hyperglycemic emergencies between patients hospitalized with and without COVID, most notably a more frequent history of T2D, longer LOS and greater mortality.

Do Americans Face Greater Mental Health and Economic Consequences from COVID-19? Comparing the U.S. with Other High-Income Countries

From the Introduction: "With more than 4 million confirmed cases and 150,000 deaths as of August, the United States is failing to control the COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019] pandemic. At a time when many nations are reopening their economies and societies, the U.S. is struggling in its attempts to do the same. To examine the early impact of the pandemic on the well-being of adults in the U.S. and abroad, the Commonwealth Fund joined the survey research firm SSRS to interview 8,259 adults age 18 and older between March and May 2020. It is the latest in the Commonwealth Fund's series of cross-national comparisons featuring the United States and nine other high-income countries that participate in the Fund's annual International Health Policy Survey."