Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 8(2): ofaa638, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1069293

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Older adults and people from certain racial and ethnic groups are disproportionately represented in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations and deaths. METHODS: Using data from the Premier Healthcare Database on 181 813 hospitalized adults diagnosed with COVID-19 during March-September 2020, we applied multivariable log-binomial regression to assess the associations between age and race/ethnicity and COVID-19 clinical severity (intensive care unit [ICU] admission, invasive mechanical ventilation [IMV], and death) and to determine whether the impact of age on clinical severity differs by race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Overall, 84 497 (47%) patients were admitted to the ICU, 29 078 (16%) received IMV, and 27 864 (15%) died in the hospital. Increased age was strongly associated with clinical severity when controlling for underlying medical conditions and other covariates; the strength of this association differed by race/ethnicity. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, risk of death was lower among non-Hispanic Black patients (adjusted risk ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-0.99) and higher among Hispanic/Latino patients (risk ratio [RR], 1.15; 95% CI, 1.09-1.20), non-Hispanic Asian patients (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.09-1.23), and patients of other racial and ethnic groups (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.06-1.21). Risk of ICU admission and risk of IMV were elevated among some racial and ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that age is a driver of poor outcomes among hospitalized persons with COVID-19. Additionally, clinical severity may be elevated among patients of some racial and ethnic minority groups. Public health strategies to reduce severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection rates among older adults and racial and ethnic minorities are essential to reduce poor outcomes.

2.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(35): 1210-1215, 2020 Sep 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-745358

ABSTRACT

Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, primarily used to treat autoimmune diseases and to prevent and treat malaria, received national attention in early March 2020, as potential treatment and prophylaxis for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). On March 20, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine sulfate in the Strategic National Stockpile to be used by licensed health care providers to treat patients hospitalized with COVID-19 when the providers determine the potential benefit outweighs the potential risk to the patient.* Following reports of cardiac and other adverse events in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 (2), on April 24, 2020, FDA issued a caution against its use† and on June 15, rescinded its EUA for hydroxychloroquine from the Strategic National Stockpile.§ Following the FDA's issuance of caution and EUA rescindment, on May 12 and June 16, the federal COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel issued recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19; the panel also noted that at that time no medication could be recommended for COVID-19 pre- or postexposure prophylaxis outside the setting of a clinical trial (3). However, public discussion concerning the effectiveness of these drugs on outcomes of COVID-19 (4,5), and clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis of COVID-19 continue.¶ In response to recent reports of notable increases in prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine (6), CDC analyzed outpatient retail pharmacy transaction data to identify potential differences in prescriptions dispensed by provider type during January-June 2020 compared with the same period in 2019. Before 2020, primary care providers and specialists who routinely prescribed hydroxychloroquine, such as rheumatologists and dermatologists, accounted for approximately 97% of new prescriptions. New prescriptions by specialists who did not typically prescribe these medications (defined as specialties accounting for ≤2% of new prescriptions before 2020) increased from 1,143 prescriptions in February 2020 to 75,569 in March 2020, an 80-fold increase from March 2019. Although dispensing trends are returning to prepandemic levels, continued adherence to current clinical guidelines for the indicated use of these medications will ensure their availability and benefit to patients for whom their use is indicated (3,4), because current data on treatment and pre- or postexposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 indicate that the potential benefits of these drugs do not appear to outweigh their risks.


Subject(s)
Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Specialization/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Treatment Outcome , United States , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
3.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(35): 1198-1203, 2020 Sep 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-745357

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is thought to spread from person to person primarily by the respiratory route and mainly through close contact (1). Community mitigation strategies can lower the risk for disease transmission by limiting or preventing person-to-person interactions (2). U.S. states and territories began implementing various community mitigation policies in March 2020. One widely implemented strategy was the issuance of orders requiring persons to stay home, resulting in decreased population movement in some jurisdictions (3). Each state or territory has authority to enact its own laws and policies to protect the public's health, and jurisdictions varied widely in the type and timing of orders issued related to stay-at-home requirements. To identify the broader impact of these stay-at-home orders, using publicly accessible, anonymized location data from mobile devices, CDC and the Georgia Tech Research Institute analyzed changes in population movement relative to stay-at-home orders issued during March 1-May 31, 2020, by all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and five U.S. territories.* During this period, 42 states and territories issued mandatory stay-at-home orders. When counties subject to mandatory state- and territory-issued stay-at-home orders were stratified along rural-urban categories, movement decreased significantly relative to the preorder baseline in all strata. Mandatory stay-at-home orders can help reduce activities associated with the spread of COVID-19, including population movement and close person-to-person contact outside the household.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Population Dynamics/statistics & numerical data , Public Health/legislation & jurisprudence , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL